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.
emotion
Jul 20, 08:45 AM
Back to reality: Apple wil use Xeon 51xx (5150 and 5160) in the MacPro, and Core 2 Duo (Merom) in the iMac and MBP to be announced at the WWDC. The top iMac config will get a boost to 2.33GHz. In addition, Apple will use the price-drops for the Yonah to upgrade the Core Solo mini to Core Duo.
I concur. Personally I'd like to see the MBs go to merom at some point relatively soon too but that's just wishful thinking as that's when I plan to get one.
I concur. Personally I'd like to see the MBs go to merom at some point relatively soon too but that's just wishful thinking as that's when I plan to get one.
Anonymous Freak
Jul 15, 02:22 PM
You mean like how the MacBook Pro was 2.0 GHz at the top end on release?
I have a feeling if 2.66 is the top-end 'stock' model, it will be upgradeable to 3.0 GHz as a user-configurable option, much the way the MacBook Pro was at 2.0 GHz upgradeable to 2.16 GHz.
With SPEC benchmarks showing The 3.0 GHz Woodcrest as the absolute fastest processor on the market for both floating point and integer (it has a 50% lead over the second-place integer chip!) it's a good bet Apple will offer it, at least as an option.
I'm actually truly excited about a processor launch. The last time was the G5 intro. (Before that, it was the original PowerPC introduction.)
I have a feeling if 2.66 is the top-end 'stock' model, it will be upgradeable to 3.0 GHz as a user-configurable option, much the way the MacBook Pro was at 2.0 GHz upgradeable to 2.16 GHz.
With SPEC benchmarks showing The 3.0 GHz Woodcrest as the absolute fastest processor on the market for both floating point and integer (it has a 50% lead over the second-place integer chip!) it's a good bet Apple will offer it, at least as an option.
I'm actually truly excited about a processor launch. The last time was the G5 intro. (Before that, it was the original PowerPC introduction.)
Evangelion
Apr 8, 05:03 AM
[B]Until Apple can get more of its own stores it needs BB more than BB needs it. So I doubt Apple went all hurt or p.o.'d girlfriend on them.
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
YoGramMamma
Apr 6, 03:02 AM
I've posted several predictions over the past few months throughout this tread at Cinema5D:
http://cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=25464
Dude I took the time to read that entire post on cinema5d and I have to tip my hat to you. You have clearly thought this out. Hopefully someone at apple saw this post and is making notes! IMO (and clearly in yours) this is very much what apple needs to do. This content store idea is brilliant, makes apple more bucks, and allows content creators a way to make money on the selling end, and benefit from well made content on the receiving end. It turns videographers and photographers and motion graphic designers into "developers" ... Just without the need to know objective-C. I like it a lot. Have you tried submitting these ideas to Apple?
The idea of downloading just the core objects and have all the other stuff being in-app purchases is also brilliant and tying everything to your appleID too, since it'd let you legally install stuff on up tot 5 machines. Why I use up almost 60gb of stuff for "soundtrack loops and Dolby surround files" is beyond me.
Also this alleviates the whole final cut express/pro distinction. Essentially, fce is just fcp without any of the extra apps / plugins downloaded.
http://cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=25464
Dude I took the time to read that entire post on cinema5d and I have to tip my hat to you. You have clearly thought this out. Hopefully someone at apple saw this post and is making notes! IMO (and clearly in yours) this is very much what apple needs to do. This content store idea is brilliant, makes apple more bucks, and allows content creators a way to make money on the selling end, and benefit from well made content on the receiving end. It turns videographers and photographers and motion graphic designers into "developers" ... Just without the need to know objective-C. I like it a lot. Have you tried submitting these ideas to Apple?
The idea of downloading just the core objects and have all the other stuff being in-app purchases is also brilliant and tying everything to your appleID too, since it'd let you legally install stuff on up tot 5 machines. Why I use up almost 60gb of stuff for "soundtrack loops and Dolby surround files" is beyond me.
Also this alleviates the whole final cut express/pro distinction. Essentially, fce is just fcp without any of the extra apps / plugins downloaded.
manu chao
Apr 25, 02:00 PM
... sorry, but in what ways do I benefit by having apple track my whereabouts to the day and meter? why isn't there an opt-in (apart from the general 'eat **** or die' TOU) or at least an opt-out for this? why is it so easy to access the data?
And any cellular provider is tracking and storing your whereabouts equally.
The difference is that MSP might storing this for billing purposes or even because it is mandated by law (for use by law enforcement). If Apple has no need for these data (which they do not have if they are not transmitted to them), they should not store them.
And any cellular provider is tracking and storing your whereabouts equally.
