MacsimumNews - Your Leading Apple News Alternative

Jack Says:

I think this patent finally reveals what could be the connection to Sony as you presented in chapter 7: Network-centric TV platform

The point about the EU is very interesting as we could see how important the next generation of time-based media player (QuickTime 7.x?) could be for Apple.

Considering what other sites wrote on this patent, you clearly went the distance to extrapolate the real gem and core of the patent we could have all Missed!

Lastly, the global ID described in the CELL patent does in fact appear to be handled by Apple’s media Icons to make it effortless. I expect nothing less from Apple. So great point.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Ron Says:

Um, the illustration for that patent shows a really old version of QuickTime from some years ago when the QuickTime player had a pulldown drawer for favorites. The drawer was ditched in a later version.

Maybe you’re trying to make a mountain out of a really old molehill?

Posted on February 08, 2005

Old News Says:

Apple tried and killed Quicktime TV back in the OS 8-9 days when it first did the brushed metal interface on the player. Lack of interest, bandwidth and programming made it virtually worthless.

That’s not to say it can’t be revived. But Quicktime TV has come and gone. There’s no scoop here.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Model Maker Says:

Today’s part 9 is fascinating. I tried to access previous parts using the links provided—but got nothing except 404s!

Apple X-net says that there are no such docs on its servers.

Where have they gone?

<mm>

Posted on February 08, 2005

jack Says:

The media icons in the drawers and the link to TV, cellphones and other aspects of this patent are relating to something new. The other commenters are either from another site or brain dead. QuickTime TV isn’t dead retarts as its being used on phones in Asia as we speak and specifically the channels like fox and CNN.

This patent was just revised in January 2005 so a lot of sour grapes from these commenters is stunningly stupid.

In fact there’s more to this patent if you took the time to actually read it, so it’s far from being old.

Great article.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Sit Down & Shut Up! Says:

Are you folks for real! Is this suppose to be jornalism.

What the patent diagram shows is nothing more than an old QuickTime Player interface. Had it running during Mac OS 9.x days.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Mac Says:

jack is right. If you bother to read the article’s description of the patent, you’ll see the modifications of the original patent. Use of old drawings probably shows continuity, but doesn’t take away from new implications.

My take on this series is that the cell processor is huge. One is in your TV, another in your 2G Mac mini, another in your desktop, etc.--all working together, regardless of brand and OS. But Microsoft is out of the picture. OS X and Linux and other open-source are in. The glue that binds is software, and who is in a better position than Apple? The years of work of Apple and its partners to create far-reaching, deep media standards, triumphs.

BTW, the earlier installments of the series were outstanding. Apparently Neo jumped ships, and the links go to the former site, which seems to want no part of sharing. Good thing I saved the early articles in PDF format--as easy as printing in OS X.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Wow...stunning lack of research. Says:

Do you folks not remember Mac OS 8.6?  Remember all the hype Steve made about QuickTime TV?  This is not new.  The interface screenshot is CLEARLY the player from QuickTime 4, running on Mac OS 8.x or 9.x.

Yeesh.  Some “news” site you’ve got here.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Someone is making this personal Says:

To model maker: If you Google the titles of the articles you’ll find them there. I tried it this morning (Google) and got the one I was looking for about IP/TV.

The satelite WorldDAB standards use MPEG-4 PART 10 H.264 AND AAC for TV standards. Broadcaster’s bought into Apple’s vision of TV in 2004 by leaping from something like 6 to 26%. So the notion that this patent is old is insane by the other guys commenting. Getting angry and telling others “to shut up’ doesn’t prove a point! This is a revised patent in 2005 so your notion that it’s old is groundless.

Obviously there’s one guy making a personal beef public which is really braindead thinking. The article is current, the patent revision is current and the attacks are simply personal. Move on Dork!

Posted on February 08, 2005

Stephen Says:

One Word:  WHOA,
Neo, you’ve hit this nail on the head, square and flat!  If I remember correctly, His Steveness made a comment back when the iTMS was being introduced about how much experience Apple has in handling streaming media and downloads, due to their hosting of all those QuickTime Movie Trailers for the past God knows how long.  They’ve been able to tweak their systems, figure out how to balance loads, and keep rates streamed so that the “user experience” is enjoyable.
I too have read about Apple’s trials with Cell phone companies in telecom trade journals over the past few years.  One never hears about the outcome, good or bad, which sometimes makes you wonder.  Hmm, me thinks they’ve been keeping a very tight lid on this all along. 
The next couple of years are definitely going to be exciting, as we see the internet explode (’bout time they put all that Dark Fiber to good use they plowed into the ground back in 2000!).  So I agree, hold onto your hats, we’re all about to be blown away!

Posted on February 08, 2005

Great Article Says:

For those of us who have followed this series knows the content in chapter 3 about IP/TV was a leap frog for Apple and you covered it before anyone.

In this article, the following demonstrates its current values:
In one embodiment, a user may subscribe to certain channels, media (Web) servers, etc., which will then provide the icons, associated with the subscribed media source(s) into wells in the drawer and/or any other directory associated therewith.

The idea of subscriptions especially to cellphones didn’t exist back earlier as some commenters made. So to the guy above, I agree totally that someone (or plural) are making this personal.

Once again, great article and timely in context.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Steve Says:

Apple holds patents on technologies that they may never use or used once and may never use again. All companies do, and they will often revise those patents to include newly invented or left out pieces so that although useless to the inventing company no person or company can rip off the idea for profit. So the fact that it is updated could mean something or could be meaningless.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Frank Petrie Says:

So the fact that it is updated could mean something or could be meaningless.

Y’know, this may be a software scenario reminiscent of the Newton. QTTV was ahead of the tech curve as broadband was just entering the average household back in the OS 8-9 days.

Now, that the technology has caught up, maybe now is the right time to impliment it, eh?

Posted on February 08, 2005

Research is fine by me Says:

In some respects patents are as “Steve"suggests. However, the whole advancements to H.264/AVC is about IP/TV. Cisco uses Apple’s Quicktime for IP/TV as was covered in chapter 3. Cisco is part of the new open media framework with Apple, IBM and Adobe. The clues are adding up - that makes this current patent update very relevant in respect to subscriptions. Apple’s iTunes set up now for commerce is set - so adding other internet subscription type of services is more than chance. We may not see it until the second half of 2006, but that’s the nature of technology and that’s the point of this guys series. We won’t see it tomorrow - so what. It’s simply covering what Apple is doing and in context and that’s all you expect from an article.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Sebhelyesfarku Says:

Why is that Maczealots always remaind me of Jehova’s Witnesses? This article is a nice example of it; the word ‘magic’ sure sign of no facts just Apple BS. Even Steve Jobs the Master of Reality Distortion Field would be proud of it.

Btw, the Quicktime download number is not about the latest version, but a cumulative number with updates, so… also well known fact that Quicktime on Windows is p.o.s.

Posted on February 08, 2005

pio pico Says:

1997 called.  they want their ancient version of QuickTime 4.0 back.

there is no story here.

Posted on February 08, 2005

What the other sites missed! Says:

Hey Neo, obviously putting “What the other sites missed” brought the nuts out to play. Good for you. The wave of attacks on your story are from punks because you got under their skin. It’s quite entertaining being that they still don’t get the update to the patent.

Good one Neo. These guys are just jealous that they missed the new attributes of the patent - it makes them look bad. Pico and this little gang are sad. Patents start in 1995 and continually get updated. The patent itself at the very end makes it clear not to depend on the drawings as current. So it’s the updated text that counts. Some people just can’t read!

Posted on February 08, 2005

Mac Says:

I realized I shouldn’t have said Microsoft is out of the picture. It’s been long rumored that XBox 2 will use the G5, and that was seamlessly changed to the Cell processor.

The point is MS will have to cooperate.

Cooperate is not a word MS likes. Dominate and Control are their words. While Apple was thinking far ahead, after Jobs came back, MS was starting to rue how they didn’t take control of the internet, and could only interject themselves with a browser. Apple spent its time on standards and working with other people, rather than twisting arms and leveraging the desktop. Apple dumped the old OS in a brilliant way, and rebuilt its OS on UNIX; while MS has sought nothing but to milk Windows and PC users. Apple has learned to move from loner, in the best sense of the word, to leader, and to build (and rebuild itself) around software and media use. Since Apple brought the PC world to media, meaning mass media, early on with DTPublishing, it just took a realization on Jobs’ part to bring Apple to a preeminent position in digital music; ditto for FCPro, Motion, and Shake for films and TV; etc.

This is the major enterprise within Apple, to be the preeminent provider of the tools of media. I bought my iPod in 2001 because iTunes was already my organizer of digital music; the iTunes Music Store didn’t exist. Much is made of the iPod subsidizing the Music Store, but to this day no one, no one, has matched the best hardware, the best download service, and the best (overall) software for digital music. The software, the standards (including AAC), and the design of the service made the iPod as much as the otherway around.

Well, the mandatory shift to HD for broadcasters just opens up huge gains to those that position themselves well. That’s just one shift in the whole media/consumer picture. Imagine where TV, cable, satellite, games, communications, passive and active media storage, and internet use will be in 10, 20, 30 years or more, within our next couple decades and the bread and butter of our kids.

The key, the base of this series of articles, is that Apple has and is positioning itself for the tremendous need to “losslessly” compress bandwith to allow far greater use of networks, while providing a solution of scalability, which makes media providers greatly happy. They are signing on, in droves. Sony, IBM, and all the related partners are in.

Microsoft is losing on many fronts, outside of Windows as an insecure, antiquated OS and the Office franchise. They decry a lack of standards when they don’t control them. They absolutely would kill to have the iPod/iTunes/Music Store, and because of their thickheadedness they let digital music get away. That’s just the start.

On the Cell chip, I’d like to know to what extent this chip in different appliances, like PlayStation, Xbox, Macs, TV’s, can interoperate and perhaps share computing tasks.

Don’t forget iSync, iCal, even .Mac just as starters, and the fact that Apple brought WiFi to the people first (another standard they have a lot to do with, I believe), and seems to understand the role of Bluetooth.

I think we are witnessing the creation of new platforms that will change how we relate to computing power; the iPod is one, games machines are another. The new PlayStation, critical to Sony, will be a media center, both as set top and portable. But processors will increasingly become appliance-centric: how much will they interact?

We’ve seen little new digital media compared to the future. Apple has positioned itself well. MS has not.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Research is fine by me Says:

Cellphones couldn’t play media in 1997 pico-pico. So go pic-off.

Posted on February 08, 2005

clone Says:

Wow...stunning lack of research.
Do you folks not remember Mac OS 8.6?  Remember all the hype Steve made about QuickTime TV?  This is not new.  The interface screenshot is CLEARLY the player from QuickTime 4, running on Mac OS 8.x or 9.x.

Yeesh.  Some “news” site you’ve got here.

Talk about research… was Steve at Apple when OS 8.6 came out? How could he hype QuickTime TV when he didn’t even work at the company.

Pick a better target next time.

Posted on February 08, 2005

QuickTime p.o.s.? Says:

Sebhelyesfarku is a PC guy calling QuickTime a P.O.S.. Now that’s interesting that a PC guy got in on this. And lo and behold his PC mind picks on one word - “magic.” If the guy with the funny name/handle or whatever it is, actually followed the series, the reference to magic is quite correct - artistically. That’s the fun of an article. However, the CELL patent references the idea of using a global ID and makes it very mysterious - which in most cases is the purpose of a patent to fend off competitiors. Apple’s simplifying this process to hiding the global ID within a media icon is what users want - to make it seamless, something that the PC guys hate.

I suppose the author could have used “Intelligent - Media Icon” or whatever. But to pick on one word, that most of us got by the way, is so lame like all things Windows, it doesn’t surprise me at all.

Posted on February 08, 2005

dashiel Says:

clone, yes, steve was with apple when 8.6 came out. 8.6 was released in 1999, steve returned to apple in 1996 when they bought NeXT. he became interim CEO in 1997. he dropped the “i” from his title in 2000, which may be what you were referring to.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Thanks Neo Says:

The three part mini series within a series - about cell and Apple’ s role in the next wave was great. The fact that the updated patent referred to cellphones and subscriptions is an excellent point and is the key to what Cassanova was talking about having it over MS.

Keep the articles coming Neo and pay no mind to the Troller that wastes our time. He made a point, he doesn’t see it so move on. Trollers are just punks anyways.

