Apple Lets You Take A Peek At How The New Mac Pro Is Being Built

Want to take a peek at how new Mac Pro is being built?  Apple is boasting that they have radically engineered their new Mac Pro to be unlike any other they have had ever engineered before.  Under the hood, it got really powerful components.  Basically, cutting edge components such as Intel Xeon E5 Quad Core or 6-Core.  Obviously, the list of the most cutting edge components yet in this new bad boy is pretty long.  You can just take a quick jump over to Apple’s official website and read the spec sheet for yourself, and please don’t drool all over yourself.  What about the aesthetic of the beast?  Some people think it looks like a cute trashcan.  I don’t know, because I haven’t seen one in real life and so I decide to keep my opinion on this closer to my chest at this point in time.  Anyhow, without Steve Jobs’ unique presence and passion, I wonder how well will Apple be able to stay focus on innovating and supporting their products with Steve Jobs-like passion?  If they’re continually developing their products with Steve Jobs-like passion and not worrying about their shareholders’ demands, then I think I will definitely want to repeatedly, shamelessly take a delicious bite off an apple in my nightly dream.  Check out the video right after the break which showcases how far Apple has had gone in making the new Mac Pro.  To the extreme yo, and the launch date of this new Mac Pro is in this December! :P~

Advertisements

Tablets And Smartphones Might Not Be So Hot If These Devices Came Out A Decade Or Two Earlier

If tablets had come out a decade or two earlier, I doubt people would care!  How come?  I imagined at that time, tablets would be near useless since modern apps, processors, and plethora of computing options that are now being able to be packaged nicely into a tiny tablet were the stuffs of imagination then.  After all, personal computers back then were still so new and incapable if we are comparing the then personal computers against the current ones.  In a way, I think I’d read somewhere that had mentioned that Steve Jobs might get the tablet idea from Star Trek, whether this piece of information is wrong or not, even if Steve Jobs had come out the tablets then, nobody would care.  With perfect hindsight, now we know why, right?  In fact, I think I’d read that Microsoft had come out with certain tablet form factors way earlier than the first wave of popular iPads, but even though at the time laptops and PCs were the norm Microsoft’s tablet form factors failed to pick up steam.  In fact, nobody had cared about Microsoft’s tablet form factors then!

With hindsight, we now clearly know why tablets are only matter now, but not back then.  Nonetheless, even now, without the hindsight, I think tablets won’t be all that important and cool as to how the current media would like us all to think.  In fact, tablets are something that people want to use in very unique circumstances.  Let say, smartphones are definitely the better device form factors to carry around since the biggest smartphones might still be a lot smaller and lighter than the smallest and lightest tablets.  You get the picture!  Smartphones obviously are more convenient and easier to pocket, therefore people feel more personal about their smartphones.  The usage of tablets are for the people who have the patience to carry more than one electronic devices when they are out and about.  I don’t think there are more folks in that camp than the camp of let carry only all in one small but powerful electronic device (such as smartphone).  I can see how awesome a tablet might be as a remote control for a big screen TV.  I can see how awesome a tablet might be for reading electronic books and magazines.  Nonetheless, I still think people prefer to do all of that on smartphones if they’re out and about.

With the current electronic trend, people are buying more tablets than personal computers.  With the current electronic trend, people are definitely buying more smartphones than personal computers.  Does this electronic trend tell us that personal computers are about to die a slow death?  I doubt so!  Nonetheless, I can see why people are buying more smaller electronic device form factors.  I don’t think it takes a rocket scientist to see the benefits of carrying something so small and yet so useful as a smartphone or a tablet.  For an example, to be able to store thousands of electronic books in a smartphone is definitely a big plus over to how things were done traditionally when it comes down to books.  Basically, convenient, useful, and powerful are the three terms that immediately come to mind whenever I think about small electronic device form factors.  Smartphones and tablets allow us to feel the power of being productive while on the go.  In a sense, the productiveness that radiates from today small electronic device form factors is something that the older generations of homo sapiens had never ever seen before.  These small electronic device form factors that set the trend which can be comparable to the older trendsetters such as the bring about of automobiles, planes, and so on.