The difference is that MSP might storing this for billing purposes or even because it is mandated by law (for use by law enforcement). If Apple has no need for these data (which they do not have if they are not transmitted to them), they should not store them.
ssk2
Mar 22, 03:28 PM
I know I haven't been on this forum for as long as some, but this topic again proves why I'm often dissuaded from posting more regularly.
The constant foot-stomping, ridiculing without even trying, 'my Dad-is-better-than-your-Dad' attitude towards other manufacturers, the list is ongoing. How can any of us write off the Playbook or the Samsung tablet without even trying them? Yes, they are second and third to the market, but then so was Apple with the first iteration of its smartphone. Now look where we are.
The iPad two does have some shortcomings, few of which are worth going to to here. However, the OS of these devices IS crucial and we are beginning to see iOS creaking slightly. In terms of looks and notifications, for me, Apple is lagging. I like how the Playbook looks and potentially, should operate. Will I make a snap judgement? No. I'll try the damn thing first before making a judgement.
Do I see these tablets wiping out the iPad? Not a chance. Not in a million years. Do I see future versions of the Playbook and Samsung tabs wiping out the iPad? Perhaps, who can say. Mobile computing and tablets are here to stay now - saying and believing that the iPad will remain as dominant is pure wishful thinking from the more fanboy-minded of us.
The constant foot-stomping, ridiculing without even trying, 'my Dad-is-better-than-your-Dad' attitude towards other manufacturers, the list is ongoing. How can any of us write off the Playbook or the Samsung tablet without even trying them? Yes, they are second and third to the market, but then so was Apple with the first iteration of its smartphone. Now look where we are.
The iPad two does have some shortcomings, few of which are worth going to to here. However, the OS of these devices IS crucial and we are beginning to see iOS creaking slightly. In terms of looks and notifications, for me, Apple is lagging. I like how the Playbook looks and potentially, should operate. Will I make a snap judgement? No. I'll try the damn thing first before making a judgement.
Do I see these tablets wiping out the iPad? Not a chance. Not in a million years. Do I see future versions of the Playbook and Samsung tabs wiping out the iPad? Perhaps, who can say. Mobile computing and tablets are here to stay now - saying and believing that the iPad will remain as dominant is pure wishful thinking from the more fanboy-minded of us.
fivepoint
Apr 28, 03:50 PM
I wonder what it would be like to go through life looking for racism around every corner? Constantly seeing the world in these glasses would have to be very tiresome and frustrating. Pretty sad really. People need to stop thinking about themselves and others as being members of groups, and start thinking of everyone as individuals. We're a society of individuals, we get our rights and our liberties as individuals, not because we're part of group A or group B.
If liberals would stop 'crying wolf' ('claiming racism') at every corner, we might actually take them seriously and help out when there's actual evidence.
If liberals would stop 'crying wolf' ('claiming racism') at every corner, we might actually take them seriously and help out when there's actual evidence.
3CCD
Aug 5, 08:28 PM
Microsoft execs have already gone on record recently saying that the rescheduled schedule for the revised schedule for scheduling the release of Vista now has a 20% chance of slipping.
The way thats written cracks me up, not sure if you were being funny or not with a sense of sarcasm (nothing against you). It just makes me think of how great Apple is.
The way thats written cracks me up, not sure if you were being funny or not with a sense of sarcasm (nothing against you). It just makes me think of how great Apple is.
Ladybug
Aug 7, 06:28 PM
If you were picking on Mail.app's Stationery I'd probably agree with you.
None of the things that Time Machine have been compared to seem even close to what they are planning to do. Including my own VMS file versioning analogies. System Restore is not capable of restoring a single file, and particularly not within a running application. It seems kind of more like a system wide undo function when it comes to files...
B
Norton's GoBack, which was purchased from some other company, has a similar feature for restoring single files. This isn't quite the same thing, but the whole concept isn't entirely new. GoBack was introduced well before Microsoft came out with System Restore... That said, I think its a great feature to include and I'm sure I'll find many uses for it.
None of the things that Time Machine have been compared to seem even close to what they are planning to do. Including my own VMS file versioning analogies. System Restore is not capable of restoring a single file, and particularly not within a running application. It seems kind of more like a system wide undo function when it comes to files...
B
Norton's GoBack, which was purchased from some other company, has a similar feature for restoring single files. This isn't quite the same thing, but the whole concept isn't entirely new. GoBack was introduced well before Microsoft came out with System Restore... That said, I think its a great feature to include and I'm sure I'll find many uses for it.
Dicx
Nov 28, 07:55 PM
Was trying for a long time to find this article:
http://db.tidbits.com/article/8751
A good story of how Microsoft got screwed into paying the $1. Long story short, because of them not controlling a market for once and not having the largest publisher of music to get tunes from, Universal held MS's feet to the fire and said pay up or forget it.