Apple will stick with Music for the next 18 months and focus to keep their lead. But it’s nice to know that Sony’s TV is due out for Q4 2006 and it’ll be interesting to see how this plays out. A lot of what Apple does is open source, so it’s going to be interesting to see how much of this TV platform is directly from Apple. Hardly any knows that Sony is using WebObjects for their site, so I don’t know if this TV platform will be like that - annonymous. That said, great article in the “big picture”. Thanks

Posted on February 08, 2005

Did the author ever use OS 9? Says:

Quicktime TV, the feature seen in the drawing, was included in OS 9 and late 8. It was cut a few years later. All you have is an old patent drawing and some crazy ideas about what it may convey. Quicktime is used for streaming in cell phones but the sketch you have of it on a Mac is from the 90’s.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Lester Nelson Says:

EXCLUSIVE! A screenshot of what the brand new drawer will look like!

http://www.macdego.com/images/qttv.jpg

ALSO! It looks like Apple’s already signing up 5 new channels:

MacObserver

AND ALSO! They’ve been chosen for Super Bowl web casts!!

MacObserver

ALL THIS SHOULD HAPPEN, OH, SOMETIME IN 2000! I’m not upset with the author of this article, everybody makes mistakes and that was an easy mistake to make if you don’t remember Quicktime TV. BUT, the readers who are jumping the gun in defense of the author, and calling anyone who reminds them that this article is flawed, are the ones that need to be reminded how retarded they are.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Ambrose Says:

In brief:

Apple dusts off an old patent when it is seen that it covers “a graphical user interface as a primary window, a second set of data for “favorites” or “channels”; time-based, non-recordable media information/programming from a content provider ... transferred across a data processing network ... altered either by the user or automatically altered/updated by a digital processing system by transferring, rearranging, adding, or deleting “time-based media icons” therein.

So just what are “time-based media icons”?

Neo’s pretty close with this: “MPEG-4 Part 10 H.264 AVC based content will be able to be beamed out to any digital device anywhere anytime directly from your Telco and or cable provider.

Close indeed, and damned perceptive. Perhaps I would be more aggressive in my targeting, for I believe that the MPEG consortium’s standard upon which Apple is now focused is not MPEG4. That is a first step; I believe the long-term plan is to establish Apple’s position as key patent holder for nothing less than MPEG21. That’s not a typo, and the plans for implementation of MPEG21—3D included—are well under way: http://danae.rd.francetelecom.com/technology-mpeg21.php

Think of it this way: The year is 2010. You have a cellphone. By itself, all it can do is make phone calls. That, and passively receive streamed encrypted data; you need to buy and insert a chipset to enable decryption.

When you do, the stream of data decodes to become your choice of music / video / hologram players, as well as your choice of players’ skins, the lineup of available channels, the content, the speed of the network and.. oh, yes.. the flavor of DRM your local authorities prefer.

It’s neat, clean and friendly and efficient, just like the iTunes Music Store. (Which was not browser based for many good reasons.)

If Mr. Jobs & Co. are successful—hardly a given, but I bet they’re gonna try damned hard—all of the reassembled data packets would reflect either Apple’s branding or base patents or Trademarks and Servicemarks (data nets are services). Except, however, for the content itself. Although even it might have been produced by DisneyPix, the name Disney and Pixar Studios tok on after their merger.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Steve Says:

I thought I was on Fox for a second here with some of the comments ...

This has been a wonderful serious of articles, astutely researched and intelligently reasoned.

Thanks Neo.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Comment from Neo Says:

Thanks for your comments good or bad - that’s simply debate.

However to the person(s) who keep harping on the illustrations, here’s how the patent ends:

Although the present invention has been described particularly with reference to FIGS. 1 through 18, it will be apparent to one skilled in the art that the present invention has utility far exceeding that disclosed in the figures.

The misguided comments in this respect simply demonstrates the lack of knowledge pertaining to patents.  The reason the patent get updated is really about the verbiage or new angle they want to cover. It’s Apple who updated the patent not me - so it seems you like to argue just to hear yourself talk.

To everyone else, Cheers! Debate is the spice of life!
Neo

Posted on February 08, 2005

Mac Says:

Good comment, Ambrose.
No mention of Apple at your link MPEG21 (France Télécom R&D;), but the intent of MPEGroup is clear, so no doubt Apple is involved and heading that way.
See:
MPEG Home Page

This is what Apple has been talking about.

If anyone can create and market an MPEG4 video download site, where you can stream or possibly download cable and broadcast content it’s Apple. They’ve already started, somewhat. Neo goes way beyond that. Content delivery is the issue, and iTunes is the model, for now. Cell phones to digital theaters covers a lot of ground.

Digital music and feature-length digital animation were not businesses until Apple/Pixar came into the picture.

I see the potential of Cell as a chip, but Neo needs to clear up what it means in products/services and for Apple. Looks like not too many have a handle on Cell as yet.

Neo should also cut to the chase in terms of spelling out the actual products and services over the next five years, let’s say, his Big Picture means. What actual products and services does he think Apple will produce, and when?

Posted on February 08, 2005

Trollasaurus Says:

I’m sorry Neo, but it seems like you (and your loyal readers—or maybe it’s just you posting anonymously to defend and console yourself) are just re-writing your article as you go.  You can scramble desperately to pick and choose parts of the text that don’t have to do with the drawer (and I’m not denying their relevance), but if you read the actual article rather than the comments it’s hard to ignore how prominently placed this fantastic little drawer is with no acknowledgment whatsoever that the drawer itself is old news and probably has nothing to do with what Apple is developing.  Why waste so much time and focus on it?  It’s sloppy writing, so don’t be surprised if readers think you’re ignorant and behind the times—even if you’re not.  There is some cool stuff in your article, but you send people off on the wrong track by getting so excited about the drawer and this “Quicktime TV” crap.

You people think these outsiders are “jealous” because they “missed” a scoop?  Do you even read other sites?

By the way, you don’t need to be so alarmed and shaken and startled to see unfamilar people posting their disagreement.  Doing so doesn’t in itself make one a “troll,” even if it makes you feel better to call them that.  So if someone disagrees and has never posted here before, what are they supposed to do?  Not say anything?  It seems like before the “trolls” showed up this place must have been a legion of hypnotized lemmings unquestioningly worshipping every word coming out of Neo’s mouth.  Shun all dissent—talk about your Fox News.

Posted on February 08, 2005

leo steenbeeke Says:

it’s sad, very sad to have to launch internet explorer to read this article. i’ve tried camino, i’ve tried safari and both couldn’t display the first 4 or 5 paragraphs without overlaps from [yes, what is it?] your main archives part and your featured partners part.
and this from a site that is about all things mac
really sad!

Posted on February 08, 2005

Michael Says:

I’ve been following this series with great interest and must say that I find the case being laid out quite convincing. Perhaps what makes this scenario most compelling was the oterwise odd (and ackward) appearance of the Sony CEO at the keynote. I’ve been buying Macs and following Steve since 1984 and one thing I’ve observed is that these presentations are very carefully scripted. If it’s in a keynote, it’s there for a reason. And if that reason isn’t immediately apparent, it will become so somewhere down the line. In this case, surely there’s more to the Apple-Sony connection in this “Year of HD” then the fact that Sony is now making a new HD camcorder. It seems to me that the camcorder was simply the pretext for the larger subtext of that part of the speech, viz., a not overly subtle announcement that Apple and Sony are forming an alliance which, at the very least, will attempt to make a major impact on emerging HDTV technologies and markets.

I can’t help but wonder what role the Mac mini (in current or future versions) will play in all this. Perhaps the “iHome Media Centre” farce will turn out to have not been so far from the truth. (BTW, any thoughts on why after two weeks, Apple dropped the cost of the BlueTooth module on the mini so far that anyone adding Airport will feel strongly compelled to put BT in their mini as well? It’s almost as though Apple wants all Wi-Fi minis to have BT as well, a la the Powerbooks). Further, might this have something to do with the relatively minor role the mini played in the keynote? I mean, why was the Shuffle the “one more thing”? While the Shuffle is cool, of the two clearly it’s been the mini that has generated the most interest and been seen as the most “revolutionary” product. Do you think that Steve might have been trying to downplay the importance of the mini (sort of a “Oh, and here’s something that PC users will be interested in") so as to not let on what a huge role in might play down the road? After all, folks are calling it a “Trogan Horse”. Maybe “Steve’s Stealth Bomber” works as well.

I also wonder if this might have something to do with the lawsuit against AppleInsider? Could it be that rather than seeking retaliation against leaking info on the mini, Apple is trying to tighten up security for a future announcement? Say, when Steve reveals what kind of payload his Stealth Bomber will carry?

Posted on February 08, 2005

Jesse Bennett-Chamberlain Says:

Hey Leo,
Thanks for the heads up about the text being stretched out. It was caused by two a long url’s posted in a previous comment that I’ve since shortened down.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Brenton Manks Says:

i’m neither here nor there on these articles at the moment; i really don’t know what to believe - but i’m still very open and will read future articles.

though, maybe these articles moved on from apple-x.net for a reason?

Posted on February 08, 2005

paul Says:

the writer and anyone who believes this obviously has not used quicktime back in the day. THIS IS NOT A REVISION PATENT. it is exactly the same thing. it works in exactly the same way, with exactly the same specifications. the cell thing does not even touch apple in any way, and about web tv, apple has tried that before. they had a prototype web tv box (around 1998) which never saw the light of day, and a cable tv set-top box. this is not new, and i am not going to sit here and argue back and forth with people that want to speculate on 7 year old patents. if apple does create something that can be shown on a television, the media drawer will have nothing to do with it. the cell PROCESSOR has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the SOFTWARE media drawer. and yes, i read the article through twice. it has nothing about today’s technology in it, and whoever believes in this would probably buy evaporated water if i sold it to them. “look! just add water from your tap, and you have H2O!!! its brilliant!!!”

Posted on February 08, 2005

Observation Says:

No one minds an intelligent and informed comment by a Wintel user on a Mac site, even if he sets out to refute an article’s thesis. Of course, that doesn’t happen often. But there is no excuse for you to comment on an article you didn’t read. That just tells us you are ignorant of the discussion. It makes you a PC troll, because your satisfaction comes from reading your own raving and your attempt to disrupt a discussion.

Posted on February 08, 2005

HAHAHAHA Says:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!

What a complete idiot! Why don’t you do something creative with your time and get a freaking life dude.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Neo Says:

To Trollasaurus:

You state 1) with no acknowledgment whatsoever that the drawer itself is old news 2) but you send people off on the wrong track by getting so excited about the drawer and this “Quicktime TV” crap.

This “old drawer” provides the media icons associated with subscription which didn’t exist in the early 90’s - so the patent covers it this way:

In one embodiment, a user may subscribe to certain channels, media (Web) servers, etc., which will then provide the icons, associated with the subscribed media source(s) into wells in the drawer and/or any other directory associated therewith.

This QuickTime TV crap is in the patent:

a media source icon, such as the media source icon 248, may reference a particular media channel, such as a news provider (e.g., CNN, Fox News, etc.), a major network (e.g.,ABC, NBC, CBS, etc.), a shopping network, or another channel. Such channels correspond to sources that typically provide continuous time-based media information/programming via a media source, such as a Web server coupled to the Internet.

So your points are not understood at all. Is there more to this patent? Yes I acknowledge that in my article. The context for the last three chapters has been Sony-Apple. So of course the patent was focused on the “media” angle.

I appreciate your comments but don’t see where you’re coming from. If you have a problem with the patent, contact Apple.

Posted on February 08, 2005

hmmm... Says:

paul wrote:
“and i am not going to sit here and argue back and forth with people that want to speculate on 7 year old patents.”

Yet that’s exactly what you’re doing. I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning. ;)

Posted on February 08, 2005

Abe Says:

I’m pretty sure this Neo is more than a little bit cracked. He really, really wants Apple to have a secret plan to use the Cell and take over the world, but it seems pretty clear that Apple just plain doesn’t.

This obsessive ‘decoding’ of patents is pitiful, if not clinical--more like a technically uninformed stream-of-consciousness word-association game than anything else. For instance, WebObjects doesn’t have anything to do with Cell processors (honest), even though Steve Jobs said in 1999 that Apple had ‘big plans’ for WebObjects!

There’s even a slight edge of incoherence to his writing. This stuff could basically be a chapter right out of The Crying of Lot 49.

Sorry, Neo. It’s not all secretly connected.

I’d actually be a little alarmed for this person’s mental health if I were a friend of his, or knew who he was.

Posted on February 08, 2005

metavurt Says:

I dont know what’s been more fun, reading the article, or reading the lame (you know who you are) responses!

Neo - whether or not you’re onto something, I still enjoyed reading the article. Nice bit o’ writing.

-+vurt

Posted on February 08, 2005

Abe Says:

Okay, now on re-reading the article I really am sort of worried. The following aside from the story is meant to be humorous, but read within the context of this long, rambling series of articles it doesn’t really seem funny ha-ha so much as funny uh-oh:

“Hmm, I think I’m hearing the sound of hallelujahs from Wall Street echoing in my head?”

If a person hears things in their head, that person should go get checked out for schizophrenia before anything bad happens. For real.

Posted on February 08, 2005

Loonies fromMacRumors Says:

The loonies, for the most part are from MacRumors - go figure. Now it makes sense. Someone put me onto their site and the loonie-toon antics began on that site earlier. What a pathetic bunch of little boys who are from a site that has no original material - so they’d eat their young to hear themselves mouth off like they’re doing on this site. They can’t read a patent let alone discuss it rationally.

MacRumors, what a pathetic bunch. Can’t wait to hear them freak out now that we know where they’re from. This should be fun. Come on monkeys - we can’t wait for your brilliance to be bestowed upon us.

Losers!

Posted on February 08, 2005

Sunshine beyond my dirty windows Says:

Loonies fromMacRumors:
Yeah, they¡¯re loonie losers! what a bunch of pathetic little boys! We¡¯re REAL men.
We¡¯re winners! High Five! ..& now chest bump¡¦ yeah! woo-hoo!

STFU!

At the very least, this article certainly spurs the imagination.
No doubt Apple has the pieces to an end-to-end solution for network TV.
Also, with the mac mini, Apple has introduced itself as a computing platform to many. and it is pretty well suited for the living room.€ It¡¯s plausible, at least, that Apple is positioning itself to enter into new territory.€ Many people are turning their mac mini¡¯s into home entertainment centers/hubs (or would like to).

so, drop the mac mini, get people to see Apple beyond the ipod, then drop a media-centric mac for the livingroom (with a nice variety of BTO options), and provide digital media content, too?

of course, this is just wishful thinking on my part.€ Nobody knows what Apple has up its sleeve (if anything), but it should be interesting to see how Apple evolves & brings things together.
(I¡¯d love to replace all my remotes with a wireless mouse paired to a mac)

Posted on February 09, 2005

LOONIES - GOOD ONE Says:

loonie responds with STFU! Aren’t they classy guys. Yeah, I went over to their site to see names like Ninja Monkey (no kidding), MudBug, Narco, dloomer, something called a whenpaulsparks and some arian named Einherjar. Sheesh, the lord of the flies. No wonder Steve Jobs hates rumor sites. They’re a little club of loonies. Why does Steve Jobs quote that 98% of QuickTime users are PC’ers? Why does he quote Walt Mossberg and PC Magazine? Because they’re not the mac cult loonies from rumor sites!

Hey, its a free country and that site has its place in an ecosyste (swamp) but attacking another Mac site all day with BS and badmouthing the site and an article - is over the line. It’s not about disagreement, it’s about you deciding that only your opinion counts and telling people who disagree with you, to STFU! Have something to say - write an article. Hacks are just that hacks. They could hack Mother Teresa just for the sake of an argument.

Posted on February 09, 2005

Breaking news, patent for a computer in a square c Says:

As has been said, QTTV has come and gone… guess the other sites didn’t miss these important details after-all, only this site did! Der…

Posted on February 09, 2005

encro Says:

I’ve followed this series from the start, most of the series is very thought provoking and are somewhat very possible pieces of the puzzle but I just don’t get this one either. After reading and then re-reading the article I fail to see the importance of this patent. The connection is too broken to be relevant.

Posted on February 09, 2005

John Says:

The Next Wave series part 3 covered QTTV from it’s launch and those squawkinng aren’t aware of this. What’s new is that subscription based media icons and time-based media is going to advance in QuickTime 7 with H.264/AVC to allow TV or any live media to go full screen. Subscription media icons will include as the patent states channels like CNN etc.

The people “pretending” to have followed this series clearly have not. Anyone reading this series clearly sees the piece of the puzzle that media icons will play this year on the Mac with Tiger - or perhaps for 2006.

The patent clearly states that the embodiments are able to change without having to update them, so this utter nonsense about an old illustration simply amplifies your ignorance to match your rudeness.

The italics is from the patent - so there’s no disputing the what the patent presents. MPEG-4 PART 10 with H.264/AVC is all about IP/TV as the author points out in chapter three.

These morons that invaded the site yesterday are the nuts that are referred to by the PC world as the “Mac Cult”. The MacRumor site states we follow Neo blindly. Hey, the series makes a great contribution and is positive. It’s covered Boeing’s connection when no other Mac site did - period. He presented a phenomenal piece on IP/TV. What do we get from these morons that invaded yesterdays story - cocky nonsense. Sorry, I’d prefer to appreciate someone making a positive contribution. You can’t write yourself nor contribute because you’re useless parrots in a crazy click.

Posted on February 09, 2005

Abe Says:

I think it’s beyond doubt that the posts under the headings “jack” (although not “Jack), “QuickTime p.o.s.?,” “Observation,” “What the other sites missed!,” “hmmm...,” “Loonies from MacRumors,” “LOONIES - GOOD ONE,” and most recently “John,” were all written by the same person, namely Neo.

(I am less sure about the posts under the headings “Someone is making this personal,” “Thanks Neo,” and “Great Article,” but the first of those, at least, also has most of the hallmarks of one of Neo’s angry, not-using-his-own-name posts.)

He wouldn’t be the first person to do this, I guess, but it’s still kind of creepy--that is a *lot* of made-up posts. In many of them he not only talks about himself in the third person, but even addresses himself directly (as in, “Good one Neo"). And without harping on this too much, the collective tone of those posts does strike me as deranged.

I, too, recently had thoughts a lot like the following (here I am quoting Neo, posting above, apparently without any irony, under the heading, “LOONIES - GOOD ONE"):

“No wonder Steve Jobs hates rumor sites. They’re a little club of loonies. Why does Steve Jobs quote . . . Walt Mossberg and PC Magazine? Because they’re not the mac cult loonies from rumor sites!”

It’s just that for me that thought was inspired, not by reading MacRumors, but by reading this series of articles here. In any event, I think the problems with this piece have been pretty fully aired, as have Neo’s various responses. I’m all done.

Posted on February 09, 2005

Mac Says:

John, thanks for some sane comments.

I would say, Neo, this was the most obsure of your pieces in this series. I’m not even sure that “Sony’s CELL based network television” that you write about is related to the Cell processor (that’s Cell, not CELL, in tech discussions).

The Cell chip looks custom made for Sony and Toshiba, Sony for use in the PS3, since the chip’s design is similar to the Emotion Engine used in PS2; and Toshiba for use in TV’s, HD TV’s obviously.

Right now it’s being debated what this chip means for Apple, but it seems the chip would be useful as a co-processor to greatly bump up mutimedia processing in the G5 PowerMac. Possibly it could be used as a combined GPU/CPU, but not likely (?). It could be the chip that makes a “G5” Powerbook possible, says one. See this site:
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/cell-2.ars

Neo, you have brought out a great deal about Apple by doing good detective work. Your approach is opposite to the insider leaking news approach.

I, for one, want you to continue, and I’m sure the background work you’re doing takes a lot of work and time. (Something so missing on some other Mac sites.)

But I would like you to take all the previous work and churn one heavy piece that spells out exactly what you see Apple doing in terms of hardware and software, and what will be done by other companies as a result of “partnerships” with Apple. For example, Sony’s CEO making an appearance as he did, and Jobs’ cryptic reference to it being the year of HD obviously, as you pointed out, has nothing to do with the Sony camcorder that Jobs pointed at the Sony CEO as if to say, “You better not back out, buster!” and “Don’t say too much. I’ve got you on tape on your own camera, Sonymaster!” Hell, that would’ve made me nervous.

In short, I know you’ve been making a case, methodically, carefully, like any good defense attorney, but every good case needs a summary. Aside from that you’ve done a great job.

Posted on February 09, 2005

Mac Says:

By the time I got this last post in, “Abe” comes in with another anti-Neo post.

This poster isn’t Neo, so listen. I’m gonna say it, “Good one, Neo.”

Abe, if you have something substantive to write about then put it on your own site. There you can criticize and attack anyone you want.

When you respond to someone’s main article and attack that person, you’re saying, “I’m too lazy to write something original myself” and “I’m not capable of defeating his argument with facts and logic, so I’ll attack the person instead.” Abe, that’s what morons do.

Abe, again this isn’t a post from “Neo,” whomever that is. I’m just a guy who’s gotten something from his articles. If this derogatory BS is coming from some bad blood from competing Mac sites, then all I’ll say is write your own damn original piece on your own site; any post you make in reply to someone else’s work should stick to the issues of the article only; anything else is stupid, juvenile behavior.

Posted on February 09, 2005

Abe Says:

I’m sorry. I don’t want to make an issue of Neo’s state of mind. It’s his business, and I’m not really sure how I ended up dwelling on it. So I am genuinely sorry.

I do think his calling critical posters loonies, punks, freaks, dorks, monkeys, losers, sad, pathetic, brain dead, retards, stunningly stupid, raving, nuts, and insane, as well as his doing it from behind a series of pseudonyms, bothered me, but it probably shouldn’t have. He had gotten called some things as well, and may well just just have been tired and overenthusiastic.

The idea that there are MacRumors (or, alternatively, Wintel-loving) people who want to come and savage Neo in their helpless jealousy is Neo’s own contribution. I don’t know if it’s true, though it doesn’t seem very likely. In my case, it certainly isn’t, since I have never posted there.

Anyway, Mac’s second-to-last post strikes me as just the sort of lucid assessment, informed by relevant sources, of what the Cell processor might mean for Apple that I came here hoping to read.

Peace.

Posted on February 09, 2005

jonsaw Says:

Abe, you show your own peculiar mindset when you assume the pro-Neo and anti-rumor-site posts were pseudonymously posted by Neo. And from a baseless assumption, as well as weird interpretations of Neo’s articles, you spin a series of “conclusions” about Neo’s state of mind.  Your approach is classic sophistry.  Neo simply wrote a good article using real information, though a little obscurely presented.

Posted on February 09, 2005

jonsaw Says:

For those wishing for a summary:

It seems to basically boil down to fullscreen TV and movies over the Internet, incorporating Quicktime and other standards Apple has been helping to develop, which can be picked up by a range of devices--cell phones, computers, new HDTVs, and maybe portable media players, including maybe one from Apple in the future.  The technical angle that average users will see, will be that the video window will be fullscreen and in full detail, instead of a little window (except on cell phones, where obviously the screen will always be small, at least until we get foldable flat panel displays that pop out of our cell phones).  So far, all we’ve gotten with Internet video, has been little windows that, if expanded to full size, become grainy and jumpy--these patent revisions describe one more step in the direction of fullscreen Internet video.  The details are in the standards and the processor chips that will be used to accomplish this, and the co-marketing deals that will be made between Apple, Sony, etc.  And it’s good news that Quicktime is part of this, since other media software like Real Player and Windows Media Player, are awful.

If you watch a lot of TV and movies, or follow the money trails (for fun or profit), this is big news.  If you watch less than a lot of TV and movies, it still means some more convenience and options.  For a while, I’ve wanted to be able to watch the occasional TV show on my cell phone, so I wouldn’t have to run home or find a Radio Shack to watch a TV program when I had to be out somewhere else, so Apple’s moves might hasten this in the US--in Japan, you can already get some TV on cell phones, using Quicktime, though I don’t know the quality of the transmission, but it seems one thing this patent revision implies, is that it’s about to get better.

The things detailed in the patent revision don’t seem to depend on Apple coming out with a WebTV-like box or any other new hardware, or to necessarily use the CELL processor--its technology can run on a variety of non-Apple devices, but also on existing Macs, including the Mac mini, which would look less conspicuous in the living room, and be cheaper, than Apple’s other Macs.  The CELL processor, for the uses described here, is just better suited to handling the new software protocols for video stuff than current processors, and may be used in Macs at some point.  As was mentioned in Neo’s article on the CELL processor, it will go into new Internet-ready TVs from Sony starting in 2006.

The drawer debate is pretty irrelevant--sure, we all know the pictures in the patent are from an old version of Quicktime Player, since the current version doesn’t have a drawer.  But a future version might bring it back--not that a drawer full of icons is anything new or exciting, but it’s just one partially convenient way of showing available channels.  And sure, the first part of Neo’s article maybe goes too heavy on the old drawer illustrations, but the rest of his article points out that the patent revisions point in the direction Apple is going with all this now--fullscreen video and movies over the Internet.  It makes watching TV and movies somewhat more convenient, or at least gives some more options.  I hope it doesn’t mean a new generation of obsessive TV and movie-watchers.

Posted on February 09, 2005

Neo Says:

To Mac: You made some excellent points on different levels and all of your contributions are appreciated.

I just wanted to pass along why I chose to use CELL in caps. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ISSCC themselves listed the many sessions for CELL in caps - contrary to everyone else in the media. Typo? Who knows, but if these guys chose to emphasize CELL. I trust they know a little something about the processor. So it wasn’t my decision to create a new acronym just to be different. Here’s the PDF info:
http://www.isscc.org/isscc/2005/ap/ISSCC2005AdvanceProgram.pdf - It starts on page 29.

As far as one heavy piece - I understand your point about coming to a full summary. However, there’s still a few pieces of the puzzle to present. Not many, but enough to cover IBM’s involvement first. Thanks again for your constructive contributions “Mac”.

Over the last three articles presented on Macsimum there have been many rational contributions made by enthusiasts of the series, with excellent points of disagreement that remained constructive. You know who you are, so thanks. It’s nice to have found a new home site and one run by an adult for adults. 

Lastly to Jonsaw - Nice to see such enthusiasm sparked by the series. There’s more to the media drawer and it’s media icons. But you sure seem to get the TV potential angle all right.

Cheers!
Neo

Posted on February 09, 2005

jonsaw Says:

Maybe the reason for bringing back the media drawer is to allow a single interface to be used both on devices with big screens, and on devices that don’t have a screen that’s big enough to run a fullscale web browser, like a cell phone.  Currently, when you select a Quicktime Player window’s Quicktime button, it will connect with Apple’s Quicktime web site, and display in the Player window a picture of one of their current offerings (usually a music CD, but sometimes a movie trailer), with a line below this image, “Click here for more content”.  When you click on this line, your web browser is brought to the front, where the fullscale Quicktime site is displayed.  This won’t work for smaller devices that can’t run a full web browser, so the media drawer approach might be able to show a small Quicktime window and a drawer, though there aren’t many cell phones whose displays are big enough even for this.  Palm Treos might do the job, but PDA displays have the vertical length to be better suited for this kind of interface.  Possibly the approach on smaller devices will be to first fill the whole screen with the ad when you connect to the Quicktime site; then, when you click on a button in the Player window, the ad will be replaced by the media drawer full of icons from which you select what you want to view.

I’d be curious to find out how much more there can be to the media drawer, as far as the user is concerned, than that the user just finds it the place to click on an icon representing which network or other media source they want to view, but I can’t see anything more than this in the patent, which describes this simple idea in the usual wordy fashion that patents tend to do.  It kind of just boils down to an on-screen channel selection menu, of a simpler sort than you have with digital cable and satellite TV providers.

As for the phrase “Magic Time-based Media Icons”, I think I now understand what they mean: as the patent states, the “magic” part simply means the icons can be changed on the fly by the broadcaster, and can “contain” other information used to manage their behavior; and “time-based media” means things that are timely, like news, and TV shows being aired at the same time they’re being broadcast over the air, complete with ads (which are often time-critical in that they advertise a product at a time that the advertiser determines is best for getting their message out, or ads for events that will take place at a certain time).

It’s actually pretty prosaic, what most patents boil down to, when stated in standard English.  However, the benefits of all this will still be nice to have.

Posted on February 10, 2005

Neo Says:

Check out this site:
1 - http://www.nabshow.com/sessiondetail.asp?id=1202907
2 - http://www.nabshow.com/PaperDescription.asp?id=1203064

“Panelists will discuss how the consumer will view video in the future, and the growing importance of IP distribution and the role and importance of the PC in how we consume entertainment programming. Also for discussion will be the introduction of Microsoft’s “Longhorn” and Apple’s “Tiger” and their effects in shaping the future of video entertainment.”

The conclusion of this session will be from ISMA.

Cheers!
Neo

Posted on February 10, 2005

Mac Says:

Thanks, but any compliments should be directed Neo’s way. I had been reading the ars technica series on the Cell chip and the extensive discussions there. After my post on the spelling of Cell, I came across a post on one of the originators of the CELL architecture, with a link to the IBM site; see these:

openforum

Michael Karl Gschwind

STI cell processor-IBM site

Quoting from the last source:
“Just as the cells in a body unite to form complete physical systems, a “Cell” architecture will allow all kinds of electronic devices (from consumer products to supercomputers) to work together, signaling a new era in Internet entertainment, communications and collaboration.” More about this below.

The spelling varies. The useage on the IBM site is “STI cell processor” and “Code-named Cell, chips based on the architecture...” and “Cell will take advantage of IBM’s most advanced semiconductor development and process technologies. These cells will deliver high performance while consuming small quantities of power” and not the least important:

“...CELL architecture with Sony and Toshiba...” and

“His contributions to the Sony/Toshiba/IBM alliance developing the CELL Broadband Processor Architecture (BPU) have been recognized as an IBM Research Division Accomplishment.” and

“Dr. Gschwind is one of the originators of the STI CELL Broadband Architecture...”

So, obviously while my saying “Cell” was used in discussions was correct, NEO was also absolutely correct to use “CELL.”

Well, after reading all the discussion of the first two installments of the ars technica series, I reread today Neo’s Parts 7 and 8 of his series, and I can say that Neo is picking up the gist of the Cell chip in ways that the very tech and lengthy ars technica series, both articles and discussion, has missed; obviously--just look at the one-page IBM webpage of the third link above.

The ars technica forum was all-over in terms of the capabilities and intentions of these chips, but the common themes are as follows:

(1) They will be powerful as hell in certain tasks;
(2) They are obviously designed to tremendously speed up “media processing” to quote one participant;
(3) So much information that would allow an assesment of the chip is missing that they are still guessing as to the intentions and potential uses of the chips.

Part 3 of that series may be out today.

I have to apologize, Neo, for having made only a quick reading of your Parts 7 and 8 the first time, because you really are bringing insights to this whole Cell deal.

IBM makes clear in its BusinessCenter page linked above (note: Business Center, not research center) that one of the main reasons for this chip is not just to leap-frog present chips in terms of power, but also to signal “a new era in Internet entertainment, communications and collaboration,” and do this by being “able to use ultra high-speed broadband connectivity to [allow cells to] interoperate with one another as one complete system, similar to the way neural cells interoperate over the brain’s network.”

Wow. Now do you get what Neo is writing about in the last three parts? Do you notice that the very few mainstream media articles are clueless? This is an extremely powerful BROAD-BANDWIDTH CHIP FOR MEDIA. Keep up the good work, Neo.

Posted on February 10, 2005

Neo Says:

To Mac: You’re the quintessential reader of Next Wave series. Someone who takes the clues provided, takes the time to further research the topic, think about it in light of the facts and put into perspective.

Personally, you should seriously consider writing an article on this topic (and maybe your journey with the series).  You present your ideas extremely well and god only knows the mac community needs more daring writers to cover subjects that most coward from. I’m sure you’d write a great article and Dennis would likely run it. Give it a shot! 

Cheers!
Neo

Posted on February 10, 2005

Mac Says:

Thanks, I appreciate that. I would have to get a better handle on this. I’ll definitely post a comment if I think I have something positive to contribute. I look forward to the next parts of the series, Neo. Good luck to you.

Posted on February 10, 2005

Monk Says:

Hey guys, I’ve heard rumors about an upcoming multicored G5 chip (Thinksecret). Does this tie in somewhere to the cell. could a multicored G5 run two operating systems; one (modified if needed) for the CELL, and one for everything else?

Posted on February 13, 2005

Mac Says:

I’ll jump in here, Monk. I believe the chip you are referring to is a successor to the current G5 chip; for articles about this chip, see this site and other Mac sites. Some are interested in a dual-core chip that could put the sizzle back into the PowerBook.

The Cell is a very exciting chip. For an excellent treatment of the Cell, go to this link and download the PDF. The author has written an excellent and remarkably quick book about Cell. The book is technical, but not overly so; and the good news for Mac enthusiasts is that the author definitely sees Apple incorporating the Cell chip in future products. He sees it adopted slowly, which is logical since this is how Apple has introduced all chips; but he believes Apple could have been planning for the Cell chip’s adoption for as long as a year and a half, and he believes Apple could introduce Cell in a product as early as this summer, after Tiger is let loose. The download is free, and the author asks for a PayPal donation of $1.95 if you find it useful; you will.

http://www.mymac.com/showarticle.php?id=1932

The author shows very well that the Cell is a demon chip that does, as IBM’s marketing claims, jump ahead of ALL chip manufactures’ current and planned chips, so much so that AMD and Intel, particularly the latter, will have to copy CELL architecture in order to keep up, putting them three or four years behind. While the author is conservative, he leaks his enthusiasm for the Cell by stating the Cell will likely change the dynamics of chip production, and the player’s involved. He flat out states that Apple is in a very good position to benefit (as are we!).

For my two cents worth, I truly HOPE Apple has been gunning for this chip. I hope, for once, that it is introduced as CPU or co-processor throughout Apple’s product lines. I HOPE that the STI partners are working with Apple--to the extent that a coordinated effort to kill off the Intel/Windows domination of personal computing comes about, for the Wintel coalition has held back innovation and sought to contain and control the computing consumer. Intel is a chipmaker, but I don’t hold them blameless, since their association with Microsoft has been nothing short of corporate marital relations.

We are at a historical crossing point in personal computing. Microsoft isn’t likely to adapt their OS to the Cell, since they have so much trouble already with Longhorn (Short----). Microsoft is the Big Brother we were warned about:
“BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU”
“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face--for ever.” George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four.
Strange that Apple should have thought it was IBM; but things change, as do companies.

How would we have predicted the security debacle of Windows? That the shattering glass of the commercial would be Windows coming down? Well, many knew, many predicted it, as the threat grew in hackerland, but so many others were hypnotized by the clamor of all the boot heels. There is a particular inherent trait in humanity--the weakness to blindly follow a massively supported dictator (eerr, “market leader"). Then there are those who rebel at the powerful dictators, especially those proven to offer little in return for lack of resistance and for obedience.

If this offends some, then you have not been caught in the swirl of malevolence in the security horror of Windows. I have seen it, witnessed it, and stepped in it. The discontent is rising.

I believe the pushing back of Longhorn’s release demonstrates two very important issues: One, that Longhorn will NOT bring a resolution to the ACTUAL problem with Windows for its current users (who have such low expectations, anyway), the security horror; Two, that Microsoft knows this all too well and that they want to continue to milk the Windows cow while they can, hoping, praying to the computing god that salvation will come through a miraculous birth in the form of the Son of the operating system. There is something pathetic about Microsoft’s appeal to the Government to help with the damage of disease and malware inflicted by their insecure operating system.

Oh, they’ll get help--ineffectual, watered down governmental help (the federal government eliminated poverty, also)--just as Microsoft squashed Antitrust penalties here.

But who’s rooting for their success? I’m not sure even their iPod using employees are.

Posted on February 14, 2005

Tacitus Says:

Mac,
Absolutely correct about MS.  Think in martial arts terms.  MS strength - their dominance of the PC scene - becomes a weakness as they are forced to concentrate on maintaining that dominance.  The ‘weaker’ opponent by being more flexible can use the opponent’s strength against him.

The reed bends the tree breaks and falls.

Tacitus

Posted on February 22, 2005

online casinos Says:

Excellent, that was really well explained and helpful

online casinos

Posted on February 25, 2005

ÍøÉ϶ij¡ Says:

I was surfing along and came across your website. I really enjoyed it. Thanks! This site is very informative. I hope to see more in the near future, Wishing you all the best!

¶Ä³¡

Posted on April 18, 2005

duchang Says:

Keep it polite and on topic.

Posted on September 02, 2005

ays Says:

Hey guys, I¡¯ve heard rumors about an upcoming multicored G5 chip (Thinksecret).

Posted on October 14, 2005