So, people are buying up more small electronic device form factors, does it mean that the personal computer trend is on a life support system?  No, because people still need to be content creators first before there will be content consumers.  Without personal computers that are powerful enough to churn out creative works, I doubt there will be much of contents to be consumed on small electronic device form factors.  So, I think personal computers are safe for now, because there aren’t any tablet or smartphone out there that can upheave this personal computer reign just yet.

Sure, personal computers are more powerful and come with more choices than ever before, but why people are not thinking or talking about them as much as they used to?  Perhaps, personal computers are so normal that we can only see them when we’re actually using them?  They’re not exotic as tablets and smartphones.  Nonetheless, asking most gamers out there which device or machine they prefer to play latest games on, I would bet personal computer with a humongous display would be the preferable choice, always!

In short, personal computer technology has came a long way and has matured to a point of it’s no longer needing to be talked about constantly in order for it to be attractive.  Plus, as personal computer technology improved, so the lifespan of personal computer machines.  With so many households are already teaming with personal computers and most mid-end to high-end personal computers are more expensive than smartphones and tablets, therefore I don’t think people want to think or buy personal computers in the same light as how they might want to do so for smartphones and tablets.

In conclusion, I think the three terms I describe earlier — convient, useful, and powerful — are some of the most important factors that dictate why people have been buying so much smartphones and tablets.  Nonetheless, if these smartphones and tablets had come out a decade or two earlier, I highly doubt that people would care!  In a sense, people are now finding these small electronic device form factors quite useful thanks to the advance of personal computer technology first.  In a sense, personal computer technology isn’t a trendsetter anymore showing that personal computer technology had been so matured.  Nonetheless, don’t think for a second that personal computer technology is dying, because it’s still the trendsetter when it comes to content producing.  So, until the small electronic device form factors get more capable, actually be as capable or better than personal computers, I don’t see how personal computers will be outdated.  With that being said, technology usually moves at the speed of light, therefore I’m not sure how relevant my saying, in regarding to personal computer popularity, will be in a near future (i.e., five years down the road).

Apple TV And Similar Platforms Are Just Scratching The Surface, Because Watching Newest Movies At Home Might Be The Next Media Revolution!

Home theater projection screen displaying a hi...

Home theater projection screen displaying a high-definition television image (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Watching iTune rental movies on iPad 2 isn’t exactly great, because movies should not be shrunk to such a proportion (i.e., 9.7 inch).  With Apple TV and Airplay though, I’m able to enjoy movies on humongous TV screen.  Lovely!  Streaming HD quality too!  Also, I don’t have to miss any part of a movie during viewing time as I can just pause the movie, go do whatever, and come back to finish up the movie whenever.  It gets better when I crank up my sound system (e.g., amplifier, speakers, mixer, equalizer, dual engine processor, etc…).

With my scenario above, I can totally understand why nowadays it’s less attractive to go to the theaters.  Of course, watching movies in theaters can have advantages such as you get to watch the newest releases of movies.  Nonetheless, the downsides of watching movies in the theaters are many too.  The examples of the downsides for watching movies in theaters are strangers can be loud and rude, cell phones can go off whenever, crying children, and dangers such as recent theater shooting (i.e., 2012 Aurora Shooting).  Weighing the downsides with the upsides for watching movies in the theaters, it’s obvious that conveniency matters most.  This is why I think people will go to theaters less as they can just sit at home, in their most comfortable environment, and enjoy their movies from their home theater systems.  It’s less hassle and safer this way!  Really!

Internet has changed so many things in people lives, and watching movies is definitely one of the things that the Internet has been meddled with.  It’s not yet an evolution, but the revolution of watching movies is clearly shown in the ways that people have watched their movies, nowadays.  People prefer to stream movies from the Internet more and more.  So, the revolution would be that people rather rebel against the traditional media such as TV reruns.  Furthermore, people also rebel against watching movies in theaters.  They only go to the theaters whenever their most anticipated movies are showing.

Nonetheless, the traditional media has one advantage over the Internet medium is that going live on the air.  Going live on the air is still something that people love most.  Nonetheless, if the new media (i.e., the one that utilizes the Internet for streaming media) begins to adopt going live on the air, the traditional media will have no advantage left.

Obviously, I don’t know what will have to come into an earthly existence to actually make me think that there is an evolution in watching movies, because watching movies is a definitive process.  Definitive process?  We can say we used to watch movies in black and white in the era of no color picture, and the revolution was that we had color picture.  We can also say we used to watch movies in theaters, and the revolution is that nowadays we prefer to watch movies from our home theater systems (i.e., home theater systems that utilize Internet for streaming movies).  So, to have an evolution in watching movies is like begging for the process of watching movies to change into an unrecognizable form of watching movies.  Such a change might have us not watching movies anymore.  Instead of watching movies, we might have to experience the movies in ways that might explode our mind.  One example would be that we get to be in the movies, and so our unique actions within the movies might change the endings of the movies.  Or we can just be the observers of the movies, and yet we get to enjoy the movies as if we enjoy the many realities.  Nonetheless, such possibilities are still in the realm of science fiction for now.

Let us leave science fiction for another day and stick to the talk of a revolution for watching movies, shall we?  So, it’s clear that watching traditional media is still have one advantage over the new media (i.e., media utilizes Internet for streaming), and the advantage is going live on the air.  Well, I lie, because the traditional media has not one, but two advantages over the new media.  The second advantage would be the newest movies that get to air in the theaters.  Imagine, what if the new media begins to stream the newest movies to homes.  This would be another revolution for watching movies, right?  Internet definitely has the potential to continue to throw volleys of revolutions, one after another, at the traditional media.  Picture this, if we can begin to stream the newest movies at home, we don’t really have to go to the theaters and feel nervous about all sorts of things (e.g., theater etiquettes, theater shooting, etc…).

Before Steve Jobs died, there was a rumor that Steve Jobs had planned to revolutionize how people are going to watch their TVs.  If this is true, I wonder that he had thought about teaming up with various media partners to bring newest movies to homes.  Nonetheless, even if Steve Jobs hadn’t thought of this, I think someone else would eventually will be able to iron out deals that will bring the newest movies to homes.  How come?  Well, if they care about how people want to watch their movies, then they should think about making people feel happier and more satisfied in watching movies.  What better way than having people feel evermore so excited about turning on their TVs than watching the newest movies from home?  And safer too?

FBI Had A Huge File On Steve Jobs, And Now It’s Being Released Into The Public; Downloadable In PDF

Steve Jobs image - this is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. Information from its description page there is shown below.  Commons is a freely licensed media file repository.

Steve Jobs image - this is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. Information from its description page there is shown below. Commons is a freely licensed media file repository.

According to Techradar’s Steve Jobs was ‘deceptive’ says FBI file article, the FBI has released Steve Jobs file, and so you can now either go read or download this file at vault.fbi.gov/steve-jobs/steve-jobs-part-01-of-01/view.  The file is around 3.9 MB which is huge for just being a PDF file (at least to me).  Anyhow, according to Techradar, Steve Jobs was under investigation by the FBI for he was considered to be nominated for a high profile government position which had something to do with George H.W. Bush’s administration (i.e., the White House).  Again, according to Techradar, FBI found Steve Jobs to be deceptive.

So, in a way if you had read Steve Jobs’ biography which was written by Walter Isaacson with the title “Steve Jobs,” you may as well want to read the FBI file on Steve Jobs to compare the two to see if there is any discrepancy.  Sure, it might not be necessary to do so, but if you’re interested in learning more on Steve Jobs, how the man was and still is being worshiped by so many in the tech industry, I guess digging into the FBI file on Steve Jobs might shed some more light on what you think you already know about the man himself.  You might also want to be diligent too on judging the man from the FBI file, because it might be that the FBI could not have been entirely correct, and the same would go for Steve Jobs’ biography.  Why?  In truth, nobody would probably know Steve Jobs better than himself, therefore you can only know what you’re being fed to read.

I find that it’s quite interesting to see Steve Jobs, just a man of building a tech giant, has been the talk of the town since he made his few first headlines back in the day.  Even though he is now rest in peace, the talk of the town apparently is still buzzing about him, still.  They talk of him as if they’re worshipping him, isn’t this quite fascinating?  Some even seeing him as a celebrity even though the man wasn’t a celebrity.  Yes, you might agree why he is being worshipped or being seen as a famous dead celebrity too, because you are willing to spend lot of money on his products still.  Nonetheless, I forgot who but someone had pointed out Bill Gates has done much more than Steve Jobs in term of making the world better and so Bill Gates should be the one to be worshipped of and not Steve Jobs.  This person probably was talking about how Bill & Melinda foundation has changed the world.  I believe, Bill & Melinda foundation was found by Bill Gates and his wife.  I have heard how Bill & Melinda foundation has been involved with projects that have huge positive impacts on the world such as allowing the children of the poorest nations to have access to much needed vaccines.

With Steve Jobs is no longer with us, his company is continuing making huge gains to which Amazon and other competitors are very much like to see Apple stumbles.  Just recently, Amazon has released a commercial to point out how expensive iPad has been.  The lady in the commercial said to the man, even with her Kindle which could be read in sunlight and the other two Kindle Fires put together would still be cheaper than the man’s iPad.  The man was embarrassed and asked her who would be sitting in the empty seat next to her, and she said it was her husband.  The commercial ended gradually as it showed the man left in embarrassment and the prices of the regular Kindle ($199) and Kindle Fires ($79) appeared to confirm what the lady in the commercial had said.

Source:  http://www.techradar.com/news/computing/apple/steve-jobs-was-deceptive-says-fbi-file-1062235?src=rss&attr=all

Google’s Newest Project Yet, Solving The X! If I’m Not Mistaken, This X Might Be Anything And You Might Be A Part Of The Equation!

English: Google Logo officially released on Ma...

Image via Wikipedia

I’m not sure how Solve for X forum would be able to encourage and arrange the average folks who just happen to have brilliant ideas to come together and discuss the stuffs of fantasies that might just fly in real world, but as Steve Jobs’ Apple commercial “Think Different” has been promoting that the crazy ones might be just the kind of people that would positively change the world.  Solve for X is a project which Google has been working on.  Just now Google has released Solve for X’s website and videos.  The website is at wesolveforx.com.  The video right after the break introduces you to Google’s Solve for X project.

Perhaps, Google’s Solve for X might only reach out to the people who may have brilliant ideas to come together and promote what might change the world.  For an example, the X might be something down to earth as finding clean water for the poorest nations to something up in space as in starting a space voyage for humankind.  You never know!  Nonetheless, I don’t know for sure how different Solve for X might be if one compares it against TED.

I hope Solve for X would allow the average folks as your next door neighbor (or even yourself) to participate in the project somehow.  You never know someone out there, perhaps your next door neighbor or even yourself might just happen to have crazy idea that might change the world in a very big way!  Nonetheless, it seems Solve for X does include average folks in its equation somewhat as it allows you to post your own Solve for X talks using Google Plus.  In truth, I haven’t tried to do such a thing, therefore I don’t even know how one would be able to use Google Plus to start a Solve for X talk!  Do you?

Source:  http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/02/06/2237259/google-solve-for-x-website-goes-live?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign
=Feed%3A+Slashdot%2Fslashdot+%28Slashdot%29

I Might Be Completely Clueless On SOPA Or I Might Be Right That SOPA Can Curb Innovations!

Burning of three witches in Baden, Switzerland (1585), by Johann Jakob Wick.  Image from Wikipedia.

Burning of three witches in Baden, Switzerland (1585), by Johann Jakob Wick. Image from Wikipedia.

I’m a small shrimp in the ocean of sharks.  Yet, I still think SOPA isn’t the solution.  I fear SOPA might encourage witch-hunts.  What witch-hunts?  Don’t freak out, I’m not talking about burning real witches.  I’m talking about having SOPA witch-hunts.  Furthermore, SOPA might have the Internet Service Providers add more things onto their already super long todo lists, consequently making them unable to be productive and competitive.  What about the lawyers?  Lawyers might have a field day when SOPA is becoming law, because they might have less time to doodle but more time to make sure SOPA is SOPA or isn’t SOPA.  I can already hear a lawyer says, ” SOPA sounds like kaching (i.e., sound of a cash register) to me.”  What makes it more clear that SOPA isn’t a solution, because affected websites can just switch to DNS servers that are outside of the United States’ jurisdiction (i.e., as in oversea), avoiding the SOPA effect easily.  Then there is the feeling that DNS business might be outsourced to foreign countries, because DNS servers within United States suddenly feel like so SOPA.

I think SOPA might look good, but in reality it can be devastating and holding back innovations.  If not for big corporations holding back innovations through patents, we might already have our brave human fellows travel on USS Enterprise, exploring the galaxies.  Perhaps, we even have electric cars however many years early if corporations aren’t so fonded with oil and patents.  Yes, I know, the tiredness of the what if jokes!  But what if the what if jokes aren’t jokes?

SOPA does feel eerily to be similar to whatever rules and regulations that govern patents to me, because it might curb innovations.  I feel innovations should be encouraged fairly, and by this I mean big and small companies alike should have a shot at being innovative.  As we have seen where patents are heading, only big corporations would have billions of dollars to acquire patents and use these patents to sue everyone else that might not really infringe on such patents, but of course such patent cases have to be settled somehow, and usually the situations come down to settling out of courts for huge amount of money.  Only when things cannot be settled out of courts, then let the court battles begin.

I don’t think small businesses even have the money and time to worry about patents and SOPA, because they are trying to hire more people and expanding their businesses.  SOPA curbs innovations from small businesses, because big corporations might have more influences on how things should turn out.  With great money comes great responsibility!  No, let me rephrase this, with great money comes great power!  Oh boy, sorry for the inconvenience, let me rephrase this again, with great power comes great innovations.  Fine, let me backtrack a bit, with great money comes great power, therefore big corporations can use SOPA to favor their agenda, right?  I fear there will be little scrutiny of the SOPA violations but the alleged SOPA violators (i.e., relatively speaking of small businesses) might be out of business in a flash, as in websites are going to be shut down immediately at DNS level (i.e., revenue streams of such websites will be completely cutoff).

Ironically, even big corporations might feel SOPA is a pain if they are the ones who are being sued.  It turns out SOPA works both ways, like a knife with both edges being sharped.  Nonetheless, big corporations have the money and power to fight off SOPA easier than small businesses.  Plus, they don’t have to get into a panic mode and outright shut down their businesses for a SOPA case, because they are going to fight for their businesses with all their might, knowing they have a chance to make SOPA favors them even though SOPA is clearly at their throats.  When facing SOPA, I think small businesses might just as well close their doors and not doing business.  Why fight in courts when SOPA could or might make them even more broke, right?  So, once again, SOPA favors big businesses!  Is this fair?  I don’t think so.

Not only small businesses might face dire circumstances when facing SOPA, but customers and Internet users might face their own SOPA dire circumstances as well.  Customers most of the time are likely the Internet users themselves, and in this aspect we relatively combine customers and Internet users as one.  (Let not talk about customers as a business is a customer of another business, because it’s about something else entirely, and it’s not relating to the case I’m trying to make.)  When a customer comes to YouTube, he or she wants to see user generated contents and some professional contents, but more likely they will be bombarded with user generated contents; this is happening, because Internet is rather freer than not.  Now, imagine one weird user generated content gets call out, and SOPA might block the whole YouTube.

Of course, YouTube is belonging to a big corporation which is Google, and so Google will have the power, the means, and the money to argue against SOPA.  Nonetheless, even Google might not prevail and customers might no longer have something as useful as YouTube.  When SOPA claims victory, YouTube and other similar services might end up biting the dust.  Of course, this scenario might be too extreme, because when SOPA becomes law, YouTube might no longer be the same YouTube as Google has to make sure their original YouTube got to be sane with SOPA.  Shall we say user generated contents might be scrutinized evermore closely by Google?  Then again, it’s only the figment of my imagination, because SOPA isn’t law yet.  If SOPA isn’t law yet, then we cannot know how YouTube will behave unless you are the one who is directing Google’s YouTube.

Does this mean we just care not for SOPA, therefore piracy will forever rampage our Internet?  Yes, we should care not for SOPA, but we should care for stopping piracy at everywhere, whether that be on the Internet or off the Internet.  SOPA isn’t the solution since SOPA can be worked around easily by using DNS servers from oversea.  SOPA isn’t the solution since I hear that its language is too broad.  If SOPA’s language is too broad, it might dictate things that can affect not only the pirates but the innocents on the Internet as well.  I don’t think the majority is supporting piracy!  If SOPA’s language is too specific, it will not work, because it will not be able to justify when big corporations can just slowly comply to SOPA and stays in business while small businesses have to close doors immediately.  If small businesses can also slowly comply to SOPA, will big businesses favor SOPA still?

I know my understanding of SOPA is rather flaky, because my indirect knowledge of SOPA are from what I’d read online.  Nonetheless, if I’m wrong, then I have to admit I’m shortsighted.  Now, if I’m right, then SOPA might be very damaging to the whole old faithful structure of the Internet.  I believe the current Internet model isn’t bad.  In fact, I believe big corporations don’t need SOPA, but they need to only change their business ideas.  Steve Jobs knew this, because he had helped music labels stayed in business through iTunes store.  You can disagree with me, but you might change your mind if you read more on how Steve Jobs had convinced many players in the music industry to work with him to make iTunes store worked, and in return Steve Jobs had made some players in the music industry very happy in term of revenues.  If the music industry isn’t happy with iTunes store, how come they are so eager to sell their music on iTunes still?  It turns out that people might prefer buying music on iTunes store than pirating, because the quality for the music from iTunes store is simply better.  Let me put this in another way, an alcoholic cannot quit being an alcoholic unless he or she tells oneself to quit, but nobody else can!  SOPA cannot block a person from pirating or running a website with pirated contents, because he or she or an entity can simply use DNS servers from places that are outside of the United States’ jurisdiction.

You can argue that United States can make SOPA works by asking other countries to comply.  In my opinion, if United States asks nicely, only the countries that are aligning with United States’ agenda on SOPA will comply right away, but other countries will not.  Now, if United States forces other countries to comply on SOPA, the whole SOPA thing can only make the United States looks like an international bully.  For SOPA, is it worth it?

I fear SOPA might do its job too well that more people might find their computers infect by computer viruses!  How?  When web hosting companies and DNS service providers within the United States deny providing DNS service to some businesses to comply with SOPA, such businesses might use not so friendly DNS service from not so friendly DNS service providers, consequently helping the spread of the computer viruses, trojans, and malware.  It’s not like rouge DNS servers will spread computer viruses, but it’s more of rouge DNS servers might be hacked easier, consequently directing web traffics to dangerous web addresses.  Such dangerous web destinations might carry computer viruses, trojans, and malware.

You can argue that rouge DNS servers might have high security measures as how DNS servers that are being run within the United States, therefore we cannot assume rouge DNS servers might be easily hacked and redirected people to dangerous web addresses, consequently having people’s computers infected with computer viruses, trojans, and malware.  I don’t see anything wrong with such an argument.  In fact, I do think you are right on the money.  I do fear though when SOPA forces website owners to use rouge DNS servers, they might not have enough time to do a careful planning on picking the right DNS service providers oversea, and by rushing into picking DNS service providers oversea so their websites can get back online faster, website owners might sign up with bad DNS service providers, consequently allowing their websites to be subjected to DNS server hacks.  Evil doers might also take the chance of seeing some websites shut down by SOPA and reopen such websites with pirated contents but with different domain names, using DNS servers outside of the United States’ jurisdiction.  Customers (i.e., Internet users) might not know better and eager to download pirated contents without knowing what they download might infect their computers with computer viruses.

In summary, I think SOPA isn’t a right solution for stopping online piracy.  In fact, I think the right solution for businesses to stop online piracy is providing something which pirating cannot best.  For an example, by providing higher quality contents at affordable prices, this can effectively mitigate people from pirating since pirated contents tend to be poor in quality.  For whoever think SOPA is the solution to online piracy, don’t you fear the Internet, the engine which plays a big part in stimulating our current economy, might break down or become less attractive to innovations?  If you know something that I don’t on SOPA, please do tell.  If you’re supporting SOPA, let just hope you aren’t wrong by supporting SOPA so our Internet future will continue to shine for years to come.  Honestly, I just hope there are more people who want to have a more open and freer Internet so innovations can continue to spawn like crazy.