new Macs
J.J. O'Shea
TB disk, 2.66 i5. Quad-core units available.
New MacBook. System redesign, multitouch, new battery, backlit display.
New Mac minis. More speed, more RAM, one version with OS X Server
preinstalled.
New mouse. No more roller ball. Bluetooth all the way.
--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
Fred Moore
J.J. O'Shea <try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote:
> New iMacs. 21.5", 4 GB RAM, 500 GB disk, 3 GHz Core 2 Duo. 27", 4 GB RAM, 1
> TB disk, 2.66 i5. Quad-core units available.
>
> New MacBook. System redesign, multitouch, new battery, backlit display.
>
> New Mac minis. More speed, more RAM, one version with OS X Server
> preinstalled.
>
> New mouse. No more roller ball. Bluetooth all the way.
More detail from Apple press releases posted on Macintouch:
Apple today introduced the new wireless Magic Mouse, the first mouse to
use Apple's revolutionary Multi-Touch technology. Pioneered on iPhone,
iPod touch and Mac notebook trackpads, Multi-Touch allows customers to
navigate using intuitive finger gestures. Instead of mechanical buttons,
scroll wheels or scroll balls, the entire top of the Magic Mouse is a
seamless Multi-Touch surface. Magic Mouse comes standard with the new
iMac and will be available as a Mac accessory at just $69. [...]
Magic Mouse features a seamless touch-sensitive enclosure that allows
it to be a single or multi-button mouse with advanced gesture support.
Using intuitive gestures, users can easily scroll through long
documents, pan across large images or swipe to move forward or backward
through a collection of web pages or photos. Magic Mouse works for left
or right handed users and multi-button or gesture commands can be easily
configured from within System Preferences.
The Magic Mouse laser tracking engine provides a smooth, consistent
experience across more surfaces than a traditional optical tracking
system. Magic Mouse uses Bluetooth wireless capabilities to create a
clean, cable-free desk top and its secure wireless connection works from
up to 10 meters away. To extend battery performance, Magic Mouse
includes an advanced power management system that works with Mac OS X to
automatically switch to low power modes during periods of inactivity.
The wireless Magic Mouse is powered by two AA batteries which are
included.
Magic Mouse comes standard with the new iMac and is available at the
end of October through the Apple Store (www.apple.com), at Apple's
retail stores and Apple Authorized Resellers for a suggested retail
price of $69. Magic Mouse requires Mac OS X Leopard version 10.5.8 or
later.
**
Apple today updated its popular MacBook with a new, durable
polycarbonate unibody design featuring a brilliant LED-backlit display,
a glass Multi-Touch trackpad and Apple's innovative built-in battery for
up to seven hours of battery life. Inheriting technology and design
features from the MacBook Pro line, the new MacBook is an ideal consumer
notebook for students and new Mac users, and is available for $999.
[...]
The new MacBook features a unibody, polycarbonate enclosure that makes
it lighter and more durable. The new design includes a unique non-skid
bottom surface and at just 4.7 pounds, the sleek MacBook slides easily
into a backpack or briefcase. MacBook comes standard with a bright,
LED-backlit display with the same wide-angle viewing technology used in
the MacBook Pro line. The new MacBook has a 2.26 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
processor, 2GB RAM, a 250GB hard drive, and powerful NVIDIA GeForce
9400M integrated graphics.
The new MacBook includes Apple's innovative built-in notebook battery
for up to seven hours of wireless productivity on a single charge, and
up to 1,000 recharges. [...]
The new MacBook is available immediately through the Apple Store
(www.apple.com), Apple's retail stores and Apple Authorized Resellers.
**
Apple today unveiled an all new iMac line featuring brilliant
LED-backlit 21.5 and 27-inch widescreen displays in a new edge-to-edge
glass design and seamless all aluminum enclosure. The new iMac line,
starting at $1,199, is the fastest ever with Intel Core 2 Duo processors
starting at 3.06 GHz, and Core i5 and i7 quad-core processors for up to
twice the performance. Every new iMac ships with a wireless keyboard and
the all new wireless Magic Mouse, the world's first mouse with
Multi-Touch technology pioneered by Apple on the iPhone, iPod touch and
Mac notebook trackpad. [...]
The new iMac features stunning LED-backlit displays with a 16:9 aspect
ratio, ideal for watching high definition movies and TV shows from
iTunes, or editing and watching your own videos or photos using iLife.
The new 21.5-inch iMac features a high resolution 1920-by-1080 pixel
display. The 27-inch iMac features a beautiful 2560-by-1440 pixel
display that offers 60 percent more pixels than the previous 24-inch
model. Both 21.5 and 27-inch displays use IPS technology to deliver
consistent color across an ultra wide 178 degree viewing angle.
