Mr_Ed
Mar 31, 04:33 PM
Gruber is rarely accurate in his conclusions, and this time is no exception.
None of what is happening smacks of being a "bait-and-switch" as he claims. That would've required extremely clever pre-planning years ago on the part of Google.
Instead, it's got all the hallmarks of too little pre-planning.
Anyone with experience dealing with large projects can see that Rubin has belatedly come to realize that things were getting out of control. Now he is goofing up trying to take full control himself instead of doing the smart thing and first getting a consensus from the OHA members.
I don't think it's about planning. After all, how much "planning" do you need to do if your philosophy behind the product is basically " open it up so everyone can contribute and see where it goes"? The point most here are making is that the age-old "open" vs. "closed" ecosystem argument, which has repeatedly been used to criticize Apple over many years, is now looking more and more as if Apple was right all along. In this case what you call "lack of planning," I call lack of much thought at all. I for one don't have much faith in most things accomplished by committee, and that is the basic flaw in most "open" systems.
The "bait and switch" reference applies in that many of those who jumped on the Android bandwagon now find they don't have nearly as much control as they thought they would, as evidenced by the complaints from that community.
None of what is happening smacks of being a "bait-and-switch" as he claims. That would've required extremely clever pre-planning years ago on the part of Google.
Instead, it's got all the hallmarks of too little pre-planning.
Anyone with experience dealing with large projects can see that Rubin has belatedly come to realize that things were getting out of control. Now he is goofing up trying to take full control himself instead of doing the smart thing and first getting a consensus from the OHA members.
I don't think it's about planning. After all, how much "planning" do you need to do if your philosophy behind the product is basically " open it up so everyone can contribute and see where it goes"? The point most here are making is that the age-old "open" vs. "closed" ecosystem argument, which has repeatedly been used to criticize Apple over many years, is now looking more and more as if Apple was right all along. In this case what you call "lack of planning," I call lack of much thought at all. I for one don't have much faith in most things accomplished by committee, and that is the basic flaw in most "open" systems.
The "bait and switch" reference applies in that many of those who jumped on the Android bandwagon now find they don't have nearly as much control as they thought they would, as evidenced by the complaints from that community.
Nuvi
Apr 11, 12:01 AM
I'm a little confused...why was Avid presenting at a Final Cut Pro User Group's meeting anyway? Do they just come in and are like "Hey, you've all made a mistake!" or something?
Because professional editors give flying-F about FCP if Apple doesn't deliver. Its about putting food on the table and not about being a fan boy. If Apple doesn't deliver a solution that is comparable with Avid MC the mass exodus away from FCP will continue. Some iOS stuff and Steve can shove it. Mr Jobs had good sense of keeping his fingers out of the Pixar so I truly hope he doesn't crap on FCS mix.
Because professional editors give flying-F about FCP if Apple doesn't deliver. Its about putting food on the table and not about being a fan boy. If Apple doesn't deliver a solution that is comparable with Avid MC the mass exodus away from FCP will continue. Some iOS stuff and Steve can shove it. Mr Jobs had good sense of keeping his fingers out of the Pixar so I truly hope he doesn't crap on FCS mix.
FelixGV
Nov 28, 11:38 PM
Aren't you tired of companies trying to have it their way? Here's what we, as consumers, should do, if that stupid policy happened:
We should create a website, where iPod buyers could subscribe by providing a proof of their iPod purchase. The website would then declare that until Universal pays back what they have taken from every member, those members will steal Universal's music instead of buying it off of the iTS. That's what the tax is there for, right?
Sweet deal! We now have the moral justification to download all of Universal's music for 1 buck. Bring it on!
We should create a website, where iPod buyers could subscribe by providing a proof of their iPod purchase. The website would then declare that until Universal pays back what they have taken from every member, those members will steal Universal's music instead of buying it off of the iTS. That's what the tax is there for, right?
Sweet deal! We now have the moral justification to download all of Universal's music for 1 buck. Bring it on!
shawnce
Jul 14, 06:45 PM
Agreed. I can make an argument for the consumer machines, where perhaps 512 MB is sufficient for basic users. Specifically, why force them to pay more for 1 GB if they don't need it. But when it comes to the Pro machines, as if anyone buying one of these beasts is not going to require at least 2 GB of RAM, let alone 1 GB. No one buys a quad Xeon Powermac to just surf the Internet and check their e-mail. :cool:
Personally I go the BTO route at Apple.com for my PowerMacs and downgrade all RAM to the minimum cost and buy my RAM from a trusted 3rd party vendor for a savings of at least 10% if not more so.