Good read nonetheless.
http://db.tidbits.com/article/8751
A good story of how Microsoft got screwed into paying the $1. Long story short, because of them not controlling a market for once and not having the largest publisher of music to get tunes from, Universal held MS's feet to the fire and said pay up or forget it.
Good read nonetheless.
Bill Gates
Aug 6, 01:53 PM
Domain Name: MAC-PRO.COM
Princess Diana#39;s Wedding Dress
princess diana wedding dress
princess diana wedding gown
princess diana wedding dress
princess diana wedding gown.
princess diana wedding dress
for Princess Diana Wedding
QCassidy352
Apr 6, 11:58 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)
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
It would be about as fast. The IGP is 150MHz slower though so graphics wise it would be slightly slower. chrmjenkins explained some smaller details but in terms of performance, i7-2649M should be similar to i5-2520M.
Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.
This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.
Remember that those are numbers under Windows. Anand mentioned in his 2011 MBP review that Intel HD 3000 has brilliant drivers in OS X, and in general it beat the 320M in OS X too. In Windows it got badly beaten by 320M. Sure the LV and especially ULV IGP will be slower than 320M, even in OS X but it may not be as bad as 50% drop.
True. But here's the thing. Apple generally updates these about one a year. With such a slow upgrade cycle, you'd like to see significant improvement on each update. To stay the same would be pretty mediocre. To actually move backwards is just sad.
And yes, I realize options are limited here by the spat between intel and nvidea and by the size of the air (not enough room for a big dedicated card). So I don't know what the right answer is. All I know is I won't be tempted by an upgrade to CPU when it comes with a gpu downgrade.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
It would be about as fast. The IGP is 150MHz slower though so graphics wise it would be slightly slower. chrmjenkins explained some smaller details but in terms of performance, i7-2649M should be similar to i5-2520M.
Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.
This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.
Remember that those are numbers under Windows. Anand mentioned in his 2011 MBP review that Intel HD 3000 has brilliant drivers in OS X, and in general it beat the 320M in OS X too. In Windows it got badly beaten by 320M. Sure the LV and especially ULV IGP will be slower than 320M, even in OS X but it may not be as bad as 50% drop.
True. But here's the thing. Apple generally updates these about one a year. With such a slow upgrade cycle, you'd like to see significant improvement on each update. To stay the same would be pretty mediocre. To actually move backwards is just sad.
And yes, I realize options are limited here by the spat between intel and nvidea and by the size of the air (not enough room for a big dedicated card). So I don't know what the right answer is. All I know is I won't be tempted by an upgrade to CPU when it comes with a gpu downgrade.
slackpacker
Apr 12, 09:25 AM
Naw, memory too. There's probably a lot I left out, it was just a quick list off the top of my head.
64bit will just expand memory access it does not have anything to do with being multiprocessor aware.
64bit will just expand memory access it does not have anything to do with being multiprocessor aware.
sgibson
Mar 31, 02:38 PM
You keep using that word� (http://cl.ly/0X032o272d2a3G1T1K3D)
mcrain
Apr 27, 02:46 PM
Are you calling me a liar? I literally went to WhiteHouse.gov, opened the file in Illustrator, and moved the text around myself. :rolleyes:
Some things never change. Laughably bias.
Anyway, like I said, I'm sure there's an explanation... are there any graphic designers here who can help?
Is there an explanation for why it matters to you and all the birthers who buy into this nonsense? I'd love to know which right-wing website had instructions for birthers wanting to "test" the image in Illustrator. It's pretty obvious you were following some fringe-website instructions. I highly doubt you just "happened" to open it in Illustrator and then do whatever. I mean, you aren't a graphic designer.
Some things never change. Laughably bias.
Anyway, like I said, I'm sure there's an explanation... are there any graphic designers here who can help?
Is there an explanation for why it matters to you and all the birthers who buy into this nonsense? I'd love to know which right-wing website had instructions for birthers wanting to "test" the image in Illustrator. It's pretty obvious you were following some fringe-website instructions. I highly doubt you just "happened" to open it in Illustrator and then do whatever. I mean, you aren't a graphic designer.
mactoday
Apr 6, 11:02 AM
I might not expect IPS, doesn’t it draw more power than TN LCDs?
I don't think you'll see IPS screens in MacBook Pro's or Air in the future.
Apple is working on the mass market now and mass market don't care about quality of the screens specially on the portables.
If you need colors and better screen then Apple will sale you "****ing glossy amazing" 27" display. :)
I don't think you'll see IPS screens in MacBook Pro's or Air in the future.