The iMac comes standard with a wireless keyboard and the new Magic
Mouse featuring Apple's revolutionary Multi-Touch technology. [...]
The iMac features improved graphics across the line with NVIDIA
GeForce 9400M integrated graphics or ATI Radeon HD 4670 discrete
graphics in the 21.5-inch model, and ATI Radeon HD 4670 discrete
graphics or ATI Radeon HD 4850 discrete graphics in the 27-inch model.
The new iMac line now also features 4GB of 1066 MHz DDR3 memory and
capacity up to 16GB across four SO-DIMM slots. Every iMac features a
built-in iSight video camera, mic and stereo speakers integrated into
the thin aluminum and glass design. iMac includes built-in AirPort
Extreme 802.11n Wi-Fi networking, Bluetooth 2.1+EDR, Gigabit Ethernet, a
total of four USB 2.0 ports, one FireWire 800 port and a new built-in SD
card slot.
**
Apple today also announced that the Mac Mini, the world's most energy
efficient desktop, is now faster, offers more storage and comes standard
with double the memory. Starting at $599, the entry level Mac Mini
features a faster 2.26 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor and 2GB of DDR3
1066 MHz memory, a 160GB hard drive, five USB 2.0 ports, FireWire 800,
NVIDIA GeForce 9400M integrated graphics and a SuperDrive. The $799 Mac
Mini features a 2.53 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor, 4GB of memory and a
larger 320GB hard drive. Apple now offers a $999 Mac Mini that is
specially configured with Mac OS X Snow Leopard Server. Mac Mini with
Snow Leopard Server features two 500GB hard drives for a total of 1TB of
server storage in the tiny 6.5-inch square by 2-inch tall Mac Mini
enclosure.
The new 3.06 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo iMac and Mac Mini lines are now
shipping and available through the Apple Store (www.apple.com), Apple's
retail stores and Apple Authorized Resellers.
The Intel Core i5 and i7 quad-core iMacs are available for order and
will begin shipping this November. Mac Mini with Mac OS X Snow Leopard
Server is available from the Apple Store and Apple's retail stores.
*****
Jolly Roger
J.J. O'Shea <try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote:
> New mouse. No more roller ball. Bluetooth all the way.
I wish Bluetooth weren't so noticeably laggy for me. : (
--
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.
JR
Richard Maine
> In article <hbkpi...@news1.newsguy.com>,
> J.J. O'Shea <try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote:
>
> > New mouse. No more roller ball. Bluetooth all the way.
>
> I wish Bluetooth weren't so noticeably laggy for me. : (
Suppose I'll give it a try.
The 27" iMacs look awfully tempting. I've been sort of resisting a new
Mac while waiting to see what this next upgrade was going to be. I could
have been happy with the last one, but rumors of new stuff comming kept
me waiting. Wow. The 27" monitor if nothing else. I've been of the
opinion that one of the negatives of the iMac line was that I'd really
prefer a bit larger monitor. (When you get to my age, you'll understand.
:-(). But the Mac Pro line was just too expensive for me and the
all-in-one form factor is handy for my desk. I think I'll go buy myself
a birthday present (today being the right day for that).
I can't stand the "mighty mouse", so the worst thing that happens if I
get one of the new mice is that it ends up in the same junk pile as the
mighty mouse would have and I keep using my Logitech. Same price for
both Apple options. Too bad there isn't an option to save a few bucks by
leaving the mouse off.
--
Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain
Lloyd Parsons
Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
> In article <hbkpi...@news1.newsguy.com>,
> J.J. O'Shea <try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote:
>
> > New mouse. No more roller ball. Bluetooth all the way.
>
> I wish Bluetooth weren't so noticeably laggy for me. : (
I get that lag with my RocketFish BT mouse, but not with the now trashed
Mighty Mouse, for what that's worth.
Paul Krause
J.J. O'Shea <try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote:
> New iMacs. 21.5", 4 GB RAM, 500 GB disk, 3 GHz Core 2 Duo. 27", 4 GB RAM, 1
> TB disk, 2.66 i5. Quad-core units available.
>
> New MacBook. System redesign, multitouch, new battery, backlit display.
>
> New Mac minis. More speed, more RAM, one version with OS X Server
> preinstalled.
>
> New mouse. No more roller ball. Bluetooth all the way.
YAWN... nothing to make me purchase. My 07 iMac with Snow leopard does
all I need.
Nice new HD screens by where's the blu ray?
As far as the Mac book goes it is nice BUT all I need in portability is
a netbook at about $300. Wish Apple would do one of those.
Jolly Roger
<p.e.krause-4EE19...@news.eternal-september.org>,
Paul Krause <p.e.k...@comcast.net> wrote:
> where's the blu ray?
*yawn* I'm not buying Blu Ray on principle.
Jolly Roger
Lloyd Parsons <lloydp...@mac.com> wrote:
I get it with my wireless MM with my MacBook Pro. It's just laggy enough
to be irritating. : (
Jolly Roger
nos...@see.signature (Richard Maine) wrote:
> the worst thing that happens if I
> get one of the new mice is that it ends up in the same junk pile as the
> mighty mouse would have and I keep using my Logitech
Would you send it to me instead? : )
Richard Maine
> In article <1j7vx70.13b22vx190ym8N%nos...@see.signature>,
> nos...@see.signature (Richard Maine) wrote:
>
> > the worst thing that happens if I
> > get one of the new mice is that it ends up in the same junk pile as the
> > mighty mouse would have and I keep using my Logitech
>
> Would you send it to me instead? : )
Well, that was just the worst thing. Might as well try it first; there's
at least a chance that I might decide I like it. :-)
Just placed my order. Modest system (by the new standards). Only upgrade
I made from the baseline 27" 3.06 GHx system was the 4850 Graphics. I
don't see the CPU speed upgrade as worth the cost for me and it might
even be a negative by adding to the heating load. I'm not really pushing
very hard on the 500GB disk capacity of this older iMac (just over 3
years old), so I think 1TB wil be plenty. The 4GB of memory is plenty
for now... and I like that the 4 slots means I can upgrade to 8GB later
for pretty cheap if the time comes that I want to do that.
Also ordered an adaptor cable to hook up to my "little" 24" second
monitor.
The Quad core ones might be great for some things, but I don't think
they are a very good match for my current wants (I hesitate to call them
"needs" :-)) and toy budget.
(And thanks Martin).
Lloyd Parsons
Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
> In article <lloydparsons-F976...@port80.individual.net>,
> Lloyd Parsons <lloydp...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <jollyroger-C1673...@news.individual.net>,
> > Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <hbkpi...@news1.newsguy.com>,
> > > J.J. O'Shea <try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote:
> > >
> > > > New mouse. No more roller ball. Bluetooth all the way.
> > >
> > > I wish Bluetooth weren't so noticeably laggy for me. : (
> >
> > I get that lag with my RocketFish BT mouse, but not with the now trashed
> > Mighty Mouse, for what that's worth.
>
> I get it with my wireless MM with my MacBook Pro. It's just laggy enough
> to be irritating. : (
You need to trade your fingers in for slower ones... :)
David Empson
> Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <hbkpi...@news1.newsguy.com>,
> > J.J. O'Shea <try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote:
> >
> > > New mouse. No more roller ball. Bluetooth all the way.
> >
> > I wish Bluetooth weren't so noticeably laggy for me. : (
>
> Suppose I'll give it a try.
>
> The 27" iMacs look awfully tempting. I've been sort of resisting a new
> Mac while waiting to see what this next upgrade was going to be. I could
> have been happy with the last one, but rumors of new stuff comming kept
> me waiting. Wow. The 27" monitor if nothing else. I've been of the
> opinion that one of the negatives of the iMac line was that I'd really
> prefer a bit larger monitor. (When you get to my age, you'll understand.
> :-(). But the Mac Pro line was just too expensive for me and the
> all-in-one form factor is handy for my desk. I think I'll go buy myself
> a birthday present (today being the right day for that).
Happy Birthday.
Point of note, which I haven't seen in most of the online commentary so
far. It is mentioned in the comparison chart on the Apple Store.
The 27" iMac's Mini DisplayPort now supports video input as well as
output, so you can use it as a monitor for another computer.
It appears that this will require another adapter and/or the right
cable, and it is probably limited to supporting computers with
DisplayPort or Mini DisplayPort output.
Adapters to convert from DVI or VGA to Mini DisplayPort might be
feasible but would probably be quite expensive and need a separate power
source (similar to the current Dual-link DVI adapter).
The full resolution of the 27" iMac is 2560 x 1440, and that is too high
for single-link DVI.
The 27" iMac's resolution is the same horizontally as the 30" Cinema
display, but it is 16:9 ratio instead of 16:10.
Small pixels!
--
David Empson
dem...@actrix.gen.nz
Priam
> Jolly Roger<jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> In article<1j7vx70.13b22vx190ym8N%nos...@see.signature>,
>> nos...@see.signature (Richard Maine) wrote:
>>
>>> the worst thing that happens if I
>>> get one of the new mice is that it ends up in the same junk pile as the
>>> mighty mouse would have and I keep using my Logitech
>>
>> Would you send it to me instead? : )
>
> Well, that was just the worst thing. Might as well try it first; there's
> at least a chance that I might decide I like it. :-)
>
> Just placed my order. Modest system (by the new standards). Only upgrade
> I made from the baseline 27" 3.06 GHx system was the 4850 Graphics. I
> don't see the CPU speed upgrade as worth the cost for me and it might
> even be a negative by adding to the heating load. I'm not really pushing
> very hard on the 500GB disk capacity of this older iMac (just over 3
> years old), so I think 1TB wil be plenty.
Don't worry. Nowadays a Seagate 1TB disk is only $109 (CAN). Apple has
probably not overcharged you much more than $300 for this feature.
Enjoy your Lucky Goldstar monitor!
Otherwise, have a happy birthday!
Howard Brazee
wrote:
>> where's the blu ray?
>
>*yawn* I'm not buying Blu Ray on principle.
I'm curious - what principle is this?
--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."
- James Madison
Jolly Roger
Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:45:26 -0500, Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> where's the blu ray?
> >
> >*yawn* I'm not buying Blu Ray on principle.
>
> I'm curious - what principle is this?
Mostly I am against all the DRM included with it.
Jolly Roger
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:45:26 -0500, Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> where's the blu ray?
> >
> >*yawn* I'm not buying Blu Ray on principle.
>
> I'm curious - what principle is this?
I am against the horrible DRM it's infested with.
P. Sture
nos...@see.signature (Richard Maine) wrote:
> I can't stand the "mighty mouse", so the worst thing that happens if I
> get one of the new mice is that it ends up in the same junk pile as the
> mighty mouse would have and I keep using my Logitech. Same price for
> both Apple options. Too bad there isn't an option to save a few bucks by
> leaving the mouse off.
Sell it as new and unopened?
--
Paul Sture
John McWilliams
> In article <jhpsd5ph9upbqnr9r...@4ax.com>,
> Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:45:26 -0500, Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> where's the blu ray?
>>> *yawn* I'm not buying Blu Ray on principle.
>> I'm curious - what principle is this?
>
> I am against the horrible DRM it's infested with.
Horrible in that it exists at all, or in that it screws up otherwise
decent operations?
What does the DRM do it shouldn't?
--
john mcwilliams
Ian Gregory
On 2009-10-20, Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
> In article
><p.e.krause-4EE19...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Paul Krause <p.e.k...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> where's the blu ray?
>
> *yawn* I'm not buying Blu Ray on principle.
Fair enough, but some people want it (Blu-ray) and there were rumours
that it would be available as an option. Obviously you would not have
chosen that option but some people are understandably disappointed that
it does not exist (personally I would not have got it either but it is a
question of cost vs utility, not of principle).
Another point about the new iMacs. I have one with a 20" display and I
would have gone for 24". The new sizes have thrown me. The price and
power consumption premium on the 27" models is putting me off them (the
ability to use them as an external monitor might appeal to some people
but I wouldn't be making use of it).
So it looks like I would be settling for the 21.5". Given the 16:9 (as
opposed to 16:10) aspect ratio, the 21.5" model only has about 10% more
screen area than the old 20" (as opposed to 44% more for the old 24").
However, it is HD resolution, and LED backlit, and has a wider viewing
angle than the old one. So I guess I would still be on a winner.
The SD card slot appeals to me, and the new mouse (my Mighty Mouse
roller ball has been stuck for about a year and I haven't got round to
breaking the case). I wouldn't have paid extra for wireless keyboard and
mouse but given that you don't get a discount for selecting the wired
options I would probably go wireless.
I am not rushing out to buy one yet though, I am waiting to see how it
goes down with Joe Public.
Ian
--
Ian Gregory
http://www.zenatode.org.uk/ian/
Jolly Roger
John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
I'll post a couple helpful links, but beyond that, I'm going to let you
rely on your own Google skills to find the information you want. ; )
<http://gear.ign.com/articles/691/691408p1.html>
<http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6283697.html>
<http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2005/09/microsoft-hd-dvd.ars>
<http://www.pcworld.com/article/124961/burning_questions_no_copying_from_
first_highdef_players.html>
<http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_connection>
<http://www.stereophile.com/news/022006fair/>
<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/03/21/dmca_exemptions_controversy/>
Fred Moore
Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
> In article <jhpsd5ph9upbqnr9r...@4ax.com>,
> Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:45:26 -0500, Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >> where's the blu ray?
> > >
> > >*yawn* I'm not buying Blu Ray on principle.
> >
> > I'm curious - what principle is this?
>
> I am against the horrible DRM it's infested with.
Yes! The DRM is thoroughly end to end and could cause significant
problems for Mac users who don't even use it (Google for details.)
Furthermore, people who know a lot more about this than I do say Blu Ray
is already dead. It's BetaMax all over again, except that VHS is digital
downloads.
End of the world as Hollywood knows it
<http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-10378654-261.html>
Howard Brazee
wrote:
>> Horrible in that it exists at all, or in that it screws up otherwise
>> decent operations?
>> What does the DRM do it shouldn't?
>
>I'll post a couple helpful links, but beyond that, I'm going to let you
>rely on your own Google skills to find the information you want. ; )
It appears that your main issue is in backing up protected disks. (An
old issue that technology has solved in the past).
What's not real clear to me is whether this protection scheme applies
to media that I create, as well as what I buy. If it is the former,
then I agree with you. If not, see my notes below:
><http://gear.ign.com/articles/691/691408p1.html>
2006 article. HDMI doesn't bother me, it works well.
It especially doesn't matter if the player and the monitor are both in
the computer. Copy protection never bothered me with earlier formats
(which got broken anyway). As long as I can play what I paid for -
or record what I want, what's the big deal? (As long as I can back
up my data)
I have copied laser disks to DvDs in case my laser disk player ever
dies. I'm not happy with the quality of the result. But what's the
big deal about spending money and work to back up all of my
commercially available disks.
><http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6283697.html>
2005 article That's a PS3 game thing.
><http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2005/09/microsoft-hd-dvd.ars>
2005 article. Again, I'm not worried about backing up movies - as
long as I can back up my data.
><http://www.pcworld.com/article/124961/burning_questions_no_copying_from_
>first_highdef_players.html>
2006 article. Again, I'm not worried about backing up movies - as
long as I can back up my data.
><http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_connection>
I'm thinking it is "managed backups" which bother you. As long as
this doesn't get in the way of data backups, and my own media
presentations, it doesn't bother me. I'm not going to back-up the
movie I just bought.
><http://www.stereophile.com/news/022006fair/>
2006 article about our rights to back-up.
><http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/03/21/dmca_exemptions_controversy/>
2006 article about our rights to back-up.
TaliesinSoft
(in article <jollyroger-C1673...@news.individual.net>):
[in the context of a mouse]
> I wish Bluetooth weren't so noticeably laggy for me. : (
I'm curious as I have no awareness of my Bluetooth mouse (Kensington
Slimblade Presenter) being "laggy". If I reach over and move the mouse the
response seems to be immediate. The same goes for double-clicking on some
text and for a drag-to-select action.
I use the mouse in conjunction with a 17" MacBook Pro, first generation.
--
James Leo Ryan --- Austin, Texas --- talies...@me.com
Jolly Roger
TaliesinSoft <talies...@me.com> wrote:
I think "lag" was a bad word for me to use. It's hard to describe; but
I'll try. It's not that the mouse takes too long to respond. It seems to
respond quickly enough. The problem to which I refer is seemingly one of
accuracy.
Here's a way to see the problem. Position a window on the screen. And
then focus on the first letter of the title of the window. Now pick a
place on the desktop that is around an inch or so away from the first
letter of the title of the window. Then try positioning the mouse cursor
from one point to the other quickly. With a wired mouse, I find I can
accurately hit each point. With a Bluetooth mouse, I often overshoot or
undershoot, and end up circling around to adjust.
Adjusting the Tracking Speed setting in System Preferences > Mouse
doesn't seem to help much. Even as lower settings, it's still harder to
hit the target than it is with a wired mouse.
I'm not sure why this is, but I believe it has something to do with the
response time of Bluetooth.
TaliesinSoft
<jollyroger-9918B...@news.individual.net>):
I tried the above test and it took me perhaps 1/3 to 1/2 second to move the
mouse accurately to a target one inch away. I have my tracking speed set one
step closer to "slow" than to "fast".
Howard Brazee
wrote:
>Furthermore, people who know a lot more about this than I do say Blu Ray
>is already dead. It's BetaMax all over again, except that VHS is digital
>downloads.
Personally I want to own a physical copy of my HD movie. But with a
Mac, I also want the ability to burn a disk with my own media and/or
data and hand carry it. The bigger the (standard) disk, the better.
John McWilliams
> In article <hbnejn$um2$3...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> In article <jhpsd5ph9upbqnr9r...@4ax.com>,
>>> Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:45:26 -0500, Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> where's the blu ray?
>>>>> *yawn* I'm not buying Blu Ray on principle.
>>>> I'm curious - what principle is this?
>>> I am against the horrible DRM it's infested with.
>> Horrible in that it exists at all, or in that it screws up otherwise
>> decent operations?
>> What does the DRM do it shouldn't?
>
> I'll post a couple helpful links, but beyond that, I'm going to let you
> rely on your own Google skills to find the information you want. ; )
/snipped links out/
Er, thanks??
When I post to usenet a question phrased in that way, I am looking for
the opinion of the person to whom I posed it. If you cannot or don't
wish to say, thanks anyway. I am quite familiar with Google and several
of its predecessors.
--
John McWilliams
Jolly Roger
TaliesinSoft <talies...@me.com> wrote:
It's not about how fast you can move the mouse, but how *reliably* you
can hit the point you are aiming for with your cursor. And the exercise
requires doing so with a wired mouse and a wireless mouse, so you can
observe the difference.
Jolly Roger
John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
I'm afraid Google is the best place for you to get the answer to "What
does the DRM do it shouldn't?".
Regarding your other question, I'd say the reason I am against the DRM
in Blue Ray is the ways in which it allows content creators to limit
just what you can do with the content.
That's really all I have time (or want) to say about it, to be honest.
When I made the comment that started this sub-thread, it wasn't an
invitation for a debate. It was simply a comment expressing my feelings.
If you were wanting more, I apologize.
Nick Naym
at jolly...@pobox.com wrote on 10/21/09 4:39 PM:
Is it at all possible that the Bluetooth version's responsiveness is
exacerbated by the MM's acceleration curve? I found it to be horrible with
my wired MM, so soon after getting my iMac I got SteerMouse, which made a
world of difference.
FWIW, since my recent upgrade to 10.5.8 my MM works fine _without_
reinstalling SteerMouse. I have no idea why.
--
iMac (24", 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM, 320 GB HDD) � OS X (10.5.8)
John McWilliams
Simply wanted your opinion, no more, no less [certainly not a debate.]
Please see this as a compliment, and I am sorry if it was an imposition.
--
john mcwilliams
TaliesinSoft
<jollyroger-0389C...@news.individual.net>):
When I did the test, using my Kensington Slimblade Presenter Bluetooth mouse
I indeed concentrated on hitting the point I was aiming for. At this time I
don't have a wired mouse so I wasn't in a position to compare. That aside,
the speed and accuracy I obtained was well within my not feeling any lag.
Jolly Roger
TaliesinSoft <talies...@me.com> wrote:
It's not something you can appreciate without comparing the two
side-by-side, I'm afraid. It's a subtle-but-irritating (to me)
TaliesinSoft
(in article <jollyroger-5FB76...@news.individual.net>):
[in response to my stating that I only performed his test, described earlier
in this thread, with a Bluetooth mouse and not also with a wired mouse]
> It's not something you can appreciate without comparing the two
> side-by-side, I'm afraid. It's a subtle-but-irritating (to me)
> difference.
Blast you! :-)
Now I'm not gonna be satisfied until I borrow a friend's wired mouse and run
the comparison. When I do I'll post my reactions.
D.F. Manno
Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
> When I made the comment that started this sub-thread, it wasn't an
> invitation for a debate.
This is Usenet, _everything_ is an invitation for a debate.
--
D.F. Manno | dfm...@mail.com
"Faith is a cop-out. If the only way you can accept an assertion is by
faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits."
(Dan Barker, former preacher, musician, b. 1949)
Richard Maine
> In article <jollyroger-F26CC...@news.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> > When I made the comment that started this sub-thread, it wasn't an
> > invitation for a debate.
>
> This is Usenet, _everything_ is an invitation for a debate.
No, it's not. :-)
(Please note the smiley.)
--
Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain
Mike Rosenberg
> > This is Usenet, _everything_ is an invitation for a debate.
>
> No, it's not. :-)
This isn't a debate, it's just contradiction.
--
My latest dance performance <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvB98fgse-s>
Mac and geek T-shirts & gifts <http://designsbymike.net/shop/mac.cgi>
Prius shirts/bumper stickers <http://designsbymike.net/shop/prius.cgi>
Richard Maine
> Richard Maine <nos...@see.signature> wrote:
>
> > > This is Usenet, _everything_ is an invitation for a debate.
> >
> > No, it's not. :-)
>
> This isn't a debate, it's just contradiction.
I suppose I'm then obligated to say "No, it's not." :-)
Mike Rosenberg
> > > > This is Usenet, _everything_ is an invitation for a debate.
> > >
> > > No, it's not. :-)
> >
> > This isn't a debate, it's just contradiction.
>
> I suppose I'm then obligated to say "No, it's not." :-)
No, you're not. ;-)
Ian Gregory
> Richard Maine <nos...@see.signature> wrote:
>
>> > > > This is Usenet, _everything_ is an invitation for a debate.
>> > >
>> > > No, it's not. :-)
>> >
>> > This isn't a debate, it's just contradiction.
>>
>> I suppose I'm then obligated to say "No, it's not." :-)
>
> No, you're not. ;-)
It's a fair cop.
By the way, the sketch is available on Monty Python's YouTube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y
Jolly Roger
TaliesinSoft <talies...@me.com> wrote:
I am very interested to read your reactions!
TaliesinSoft
<jollyroger-FDCA2...@news.individual.net>):
[in response to my stating in regards to the comparison between a bluetooth
mouse and a wired mouse]
>> Now I'm not gonna be satisfied until I borrow a friend's wired mouse and
>> run the comparison. When I do I'll post my reactions.
>
> I am very interested to read your reactions!
Comparing the performance of a bluetooth and a wired mouse on my Mac and my
friends Mac neither of us good sense any difference when running the "Jolly"
test. We were both able to move the mice, both bluetooth and wired,
accurately to a target an inch away in about a half of a second. Neither of
us at anytime felt that there was any lag in the movement of the mice.
My Mac is a MacBook Pro 17" first generation Intel.
My friend's Mac is a MacBook Pro 15" brand new.
The bluetooth mouse was my Kensington Slimblade Presenter.
The wired mouse was my friend's Mighty Mouse.
Mike Rosenberg
> Comparing the performance of a bluetooth and a wired mouse on my Mac and my
> friends Mac neither of us good sense any difference when running the "Jolly"
> test.
Just so JR knows he's not alone, bluetooth mice always feel kind of
sluggish to me compared to wired mice.
Nick Naym
Rosenberg at mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com wrote on 10/23/09 11:35 AM:
> TaliesinSoft <talies...@me.com> wrote:
>
>> Comparing the performance of a bluetooth and a wired mouse on my Mac and my
>> friends Mac neither of us good sense any difference when running the "Jolly"
>> test.
>
> Just so JR knows he's not alone, bluetooth mice always feel kind of
> sluggish to me compared to wired mice.
As I opined earlier, I'm wondering if the the mouse's acceleration curve
might be contributing to it.
Tom Lake
"Mike Rosenberg" <mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com> wrote in message
news:1j800rj.1xtsoye1y6r3l7N%mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com...
> Richard Maine <nos...@see.signature> wrote:
>
>> > > > This is Usenet, _everything_ is an invitation for a debate.
>> > >
>> > > No, it's not. :-)
>> >
>> > This isn't a debate, it's just contradiction.
>>
>> I suppose I'm then obligated to say "No, it's not." :-)
>
> No, you're not. ;-)
>
Monty Python Lives!
Tom Lake
--
Are you a bunch of Nazis?
(Just to satisfy Godwin's Law)
Jolly Roger
TaliesinSoft <talies...@me.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 17:34:13 -0500, Jolly Roger wrote (in article
> <jollyroger-FDCA2...@news.individual.net>):
>
> [in response to my stating in regards to the comparison between a bluetooth
> mouse and a wired mouse]
>
> >> Now I'm not gonna be satisfied until I borrow a friend's wired mouse and
> >> run the comparison. When I do I'll post my reactions.
> >
> > I am very interested to read your reactions!
>
> Comparing the performance of a bluetooth and a wired mouse on my Mac and my
> friends Mac neither of us good sense any difference when running the "Jolly"
> test. We were both able to move the mice, both bluetooth and wired,
> accurately to a target an inch away in about a half of a second. Neither of
> us at anytime felt that there was any lag in the movement of the mice.
Again, "lag" was a bad word to use. This really seems to be about
precision. I find I have a harder time hitting the mark with a wireless
mouse than I do with a wired mouse. I often overshoot or undershoot with
a wireless mouse. Such is not the case with a wired mouse. If you aren't
paying attention to where your cursor actually ends up, then you
probably won't notice it.
Jolly Roger
mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:
> TaliesinSoft <talies...@me.com> wrote:
>
> > Comparing the performance of a bluetooth and a wired mouse on my Mac and my
> > friends Mac neither of us good sense any difference when running the "Jolly"
> > test.
>
> Just so JR knows he's not alone, bluetooth mice always feel kind of
> sluggish to me compared to wired mice.