Personally I go the BTO route at Apple.com for my PowerMacs and downgrade all RAM to the minimum cost and buy my RAM from a trusted 3rd party vendor for a savings of at least 10% if not more so.
moonzilla
Jul 27, 12:08 PM
i think it's safe to assume that Apple will be making an effort to differentiate the Macbooks and the MBP. As of right now, other than the video card, and backlit keyboard, there doesnt seem like a solid reason to fork over an extra 800-1200 bucks. i expect Apple to use the core2 for this purpose. put merom only in the mbp, and force the power-hungry users to upgrade to the pro model.
FF_productions
Aug 15, 11:34 AM
Check it out!
http://barefeats.com/quad06.html
The 3 ghz Mac Pro is neck and neck with the G5 Quad in the Adobe benchmarks, sick considering the fact it's running under rosetta!!
http://barefeats.com/quad06.html
The 3 ghz Mac Pro is neck and neck with the G5 Quad in the Adobe benchmarks, sick considering the fact it's running under rosetta!!
troop231
Mar 22, 12:56 PM
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
Hugh Hefner of course.. :cool:
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
Hugh Hefner of course.. :cool:
freeny
Jul 20, 08:10 AM
WOW! Octo cores:eek:
Im due a new computer and every time I hear about whats in the pipeline I bump my purchase date ahead another 4 months:o
Im due a new computer and every time I hear about whats in the pipeline I bump my purchase date ahead another 4 months:o
BoRegardless
Mar 26, 10:42 AM
OS evolution is like classifying cats by size.
Each one gets a bit bigger, but they are still cats.
The only time I would be excited, literally, about a MAJOR release is if they went to an OS which was slated to be described by Canines.
Then I would be reasonably assured something astounding was coming.
Each one gets a bit bigger, but they are still cats.
The only time I would be excited, literally, about a MAJOR release is if they went to an OS which was slated to be described by Canines.
Then I would be reasonably assured something astounding was coming.
milo
Sep 13, 07:05 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet.
Not true, according to the article. They said it wasn't easy, but they were able to max out all 8 cores. You can see the Activity Monitor graph all filled up.
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
That's how it is now, at least with multiple apps. I bet it's possible to program for an unspecified number of multiple cores, and there may be apps doing it already.
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
Read the article again, they WERE able to max them out, just not easily. Based on that, OSX seems to be able to scale already. Developers just need to start writing apps that are more MP friendly.
Not true, according to the article. They said it wasn't easy, but they were able to max out all 8 cores. You can see the Activity Monitor graph all filled up.
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
That's how it is now, at least with multiple apps. I bet it's possible to program for an unspecified number of multiple cores, and there may be apps doing it already.
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
Read the article again, they WERE able to max them out, just not easily. Based on that, OSX seems to be able to scale already. Developers just need to start writing apps that are more MP friendly.
wizard
Mar 26, 10:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
It is pretty incredible that the ignorance around Mac OS releases never stops. For one thing if you loose data on a computer, the only person to blame is the one staring at you in the mirror.
Even the whine about nothing worthwhile for the user is a bit old and reflects what we heard about SL. Yet SL on my early 2008 MBP was a drastic improvement for the user right out of the box and just got better with each update. User facing features are the only reason to update, fixes to underlying facilities can go a long way to justifying the software update.
As to the server integration, it hasn't and never will be a product worth $500. It is great that Apple is adding support to the base install but people need to realize a few things. One is that Mac OS is UNIX, people need to get that through their heads. Thus Apples server product only really adds in what is already seen in many UNIX intallations in a base install. Speaking of which much of that functionality is well established open source. Second the pricing of "server" software seems to be tailored to fit the mentality of the corporate world, where they feel they need to pay big bucks for something trivial. It is no wonder that Linux as established itself as a server OS in the SOHO world and at some of the more forward thinking larger corporations. As others have pointed out the basics of UNIX have been around for ages now, very little new territory is being cleared here, thus little justification for up charges on server software.
Finally it is a bit cowardly to avoid the future because you see nothing of value there for you personally. It is frightenly similar to the attitude seen in those that cut their own wrists.
It is pretty incredible that the ignorance around Mac OS releases never stops. For one thing if you loose data on a computer, the only person to blame is the one staring at you in the mirror.
Even the whine about nothing worthwhile for the user is a bit old and reflects what we heard about SL. Yet SL on my early 2008 MBP was a drastic improvement for the user right out of the box and just got better with each update. User facing features are the only reason to update, fixes to underlying facilities can go a long way to justifying the software update.