Apple is working on the mass market now and mass market don't care about quality of the screens specially on the portables.
If you need colors and better screen then Apple will sale you "****ing glossy amazing" 27" display. :)
Popeye206
Apr 11, 02:26 PM
That's why god created the internet.......:D
Yeah.... but it sure is fun to go to the Mall and see all the stores with just a few shoppers each until you hit the Apple store which is almost always packed with people. :)
Yeah.... but it sure is fun to go to the Mall and see all the stores with just a few shoppers each until you hit the Apple store which is almost always packed with people. :)
blahblah100
Mar 31, 05:51 PM
I used to have a friend who would spend days tweaking the LINUX OS code so that his browser would look super duper cool.
How many people like that do you know?
Really? I would have thought he would have tweaked the code to the actual browser.
How many people like that do you know?
Really? I would have thought he would have tweaked the code to the actual browser.
8CoreWhore
Mar 26, 03:33 AM
The Initial Golden Master Sorta Kinda pre Platinum - Maybe Version. :cool:
nerveosu
Aug 7, 04:23 PM
It says somewhere on the apple web site that macs with G3s will be supported with Leopard.. any word on specific computers that will be supported? I have a iMac DV 400 G3 that I am curious about.
aimbdd
Apr 7, 11:06 PM
Just like nikon pulled their d7000 from best buy? :P
Accept they were pulled for selling them early.
Not that i minded getting it 3 days early :D
Accept they were pulled for selling them early.
Not that i minded getting it 3 days early :D
janstett
Aug 19, 07:48 AM
I have a question about dual monitor support on the Mac Pro...
Right now my main desktop is a 3.6 GHz Pentium D Xtreme (codename Smithfield, 2 cores w/ Hyperthreading, looks like 4 cores) running XP Media Center. A very capable machine, but I'm on the verge of getting a 3 GHz Mac Pro (stripped so I can mitigate the financial damage). I want the ATI Radeon display card.
I have two displays, the 2nd of which is rotated 90 degrees (portrait mode) so it's the perfect size for editing documents or reading long articles. Can I rotate the 2nd display 90 degrees like I can in Windows?
Right now my main desktop is a 3.6 GHz Pentium D Xtreme (codename Smithfield, 2 cores w/ Hyperthreading, looks like 4 cores) running XP Media Center. A very capable machine, but I'm on the verge of getting a 3 GHz Mac Pro (stripped so I can mitigate the financial damage). I want the ATI Radeon display card.
I have two displays, the 2nd of which is rotated 90 degrees (portrait mode) so it's the perfect size for editing documents or reading long articles. Can I rotate the 2nd display 90 degrees like I can in Windows?
MattInOz
Apr 5, 09:31 PM
I doubt Apple will ship a new version of FCP before they ship lion, there are simply no real video editor APIs in Snow Leopard that are capable of 64 bit, QT Kit is a joke.
HOWEVER, according to the developer page for Lion there will be a brand new A/V API in Lion that will be 64 bit and FCP will most likely be written in that.
I guess they could back port the entire API to Snow Leopard, but I wouldn't count on it.
There is little to no technical reason the new framework couldn't run on Snow Leopard as a private API embedded with the final cut release. If the framework you mean is AV Foundation then they don't need to backport it all. It's Not a "New" API it's been running on the iOS branch of OSX for a few years now. So Snow Leopard shouldn't be much of an issue, it's just a matter of tying it in to GCD and the other low level fun stuff SL brought online. It doesn't sound like there is anything in Lion that will mean it will work different at those low levels to stop it working.
Remember Apple owns both the OS and FCP. The low level video boffins at Apple seem to have been working all along to get the framework read for this release. The suggestion that in a company as small as Apple that a team developed the AV foundation without the FCP people knowing about it till the last minute is kind of ridiculous.
HOWEVER, according to the developer page for Lion there will be a brand new A/V API in Lion that will be 64 bit and FCP will most likely be written in that.
I guess they could back port the entire API to Snow Leopard, but I wouldn't count on it.
There is little to no technical reason the new framework couldn't run on Snow Leopard as a private API embedded with the final cut release. If the framework you mean is AV Foundation then they don't need to backport it all. It's Not a "New" API it's been running on the iOS branch of OSX for a few years now. So Snow Leopard shouldn't be much of an issue, it's just a matter of tying it in to GCD and the other low level fun stuff SL brought online. It doesn't sound like there is anything in Lion that will mean it will work different at those low levels to stop it working.
Remember Apple owns both the OS and FCP. The low level video boffins at Apple seem to have been working all along to get the framework read for this release. The suggestion that in a company as small as Apple that a team developed the AV foundation without the FCP people knowing about it till the last minute is kind of ridiculous.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder