kcmac
Apr 10, 10:34 AM
Oh boo hoo about the companies being "booted" from sponsorships. The company I work for goes to trade shows. The time invested is actually quite small and most of the materials are in inventory anyway. The presentations are usually based on the same script. I bet the companies aren't that disappointed. In fact they would like to be there and see what Apple is up to more than anyone else. So I bet they'll send the same presenter staff there to view and record anything of note to send back to their company.
Businesses deal with things by contract and those contracts have terms and conditions. No company would just break a contract so I'm sure everything wad handled quite smoothly behind the scenes. So I think this idea that Apple bullied or pushed people is silly.
There are a few times I have made presentations at a conference when I would have loved to have let someone takeover the podium!
Businesses deal with things by contract and those contracts have terms and conditions. No company would just break a contract so I'm sure everything wad handled quite smoothly behind the scenes. So I think this idea that Apple bullied or pushed people is silly.
There are a few times I have made presentations at a conference when I would have loved to have let someone takeover the podium!
BrentT
Jun 14, 08:55 PM
My local RS said they were on a conference call at 5:30 pm EST for the latest info. He said they will take preorders at 1 pm on 6/15 BUT that is only taking a name and number, it is not a reservation or guarantee of a phone on the 24th. He had no idea how many phones they will actually receive. I don't think I will bother signing up.
One question I forgot to ask is if they will still buy my 3G phone? He earlier told me there would be a $100 floor for trade-ins from 6/24 to 7/24 but I don't know if that requires a phone purchase too.
One question I forgot to ask is if they will still buy my 3G phone? He earlier told me there would be a $100 floor for trade-ins from 6/24 to 7/24 but I don't know if that requires a phone purchase too.
Multimedia
Aug 18, 08:53 AM
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/mac%20pro_081406100848/12798.png
I think this speaks for itself.
When I'm working on one project, that's all my attention to it. When I'd like to encode it, I'd like my however many cores to be at full blast. Sadly, that's not happening at the moment and will remain so until they rewrite h264 encoding.
Like I said, unless people are doing what you do (sending multiple files to be encoded at the same time all the time) they won't benefit from 4, 8, 100 cores.
Now if anyone can show benchmarks that show FCP being 40-50% faster on a quad than on a dual when working on a project, I'll shut up :)That chart speaks for NOTHING. Comparing a Mac Pro to old 2004 single core Dual G5 PowerMacs is a completely irrelevant and spurious "test". This entire review is flawed by the missing Quad G5. BTW I don't use H.264 at all ever.
I think this speaks for itself.
When I'm working on one project, that's all my attention to it. When I'd like to encode it, I'd like my however many cores to be at full blast. Sadly, that's not happening at the moment and will remain so until they rewrite h264 encoding.
Like I said, unless people are doing what you do (sending multiple files to be encoded at the same time all the time) they won't benefit from 4, 8, 100 cores.
Now if anyone can show benchmarks that show FCP being 40-50% faster on a quad than on a dual when working on a project, I'll shut up :)That chart speaks for NOTHING. Comparing a Mac Pro to old 2004 single core Dual G5 PowerMacs is a completely irrelevant and spurious "test". This entire review is flawed by the missing Quad G5. BTW I don't use H.264 at all ever.
Unspeaked
Sep 19, 10:56 AM
Just make a box on the front page that has a picture of a MBP and let it say "the fastest just got faster" or something.
The fastest?
If that were the case, no one here would be complaining...
The fastest?
If that were the case, no one here would be complaining...
aiqw9182
Apr 10, 12:40 AM
Hoping for some better multi-core support(although probably going to have to wait for Lion for the newer QuickTime engine) and a UI that isn't from the 90's:
http://www.candlerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/03_ambit_fullscreen-300x232.jpg
^ Final Cut on Mac OS 9
Final Cut on Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard:
http://adobe-discount.com/product_images/o/apple_final_cut_express_hd_4__90390.jpg
Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
http://www.candlerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/03_ambit_fullscreen-300x232.jpg
^ Final Cut on Mac OS 9
Final Cut on Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard:
http://adobe-discount.com/product_images/o/apple_final_cut_express_hd_4__90390.jpg
Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
SPUY767
Aug 17, 10:48 AM
I would have thought that the Final Cut Pro benchmark would have really blown away the G5 - not so much, right?
Awesome on FileMaker and I can't wait to see how this stuff runs Adobe PS Natively.
The vague manner in which they described the test, it seems like this may have been more of an I/O problem than a processing one. Can't say for sure.
Awesome on FileMaker and I can't wait to see how this stuff runs Adobe PS Natively.