As to the server integration, it hasn't and never will be a product worth $500. It is great that Apple is adding support to the base install but people need to realize a few things. One is that Mac OS is UNIX, people need to get that through their heads. Thus Apples server product only really adds in what is already seen in many UNIX intallations in a base install. Speaking of which much of that functionality is well established open source. Second the pricing of "server" software seems to be tailored to fit the mentality of the corporate world, where they feel they need to pay big bucks for something trivial. It is no wonder that Linux as established itself as a server OS in the SOHO world and at some of the more forward thinking larger corporations. As others have pointed out the basics of UNIX have been around for ages now, very little new territory is being cleared here, thus little justification for up charges on server software.
Finally it is a bit cowardly to avoid the future because you see nothing of value there for you personally. It is frightenly similar to the attitude seen in those that cut their own wrists.
toddybody
Apr 6, 11:00 AM
So are the current MacBook airs using a dedicated gpu? Or is it integrated? I'm confused. :-)
99.99999999999999999999999999999999% sure it will be integrated. Akin to the base MBP. :( Id LOVE it if the 13inch had a discrete GPU (with optimus switching it could perform rather well, battery wise). I just hope they redesign the thermal exhaust on the MBA...if read about mobos warping due to exposed hi temps (maybe thats BS, but a fan that small cant cool well)
99.99999999999999999999999999999999% sure it will be integrated. Akin to the base MBP. :( Id LOVE it if the 13inch had a discrete GPU (with optimus switching it could perform rather well, battery wise). I just hope they redesign the thermal exhaust on the MBA...if read about mobos warping due to exposed hi temps (maybe thats BS, but a fan that small cant cool well)
jonharris200
Aug 5, 04:53 PM
I think that that we'll have to wait for Paris for the iMac update and new iPods.
France would be a stunning choice of location for the launch of something that's iTunes related! I'm sure that that irony hasn't escaped Jobs & Co in their product scheduling. ;)
France would be a stunning choice of location for the launch of something that's iTunes related! I'm sure that that irony hasn't escaped Jobs & Co in their product scheduling. ;)
Luis Ortega
Apr 6, 02:59 PM
Really? Are sales numbers what dictates one product is better than the other?
I'm not saying the Xoom is better (I haven't used one) but a reading of the posts on this thread would suggest that sales number indicate that one product is better than the other.
In that case, Windows is obviously the best OS on the planet, by a magnitude of 10.
I'm not saying the Xoom is better (I haven't used one) but a reading of the posts on this thread would suggest that sales number indicate that one product is better than the other.
In that case, Windows is obviously the best OS on the planet, by a magnitude of 10.
SandynJosh
Mar 31, 10:40 PM
Thats not at all what this article is saying. The Android project is still going to be "open source".
Uh, yeah...and all animals are equal, but pigs are more equal.
Uh, yeah...and all animals are equal, but pigs are more equal.
Nuvi
Apr 11, 02:35 AM
Except he rewrote iMovie all my himself before showing it to Apple. Jobs then chose to adopt the new interface.
So if anything, what you find crap in iMovie was Ubilos' ideas.
Things I don't like to hear... In all honesty I just hope he wanted to separate iMovie from Pro products even more... I have bad feeling about all of this. Rumors about FCP being FC (literally not going for pro anymore) and aiming for online consumer delivery like YouTube makes me sick. If they have killed tape input / output you know that moment Apple really made iCut"Pro".
So if anything, what you find crap in iMovie was Ubilos' ideas.
Things I don't like to hear... In all honesty I just hope he wanted to separate iMovie from Pro products even more... I have bad feeling about all of this. Rumors about FCP being FC (literally not going for pro anymore) and aiming for online consumer delivery like YouTube makes me sick. If they have killed tape input / output you know that moment Apple really made iCut"Pro".
SuperCachetes
Feb 28, 09:04 PM
What does my post have to do with cinema excellence?
Well, it's certainly sweeping drama based on fiction. Like so many Oscar winners, it's also a bit of vapid fluff that people will view and quickly forget. Frankly, I didn't mean to imply any excellence other than at making completely unfounded generalizations.
Unless influenced otherwise the brain develops heterosexually
Are you saying you think people program themselves to be gay? Or is it based on what cartoons they watch as a kid? Maybe lack of a father figure? Tell us more, Doc!
Well, it's certainly sweeping drama based on fiction. Like so many Oscar winners, it's also a bit of vapid fluff that people will view and quickly forget. Frankly, I didn't mean to imply any excellence other than at making completely unfounded generalizations.
Unless influenced otherwise the brain develops heterosexually
Are you saying you think people program themselves to be gay? Or is it based on what cartoons they watch as a kid? Maybe lack of a father figure? Tell us more, Doc!
shawnce
Aug 18, 10:14 PM
So You are saying 10 seconds from OFF to the Grey Apple then 5 more seconds to the desktop? With 3 GB of New Egg + 2GB RAM? That's still very fast. Quad G5 is almost as fast as that though.
A little random trivia I learned at WWDC 06...
- When you see the Apple symbol on an Intel Mac that means EFI boot loader is active.
- When you see the spinning progress indicator that means the kernel has taken over from EFI boot loader.
- When you see the the switch to blue with progress dialog then the logininwindow is active (launchd has been loading required boot time services by this point).
If you hold down option while booting and get into the traditional boot disk selection screen on a Intel based Mac you can add and remove storage devices and they will appear/disappear automatically (EFI allows for much faster scanning and dynamic add/remove of devices). Additionally they will use the volume icon if one is found and for fun you can use your IR remote to make your boot selection.
A little random trivia I learned at WWDC 06...
- When you see the Apple symbol on an Intel Mac that means EFI boot loader is active.
- When you see the spinning progress indicator that means the kernel has taken over from EFI boot loader.
- When you see the the switch to blue with progress dialog then the logininwindow is active (launchd has been loading required boot time services by this point).
If you hold down option while booting and get into the traditional boot disk selection screen on a Intel based Mac you can add and remove storage devices and they will appear/disappear automatically (EFI allows for much faster scanning and dynamic add/remove of devices). Additionally they will use the volume icon if one is found and for fun you can use your IR remote to make your boot selection.
8CoreWhore
Apr 10, 04:37 AM
As bad as it sounds for Apple to "boot out the others", Apple doesn't have the authority to do that. FCUG organizers chose to do it at Apple's request because they require the space and time. FCUG could have said no to Apple, but why would they? It's not a Canon Group, it's a FCU Group...
Dan==
Jul 27, 04:53 PM
Very nice, indeed... (of course, i expect that Apple release something much more beautiful than waht you did :D :p :D)
Thanks, and yes, me too. I just hope they do something to fill that headless hole between the mini and pro. And I hope the innards are more accessible than the mini.
Thanks, and yes, me too. I just hope they do something to fill that headless hole between the mini and pro. And I hope the innards are more accessible than the mini.
jmazzamj
Apr 6, 02:22 PM
This insight is not very far-fetched: The 17W Sandy Bridge processor will be used in the next gen 11" Airs, not the 13" which will use the 25W version of Sandy Bridge. I can bet on this...
Next Air will see a DRAMATIC speed improvement CPU wise and a minor decrease in GPU performance.
Cheers
Next Air will see a DRAMATIC speed improvement CPU wise and a minor decrease in GPU performance.
Cheers
Dagless
Aug 10, 05:21 AM
Nope, just Windows unfortunately.
And they aint half brilliant. GT reminds me of a casualised WTCC (or at least the rally tracks). It's a very serious toy for very serious sim drivers.
And they aint half brilliant. GT reminds me of a casualised WTCC (or at least the rally tracks). It's a very serious toy for very serious sim drivers.
orthorim
Apr 7, 10:21 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
A 15" MBA (no optical) with dedicated graphics is my ideal Mac. It'll happen someday...
Same here except I don't need the dedicated gfx. For what? Games? Whenever I attempt to play a gfx intensive game on my mbp it gets super hot and the fans start to sound like a jet engine. That's not an appealing proposition. I'd rather play on the iPad , or games that don't require more than the built in gfx.
I am sitting out this generation of mbp. Get rid of the optical or I won't buy it. At least provide an option to officially replace it with a HD tray. I know it's not hard to hack, I have done it, but I don't see why I'd have to hack a brand new machine (and possibly void the warranty)
A 15" MBA (no optical) with dedicated graphics is my ideal Mac. It'll happen someday...
Same here except I don't need the dedicated gfx. For what? Games? Whenever I attempt to play a gfx intensive game on my mbp it gets super hot and the fans start to sound like a jet engine. That's not an appealing proposition. I'd rather play on the iPad , or games that don't require more than the built in gfx.
I am sitting out this generation of mbp. Get rid of the optical or I won't buy it. At least provide an option to officially replace it with a HD tray. I know it's not hard to hack, I have done it, but I don't see why I'd have to hack a brand new machine (and possibly void the warranty)
ArchaicRevival
Apr 6, 02:10 PM
Epic. Fail.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder