But still, my technical question is still out there - is there any technical difficulty in doing what I suggest?
Yes, your question is a valid one. As far as I know, there is no way to have in OS X two login sessions running at the same time on the same machine through separate monitors. This is a technical limitation and concerns the native Aqua environment. Fast User Switch is a way to partially alleviate this problem. I would bet however that you can have this functionality in X11 sessions, I don't know though how to set it up.
I'd like to see Apple push the envelope again with the new iMac.
This will be the first post PPC/Intel transition iMac and I'm hoping for something really special.
I'd like to see a Intel's consumer Quad core in there. Running at 2.4 gig would be nice. For the 24 inch model... I'd like to see the display go chinless and alu'. And a 8800 Nvidia variant lower power GPU. You'd have a nice rig with that. 2 gigs of ram on the top model. Colour annodized to match the shuffles woud hark back to the original iMac...
I'd like to see them push the price bracket down further from 675 pounds to 595 pounds inc VAT.
Take a VERY BIG NOTICE on Jobs words (in the just released open letter) about DRM free music !!
It will shape a LOT of things to emerge soon...
Are we excited yet ?
PS: Question: How can DRM have anything to do with Macs ?????????????????
Macs are currently the storehouse for all iTunes downloads. If music labels and movie studios can get past the stupid DRM thing, Apple could greatly increase the number of available music and movie titles on the iTunes store.
I'd like to be able to download music, TV shows and movies directly from an ?TV and have them stream directly to an HDTV. The Mac can be used to set up the account but once that's done, you should be able to buy stuff from your couch. There should also be a rental model for movies such that a rental would stream to your TV for viewing, stay on the ?TV HD for a set period of time and then disappear.
Much as I would love to believe you, I don't think SJ's statement has anything to do with changes in Apple's policy. I think they are just putting the ball (and blame) into the recdord companies' court.
They are simply telling the EU, consumers, other regulators etc that they would happily drop DRM tomorrow if they music industry let them. It is also a shot across the bows of the film industry, who by all accounts want even more stringent DRM than the music industry pimps ('cos that's what they all are). Universal want a cut of every iPod as well as evry film. and they want draconian DRM as well. Apple's simply making public the argument (that's obviously failed in private) "Ha! Do you really think we're going to let you get away with that? And do you really think we're gonna take the blame when we lose a restrictive practices case in the EU?
Apple's brand has been hurt more than any over the music DRM fiasco, even though it was insisted upon by the music industry. Apple are going public as (the consumer's friend" to strenghten their negotiating hand.
Much as I would love to believe you, I don't think SJ's statement has anything to do with changes in Apple's policy. I think they are just putting the ball (and blame) into the recdord companies' court.
They are simply telling the EU, consumers, other regulators etc that they would happily drop DRM tomorrow if they music industry let them. It is also a shot across the bows of the film industry, who by all accounts want even more stringent DRM than the music industry pimps ('cos that's what they all are). Universal want a cut of every iPod as well as evry film. and they want draconian DRM as well. Apple's simply making public the argument (that's obviously failed in private) "Ha! Do you really think we're going to let you get away with that? And do you really think we're gonna take the blame when we lose a restrictive practices case in the EU?
Apple's brand has been hurt more than any over the music DRM fiasco, even though it was insisted upon by the music industry. Apple are going public as (the consumer's friend" to strenghten their negotiating hand.
Well, Jobs words are multidirectional shots.
On one hand, he plainly states that DRM is a Label-Owned-Tech and not Apple's.
On the other hand it points, together with the iPhone to a very significant paradigm change in tech. You see in the last 5 years tech had a tremendous boost that only landed the power on the 3 biggest industries that benefited from it.
1- Music Industry
2- Video Industry ( not movies , yet)
3- Cellphone operators.
For me, the biggest greedy bastards in the world ate BY FAR, the cellphone operators ( I should know...) They artificially jack up prices, distort terminal prices, often blaming the imcumbent networks, but really they are the Devil on Earth.
Apple has created something with the Music Industry to serve as an example for consumer awareness and future expectations.
Apple said " Let us show you how cool and simple enjoying Music is "...2 years later everyone and their mother are crying DRM (not ipods or Apple) should be killed... Supose it is ? What's left ? Apple's elegant players and Jukebox/Online Distribution. BINGO.
Do , we consumers , care ? I do.
Now let's enter another industry. Apple again makes the coolest, most elegant, well thought out tech and sells it to consumers. Everyone loves it BUT AS ALWAYS, the price setters ( cellphone operators,) willl find even MORE DEVIOUS WAYS to get your money...
Want more proof ?
Everyone in the world still pays internet "traffic" ,LOL, and per minute usage. Guess they learned something from the cellular crooks.
The telephone is a hundred years ols and now it's the single MOST EXPENSIVE commodiy in the planet.
Cellphone operators are now the criminals who fight every second of their pathetic professional lives to keep the paradigm of "AIRTIME" billable.
I hope DRM goes away, I hope iPhone cost 500 USD or even more.And most of all I hope WiMAX to come sooner rather than later and my iPhone will switch to that.
I'd like to see Apple push the envelope again with the new iMac.
This will be the first post PPC/Intel transition iMac and I'm hoping for something really special.
I'd like to see a Intel's consumer Quad core in there. Running at 2.4 gig would be nice. For the 24 inch model... I'd like to see the display go chinless and alu'. And a 8800 Nvidia variant lower power GPU. You'd have a nice rig with that. 2 gigs of ram on the top model. Colour annodized to match the shuffles woud hark back to the original iMac...
I'd like to see them push the price bracket down further from 675 pounds to 595 pounds inc VAT.
Lemon Bon Bon.
I like that specs
That will be cool, Quad Core!, how much is that, $999? not sure, could be expensive for iMac...
Why was black color left out of Shuffle? going to be get rid from Nano as well?
I'd like to see a Intel's consumer Quad core in there.
Is not prohibitively expensive for the iMac class and for an already expensive consumer model (24")? Anyone knows what is the price difference between the dual and the quad core chips? Somehow I feel this is not going to happen just because of cost considerations.
No. What this has to do with the iMac? I see nothing. Or we do talk about something else?
Hmmm... we MIGHT be talking about something else.
But still the iMac used to be the HUB of your digital life. Next one will be more of a GIGASWITCH at that. As I said before expect something very different...
But still the iMac used to be the HUB of your digital life. Next one will be more of a GIGASWITCH at that.
May I ask, what is a GIGASWITCH?
Quote:
Originally Posted by European guy
As I said before expect something very different...
OK, let's say I believe you. I don't ask for details. Just two things: do you have from your source a clear picture of the hardware and when one can expect it? Or more vaguely, before or after Leopard's release?
But still the iMac used to be the HUB of your digital life. Next one will be more of a GIGASWITCH at that. As I said before expect something very different...
Oh man, someone is setting himself up to be ROLOed big time if his vague rumors turn out to be no more than just that....
Moreover I'm very curious what kind of "little bird" finds his way from Cupertino to Portugal
[QUOTE=PB;1039467OK, let's say I believe you. I don't ask for details. Just two things: do you have from your source a clear picture of the hardware and when one can expect it? Or more vaguely, before or after Leopard's release?[/QUOTE]
No, not a clear picture, sorry.
I have been completely transparent on the info I have.
As this is no secret, I was told to expect a very different iMac on the next iteration. I have some personal reasons to believe this info to be true, but, truth be said, absolutely to factual evidence on it. It should be no hard prediction to expect something evolutive on the iMac, but "little bird" said, more than once, to expect a more "radical" approach.
Tis what I know , and nothing less.
As for me being wrong, no problem. Messengers get killed all the time.
I have been completely transparent on the info I have.
As this is no secret, I was told to expect a very different iMac on the next iteration. I have some personal reasons to believe this info to be true, but, truth be said, absolutely to factual evidence on it. It should be no hard prediction to expect something evolutive on the iMac, but "little bird" said, more than once, to expect a more "radical" approach.
Tis what I know , and nothing less.
As for me being wrong, no problem. Messengers get killed all the time.
Comments
But still, my technical question is still out there - is there any technical difficulty in doing what I suggest?
Yes, your question is a valid one. As far as I know, there is no way to have in OS X two login sessions running at the same time on the same machine through separate monitors. This is a technical limitation and concerns the native Aqua environment. Fast User Switch is a way to partially alleviate this problem. I would bet however that you can have this functionality in X11 sessions, I don't know though how to set it up.
It will be nice with different colors, White is kinda too dull after long time ...
1) Colorful iMac
2) Chinless iMac
3) some form of Alu
4) and good specs
This will be the first post PPC/Intel transition iMac and I'm hoping for something really special.
I'd like to see a Intel's consumer Quad core in there. Running at 2.4 gig would be nice. For the 24 inch model... I'd like to see the display go chinless and alu'. And a 8800 Nvidia variant lower power GPU. You'd have a nice rig with that. 2 gigs of ram on the top model. Colour annodized to match the shuffles woud hark back to the original iMac...
I'd like to see them push the price bracket down further from 675 pounds to 595 pounds inc VAT.
Lemon Bon Bon.
It will shape a LOT of things to emerge soon...
Are we excited yet ?
PS: Question: How can DRM have anything to do with Macs ?????????????????
but...
the iMac is...
Portable - wireless screen?
The veracity of your claims is impossible to determine, without an elevator involved.
Take a VERY BIG NOTICE on Jobs words (in the just released open letter) about DRM free music !!
It will shape a LOT of things to emerge soon...
Are we excited yet ?
PS: Question: How can DRM have anything to do with Macs ?????????????????
Macs are currently the storehouse for all iTunes downloads. If music labels and movie studios can get past the stupid DRM thing, Apple could greatly increase the number of available music and movie titles on the iTunes store.
I'd like to be able to download music, TV shows and movies directly from an ?TV and have them stream directly to an HDTV. The Mac can be used to set up the account but once that's done, you should be able to buy stuff from your couch. There should also be a rental model for movies such that a rental would stream to your TV for viewing, stay on the ?TV HD for a set period of time and then disappear.
They are simply telling the EU, consumers, other regulators etc that they would happily drop DRM tomorrow if they music industry let them. It is also a shot across the bows of the film industry, who by all accounts want even more stringent DRM than the music industry pimps ('cos that's what they all are). Universal want a cut of every iPod as well as evry film. and they want draconian DRM as well. Apple's simply making public the argument (that's obviously failed in private) "Ha! Do you really think we're going to let you get away with that? And do you really think we're gonna take the blame when we lose a restrictive practices case in the EU?
Apple's brand has been hurt more than any over the music DRM fiasco, even though it was insisted upon by the music industry. Apple are going public as (the consumer's friend" to strenghten their negotiating hand.
Much as I would love to believe you, I don't think SJ's statement has anything to do with changes in Apple's policy. I think they are just putting the ball (and blame) into the recdord companies' court.
They are simply telling the EU, consumers, other regulators etc that they would happily drop DRM tomorrow if they music industry let them. It is also a shot across the bows of the film industry, who by all accounts want even more stringent DRM than the music industry pimps ('cos that's what they all are). Universal want a cut of every iPod as well as evry film. and they want draconian DRM as well. Apple's simply making public the argument (that's obviously failed in private) "Ha! Do you really think we're going to let you get away with that? And do you really think we're gonna take the blame when we lose a restrictive practices case in the EU?
Apple's brand has been hurt more than any over the music DRM fiasco, even though it was insisted upon by the music industry. Apple are going public as (the consumer's friend" to strenghten their negotiating hand.
Well, Jobs words are multidirectional shots.
On one hand, he plainly states that DRM is a Label-Owned-Tech and not Apple's.
On the other hand it points, together with the iPhone to a very significant paradigm change in tech. You see in the last 5 years tech had a tremendous boost that only landed the power on the 3 biggest industries that benefited from it.
1- Music Industry
2- Video Industry ( not movies , yet)
3- Cellphone operators.
For me, the biggest greedy bastards in the world ate BY FAR, the cellphone operators ( I should know...) They artificially jack up prices, distort terminal prices, often blaming the imcumbent networks, but really they are the Devil on Earth.
Apple has created something with the Music Industry to serve as an example for consumer awareness and future expectations.
Apple said " Let us show you how cool and simple enjoying Music is "...2 years later everyone and their mother are crying DRM (not ipods or Apple) should be killed... Supose it is ? What's left ? Apple's elegant players and Jukebox/Online Distribution. BINGO.
Do , we consumers , care ? I do.
Now let's enter another industry. Apple again makes the coolest, most elegant, well thought out tech and sells it to consumers. Everyone loves it BUT AS ALWAYS, the price setters ( cellphone operators,) willl find even MORE DEVIOUS WAYS to get your money...
Want more proof ?
Everyone in the world still pays internet "traffic" ,LOL, and per minute usage. Guess they learned something from the cellular crooks.
The telephone is a hundred years ols and now it's the single MOST EXPENSIVE commodiy in the planet.
Cellphone operators are now the criminals who fight every second of their pathetic professional lives to keep the paradigm of "AIRTIME" billable.
I hope DRM goes away, I hope iPhone cost 500 USD or even more.And most of all I hope WiMAX to come sooner rather than later and my iPhone will switch to that.
I for one like to pay for the tech I use...
I'd like to see Apple push the envelope again with the new iMac.
This will be the first post PPC/Intel transition iMac and I'm hoping for something really special.
I'd like to see a Intel's consumer Quad core in there. Running at 2.4 gig would be nice. For the 24 inch model... I'd like to see the display go chinless and alu'. And a 8800 Nvidia variant lower power GPU. You'd have a nice rig with that. 2 gigs of ram on the top model. Colour annodized to match the shuffles woud hark back to the original iMac...
I'd like to see them push the price bracket down further from 675 pounds to 595 pounds inc VAT.
Lemon Bon Bon.
I like that specs
That will be cool, Quad Core!, how much is that, $999? not sure, could be expensive for iMac...
Why was black color left out of Shuffle? going to be get rid from Nano as well?
I'd like to see a Intel's consumer Quad core in there.
Is not prohibitively expensive for the iMac class and for an already expensive consumer model (24")? Anyone knows what is the price difference between the dual and the quad core chips? Somehow I feel this is not going to happen just because of cost considerations.
Take a VERY BIG NOTICE on Jobs words (in the just released open letter) about DRM free music !!
It will shape a LOT of things to emerge soon...
Are we excited yet ?
No.
The veracity of your claims is impossible to determine, without an elevator involved.
Ha ha
I'm making plastics right now!
No.
Hmmm... we MIGHT
But still the iMac used to be the HUB of your digital life. Next one will be more of a GIGASWITCH at that. As I said before expect something very different...
But still the iMac used to be the HUB of your digital life. Next one will be more of a GIGASWITCH at that.
May I ask, what is a GIGASWITCH?
As I said before expect something very different...
OK, let's say I believe you. I don't ask for details. Just two things: do you have from your source a clear picture of the hardware and when one can expect it? Or more vaguely, before or after Leopard's release?
Hmmm... we MIGHT
But still the iMac used to be the HUB of your digital life. Next one will be more of a GIGASWITCH at that. As I said before expect something very different...
Moreover I'm very curious what kind of "little bird" finds his way from Cupertino to Portugal
For now iThink it's just the iDodo
May I ask, what is a GIGASWITCH?
Gigaswitch is the missing piece that has held up Gigawire all these years.
Gigaswitch is the missing piece that has held up Gigawire all these years.
Ah, thanks, I see now!
No, not a clear picture, sorry.
I have been completely transparent on the info I have.
As this is no secret, I was told to expect a very different iMac on the next iteration. I have some personal reasons to believe this info to be true, but, truth be said, absolutely to factual evidence on it. It should be no hard prediction to expect something evolutive on the iMac, but "little bird" said, more than once, to expect a more "radical" approach.
Tis what I know , and nothing less.
As for me being wrong, no problem. Messengers get killed all the time.
As for Leopard, absolutely no info...
No, not a clear picture, sorry.
I have been completely transparent on the info I have.
As this is no secret, I was told to expect a very different iMac on the next iteration. I have some personal reasons to believe this info to be true, but, truth be said, absolutely to factual evidence on it. It should be no hard prediction to expect something evolutive on the iMac, but "little bird" said, more than once, to expect a more "radical" approach.
Tis what I know , and nothing less.
As for me being wrong, no problem. Messengers get killed all the time.
As for Leopard, absolutely no info...
OK, thanks, this clears up some things.