The vague manner in which they described the test, it seems like this may have been more of an I/O problem than a processing one. Can't say for sure.
Multimedia
Jul 21, 01:51 PM
Yes, with the possibility of a Mac Pro with 8 core on the horizon, it makes sense to skip the 4 core altogether. Or, start with lower end of 4 cores (say 2GHz) and then, if necessary and possible, upgrade it to 8 cores. I wonder if waiting for 8 cores is going to be a common sentiment. In that case, it would make sense for Apple to offer an upgrade path to it.There may be unknown variables supporting 8 cores from 4 such that I would not want to take that path. I would rather have 8 cores on a new motherboard with faster ram etc supported to get the most out of all of them at newer faster speeds.
faroZ06
Apr 27, 08:50 AM
I miss the old Apple where they didn't care if idiots complained. Between changing the bars after the antenna issue, ( all they really did is change the bars to not show a big drop when there was a big drop in reception, as AT&T suggested,) and now nerfing location services DB they just seem to be giving in to idiocracy.
And Tea Party members :D
And Tea Party members :D
DJMastaWes
Aug 26, 08:29 PM
Updated Wesbite Is Usually by 9 Eastern. Occasionally later. But usually then. :)
Eastern? That's 6:00AM Pacific? You think?
9:00AM Pacific sounds good.
Eastern? That's 6:00AM Pacific? You think?
9:00AM Pacific sounds good.
Macnoviz
Jul 22, 03:03 AM
So I read in this thread that Kentsfield and Clovertown ARE compatible with Conroe and Woodcrest sockets (respectively) (Cloverton or Clovertown?)
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
nagromme
Aug 7, 03:21 PM
Wow! :eek:
It's amazing how Apple keeps managing BIG updates to OS X. They are moving forward so much more efficiently than Microsoft. Not just polishing little things, but big, useful things. Not to mention some fun ones to attract consumers. I hope the advanced Spotlight features include easy boolean searching.
And now we can all wonder about those OTHER features Steve said they are concealing for now so Microsoft can't make a halfway copy (or attempt to) yet again.
I'm surprised res-independent UI was not discussed, but Apple has already said (http://developer.apple.com/releasenotes/GraphicsImaging/ResolutionIndependentUI.html) that is coming, so maybe it's just not polished enough to bother showing yet. (Or maybe it's better to show when new displays come out? Today's new low prices on Cinema Displays might hint at new displays to come later.)
I've been asking for that background-change effect in iChat for years! Adobe Premiere could do that in the 90s, though not in realtime. Too cool!
Now one question... A new Front Row has been mentioned, but what will it have? PVR, tuner-ready for future Macs or peripherals? At first I also wondered about ["from across the room or across the house"... But I bet they're just talking about sharing iTunes or photos from another Mac, which is old news.
PS, congrats to MR's servers for handling the load :)
It's amazing how Apple keeps managing BIG updates to OS X. They are moving forward so much more efficiently than Microsoft. Not just polishing little things, but big, useful things. Not to mention some fun ones to attract consumers. I hope the advanced Spotlight features include easy boolean searching.
And now we can all wonder about those OTHER features Steve said they are concealing for now so Microsoft can't make a halfway copy (or attempt to) yet again.
I'm surprised res-independent UI was not discussed, but Apple has already said (http://developer.apple.com/releasenotes/GraphicsImaging/ResolutionIndependentUI.html) that is coming, so maybe it's just not polished enough to bother showing yet. (Or maybe it's better to show when new displays come out? Today's new low prices on Cinema Displays might hint at new displays to come later.)
I've been asking for that background-change effect in iChat for years! Adobe Premiere could do that in the 90s, though not in realtime. Too cool!
Now one question... A new Front Row has been mentioned, but what will it have? PVR, tuner-ready for future Macs or peripherals? At first I also wondered about ["from across the room or across the house"... But I bet they're just talking about sharing iTunes or photos from another Mac, which is old news.
PS, congrats to MR's servers for handling the load :)
chubad
Aug 11, 07:37 PM
If Apple makes a phone, I will order one on the spot. If the interface is as well thought out and simple as the iPod, then it will be a smash hit.:D
Huntn
Apr 28, 09:58 AM
Imagine that, three responses which utterly fail to refute let alone dispute my clear and truthful argument. Instead, they leave snide remarks. No substance WHATSOEVER. :)
You accuse every 'liberal' in this forum of being blinded by their bias. I suppose all of the 'conservatives' see clearly and are willing to consider all reasonable alternatives. Lol. And then the debate becomes what is reasonable? :p
If you are unwilling to admit there is a racial aspect to some of the attacks on Obama who is being blind? There is no other President in the history of the U.S. who has been asked for so much proof of citizenship.