Thanks. My wife noticed it right away as well. So I know I'm not
delusional. : ) And no I know she's not either! : D
Jolly Roger
Nick Naym <nicknaym@[remove_this].gmail.com> wrote:
> In article 1j81esh.1q56znmirrtswN%mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com, Mike
> Rosenberg at mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com wrote on 10/23/09 11:35 AM:
>
> > TaliesinSoft <talies...@me.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Comparing the performance of a bluetooth and a wired mouse on my Mac and
> >> my
> >> friends Mac neither of us good sense any difference when running the
> >> "Jolly"
> >> test.
> >
> > Just so JR knows he's not alone, bluetooth mice always feel kind of
> > sluggish to me compared to wired mice.
>
> As I opined earlier, I'm wondering if the the mouse's acceleration curve
> might be contributing to it.
Definitely possible. Though I've noticed it with Apple and Logitech mice.
Nick Naym
at jolly...@pobox.com wrote on 10/23/09 10:55 PM:
> In article <1j81esh.1q56znmirrtswN%mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com>,
> mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:
>
>> TaliesinSoft <talies...@me.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Comparing the performance of a bluetooth and a wired mouse on my Mac and my
>>> friends Mac neither of us good sense any difference when running the "Jolly"
>>> test.
>>
>> Just so JR knows he's not alone, bluetooth mice always feel kind of
>> sluggish to me compared to wired mice.
>
> Thanks. My wife noticed it right away as well. So I know I'm not
> delusional. : )
Hmmmm....
> And no I know she's not either! : D
She _did_ marry you, right?
;P
Nick Naym
at jolly...@pobox.com wrote on 10/23/09 10:55 PM:
> In article <C70758D0.4973E%nicknaym@[remove_this].gmail.com>,
> Nick Naym <nicknaym@[remove_this].gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> In article 1j81esh.1q56znmirrtswN%mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com, Mike
>> Rosenberg at mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com wrote on 10/23/09 11:35 AM:
>>
>>> TaliesinSoft <talies...@me.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Comparing the performance of a bluetooth and a wired mouse on my Mac and
>>>> my
>>>> friends Mac neither of us good sense any difference when running the
>>>> "Jolly"
>>>> test.
>>>
>>> Just so JR knows he's not alone, bluetooth mice always feel kind of
>>> sluggish to me compared to wired mice.
>>
>> As I opined earlier, I'm wondering if the the mouse's acceleration curve
>> might be contributing to it.
>
> Definitely possible. Though I've noticed it with Apple and Logitech mice.
Huh?? What have you noticed?
Mike Rosenberg
> >>> Just so JR knows he's not alone, bluetooth mice always feel kind of
> >>> sluggish to me compared to wired mice.
> >>
> >> As I opined earlier, I'm wondering if the the mouse's acceleration curve
> >> might be contributing to it.
> >
> > Definitely possible. Though I've noticed it with Apple and Logitech mice.
>
>
> Huh?? What have you noticed?
That bluetooth mice always feel kind of sluggish (in my words) or
exhibit a lag (his words) compared to wired mice.
Nick Naym
Rosenberg at mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com wrote on 10/25/09 11:06 AM:
> Nick Naym <nicknaym@[remove_this].gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> Just so JR knows he's not alone, bluetooth mice always feel kind of
>>>>> sluggish to me compared to wired mice.
>>>>
>>>> As I opined earlier, I'm wondering if the the mouse's acceleration curve
>>>> might be contributing to it.
>>>
>>> Definitely possible. Though I've noticed it with Apple and Logitech mice.
>>
>>
>> Huh?? What have you noticed?
>
> That bluetooth mice always feel kind of sluggish (in my words) or
> exhibit a lag (his words) compared to wired mice.
Ah! OK. Well, I can't comment on Logitech -- the only one I've ever owned (I
still have it, and it still works great) is wireless: a Cordless MouseMan
Optical. But the MM's acceleration curve is (IMO) intrinsically horrid.
But, as I previously mentioned, since I updated to 10.5.8, MM works quite
nicely...I'm not sure if Apple changed MM's acceleration curve in that
update, or if it's something that I unwittingly effected (though I can't
even remotely imagine what that could've been).
BTW: After the 10.5.8 update, so far my system has been behaving rather
nicely (finally, after all these months!) -- at least I haven't been plagued
by all those oddball problems I whined about before. (Only Spotlight remains
a pain in the ass. And then there's that new problem with Time Machine...)
However, I did discover a slightly annoying bug in 10.5.8. Apple verified it
and, as a gesture for doing so (and (allegedly) as well as for all the
aggravation I've experienced with the system's poor performance since nearly
Day #1) is sending me a free SL upgrade. Whoopee!;P
--
iMac (24", 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM, 320 GB HDD) � OS X (10.5.8)
ptical