You accuse every 'liberal' in this forum of being blinded by their bias. I suppose all of the 'conservatives' see clearly and are willing to consider all reasonable alternatives. Lol. And then the debate becomes what is reasonable? :p
If you are unwilling to admit there is a racial aspect to some of the attacks on Obama who is being blind? There is no other President in the history of the U.S. who has been asked for so much proof of citizenship.
Superdrive
Nov 28, 07:05 PM
Make quality music and I'll buy it.
Perhaps my iPod doesn't even play Universal's music. Why should they get a chunk? Greedy bastards. Apple should just go ahead and open up the iTMS to artists and eliminate the middle man.
Perhaps my iPod doesn't even play Universal's music. Why should they get a chunk? Greedy bastards. Apple should just go ahead and open up the iTMS to artists and eliminate the middle man.
extraextra
Aug 26, 09:24 PM
The update time for Apple's store is 9am EST? I was under the impression that it was 9am PST. I'm behind the times! (pun intended, I suppose)
Is the 7-10 days for BTO iMacs? Or stock ones?
Is the 7-10 days for BTO iMacs? Or stock ones?
Ahheck01
Apr 12, 08:35 AM
What time do we expect an annoucement today? Any live feeds out there on NAB?
akac
Mar 26, 09:40 PM
Details found here :
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Apple-removes-Samba-from-Mac-OS-X-10-7-Server-1215179.html
Gist of it :
- less features than Samba
- no more Active Directory Services
- Just file sharing now.
Samba developers have also noted that the true motive behind this move might not be the GPLv3 per say, but a more global move away from the GPL. Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Anyway, Samba v4 could have given them all the "features" they implemented and much more. Their own in-house version won't necessarily be better just because it's written by Apple. The Samba team does a great job with what Microsoft puts out as documentation (if you can even call it that).
Note that from the article, this change only impacts OS X Server. The client was already an in-house solution.
Although from my understanding from people using this today, the Apple implementation is dramatically faster than the Samba implementation. Just like WebKit started from KHTML and had fewer features than Mozilla, its ended up being the best browser engine out there. Leaner. Meaner. Faster. But it took time. Apple's SMB/CIFS implementation is going the same route. Now I've read elsewhere that it DOES support Active Directory. And elsewhere that it doesn't. The Preview version of Lion was 2 months old by the time devs got it, so its also possible that those reports are all just wrong in as far as what works and what is supposed to work (i.e. it may support AD, but bugs cause it not to work well or at all on some installs).
You will be foolish to wait around unless you want to get buried in the on-slaught of new and improved apps to take advantage of Lion from day one.
Exactly. I know of at least one major app right now that is going to go Lion only...
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
You just gave the perfect answer. Using a VM. Run SL in a VM for Rosetta apps :)
It's needed for me.
Look, Rosetta isn't a part of OS X by default. If it is installed, then it is needed by the user, and thus isn't "crap." If the user doesn't need it, it won't be installed. For most users, it will be "cut out." I don't see why having the option there for people who need it stifles progress.
Actually its not a small piece. Its a big piece. EVERY OS X Library has to be provided in PowerPC code as well as x86. So Rosetta itself, by itself is tiny. But all the extra libraries that make up OS X is huge. And that's why its cut out.
In SL, it shipped with all the libraries, but not the Rosetta piece. So it was a simple install of just the Rosetta piece.
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Apple-removes-Samba-from-Mac-OS-X-10-7-Server-1215179.html
Gist of it :
- less features than Samba
- no more Active Directory Services
- Just file sharing now.
Samba developers have also noted that the true motive behind this move might not be the GPLv3 per say, but a more global move away from the GPL. Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Anyway, Samba v4 could have given them all the "features" they implemented and much more. Their own in-house version won't necessarily be better just because it's written by Apple. The Samba team does a great job with what Microsoft puts out as documentation (if you can even call it that).
Note that from the article, this change only impacts OS X Server. The client was already an in-house solution.
Although from my understanding from people using this today, the Apple implementation is dramatically faster than the Samba implementation. Just like WebKit started from KHTML and had fewer features than Mozilla, its ended up being the best browser engine out there. Leaner. Meaner. Faster. But it took time. Apple's SMB/CIFS implementation is going the same route. Now I've read elsewhere that it DOES support Active Directory. And elsewhere that it doesn't. The Preview version of Lion was 2 months old by the time devs got it, so its also possible that those reports are all just wrong in as far as what works and what is supposed to work (i.e. it may support AD, but bugs cause it not to work well or at all on some installs).
You will be foolish to wait around unless you want to get buried in the on-slaught of new and improved apps to take advantage of Lion from day one.
Exactly. I know of at least one major app right now that is going to go Lion only...
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
You just gave the perfect answer. Using a VM. Run SL in a VM for Rosetta apps :)
It's needed for me.
Look, Rosetta isn't a part of OS X by default. If it is installed, then it is needed by the user, and thus isn't "crap." If the user doesn't need it, it won't be installed. For most users, it will be "cut out." I don't see why having the option there for people who need it stifles progress.
Actually its not a small piece. Its a big piece. EVERY OS X Library has to be provided in PowerPC code as well as x86. So Rosetta itself, by itself is tiny. But all the extra libraries that make up OS X is huge. And that's why its cut out.
In SL, it shipped with all the libraries, but not the Rosetta piece. So it was a simple install of just the Rosetta piece.
Jamieserg
Apr 5, 05:16 PM
I'm not trolling, this is an honest question. But isn't a Final Cut pretty much worthless for commercial use without a way to put the results on Blu-Ray?
canon rebel xsi.
MovieCutter
Aug 15, 11:42 AM
Still waiting for game benchmarks...
technicolor
Sep 19, 08:49 PM
DailyTech (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4217) has a mention of the Core 2 Quadro processors.
Pricing mentioned was a little lower than I expected, but it's processors in the Conroe line rather than the Xeon. Having said that, the 3GHz Xeon is slightly cheaper than the 2.93GHz Conroe.
As expected, the highest rated speed mentioned is 2.67Ghz. This intel crap updates far too frequently...ugh
:mad:
Pricing mentioned was a little lower than I expected, but it's processors in the Conroe line rather than the Xeon. Having said that, the 3GHz Xeon is slightly cheaper than the 2.93GHz Conroe.
As expected, the highest rated speed mentioned is 2.67Ghz. This intel crap updates far too frequently...ugh
:mad:
ltcol266845
Aug 25, 07:41 PM
Im sorry, but when you recall 1.8million batteries, and expect them not to get over laoded with call, your crazy. Dell is making some people wait nearly 70 days to get their replacement. Its a LOT of batteries. Affecting a LOT of users. These things happen.
NJRonbo
Jun 22, 09:05 AM
ugp,
Were there any PINS given in your store?
Please keep us updated. We look forward to it.
Thanks
Were there any PINS given in your store?
Please keep us updated. We look forward to it.
Thanks
GFLPraxis
Mar 31, 02:39 PM
You could say the same thing about Apple though. The Apple fad will go away and the extremely closed ecosystem which seems to not be really developing much in terms of UI or having an actual roadmap could end iOS.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
Wars are great for the economy. This IS a war. But we're the economy that benefits from it. And it doesn't have that "people dying" downside to traditional wars.
Yay for corporate wars, since the winner is us!
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
Wars are great for the economy. This IS a war. But we're the economy that benefits from it. And it doesn't have that "people dying" downside to traditional wars.
Yay for corporate wars, since the winner is us!
ksz
Sep 20, 07:44 PM
Jobs and Raskin were both proponents of that concept, and it lives in in some of the userbase.
I had the pleasure of meeting Jef Raskin at his home in Pacifica a year before he passed away. He loved to play musical instruments and performed a short recital on his piano. Later that evening, after showing his Apple I in a wooden box, he encouraged me to read his book The Humane Interface and let him know what I thought about it. Sadly, I wasn't able to do that in time. But the conversation we had made it clear that he was not a fan of Steve Jobs. They both had strong opinions on various aspects of UI design. Even though I rather like OS X, Raskin politely argued against the inefficiencies of that design.
It was some time ago and I don't remember all the details from that night, but Raskin, I think, was more scientific in his approach. He preferred to study user response rates, time-to-decision, amount of eye movement, amount of pointer movement, number of mouse clicks, and various other factors that might contribute to 'dead' or wasted time.
I had the pleasure of meeting Jef Raskin at his home in Pacifica a year before he passed away. He loved to play musical instruments and performed a short recital on his piano. Later that evening, after showing his Apple I in a wooden box, he encouraged me to read his book The Humane Interface and let him know what I thought about it. Sadly, I wasn't able to do that in time. But the conversation we had made it clear that he was not a fan of Steve Jobs. They both had strong opinions on various aspects of UI design. Even though I rather like OS X, Raskin politely argued against the inefficiencies of that design.
It was some time ago and I don't remember all the details from that night, but Raskin, I think, was more scientific in his approach. He preferred to study user response rates, time-to-decision, amount of eye movement, amount of pointer movement, number of mouse clicks, and various other factors that might contribute to 'dead' or wasted time.
No comments:
Post a Comment