Super Dave
Aug 7, 04:33 PM
I dont think the "Top Secret" stuff is really top secret. I think Apple needs some more time to develope a few things before releasing them out into the public. No reason to release buggy apps.
Remember, WWDC was pushed back this year. THey aren't done with Leopard just yet.
They certainly aren't done, but they're announcing it within the same length time frame as they did with Tiger if I recall.
I actually believed him on the "Top Secret" stuff. Every vista build changes, so it's good to not let too much out of the bag until Vista is either interface frozen or released.
David :cool:
Remember, WWDC was pushed back this year. THey aren't done with Leopard just yet.
They certainly aren't done, but they're announcing it within the same length time frame as they did with Tiger if I recall.
I actually believed him on the "Top Secret" stuff. Every vista build changes, so it's good to not let too much out of the bag until Vista is either interface frozen or released.
David :cool:
Multimedia
Sep 19, 11:29 AM
I missed you guys this morning. ;)
dernhelm
Aug 7, 03:48 PM
Hey nice to see osx will have system restore =D
YOU MUST BE KIDDING. Have you actually used System Restore to restore a single file? Oh that's right, you can't. All you can do it reset your system back to a point where the file existed.
This is MUCH more powerful, and more like something users would actually want.
System Restore is great for those times when you want to apply a system patch that could be iffy, and you are willing to "snap" a restore point, apply the patch, and roll back if something didn't fly.
But for the normal user, it is much more useless.
YOU MUST BE KIDDING. Have you actually used System Restore to restore a single file? Oh that's right, you can't. All you can do it reset your system back to a point where the file existed.
This is MUCH more powerful, and more like something users would actually want.
System Restore is great for those times when you want to apply a system patch that could be iffy, and you are willing to "snap" a restore point, apply the patch, and roll back if something didn't fly.
But for the normal user, it is much more useless.
ChickenSwartz
Aug 27, 08:24 AM
Not true.
Recent years, updates came right before the end of the promotion.
There is a strategic reason for this. Since there have been some issues with new Macs, this promotion will motivate some buyers not to wait. In the retail world waiting means there is a bigger chance the buyer will go else where (like to Dell or something). I am sure if you look at the profit on a Nano vs. a Mac you will see that if this promotion sells 1 Mac that wouldn't be sold without the promotion makes up for 5 or so Nanos that went with Macs that would have been sold anyway. This promotion is not cutting into Apple's profits; they are making more money off this.
Recent years, updates came right before the end of the promotion.
There is a strategic reason for this. Since there have been some issues with new Macs, this promotion will motivate some buyers not to wait. In the retail world waiting means there is a bigger chance the buyer will go else where (like to Dell or something). I am sure if you look at the profit on a Nano vs. a Mac you will see that if this promotion sells 1 Mac that wouldn't be sold without the promotion makes up for 5 or so Nanos that went with Macs that would have been sold anyway. This promotion is not cutting into Apple's profits; they are making more money off this.
akdj
Apr 6, 11:01 AM
Have any of you been able to use Sandy Bridge hardware h.264 on the MBP for your AVC files?
I understand that there is an issue with 24p (it's 24.000 hz not 23.976 hz as it should be) which will be corrected with Ivey Bridge, but 30p/60p/60i should work fine. I'm assuming that this feature will show up in Lion, but probably isn't yet supported in SL.
Yes...using the new MBP, 17" SB 2.2 with FCP. Works fine, regardless of frame rate...however, there are a gazillion different "flavors" of AVC and h.264. I shoot HVX/HPX/EX1 and Canon 5d2/7d cams...all either at 24p/30p/60p. And obviously not AVC...however, h.264 I have plenty of experience with... Never had an issue with ANY FR, and this MBP is zippy as hell! Comparable to my '08 Mac Pro 3ghz/8 core machine for times on rendering and compression and exporting. Love this machine and I'm anxiously awaiting the new iMac/Mac Pro updates. I almost bought the 2010 Mac Pro 12 core...but I wanted to wait out the FCP news this year, so held off. If my new MBP is indicative of the performance boost we can expect with the new Mac pro....regardless of whether they use Sandy or Ivy bridge....it's going to be a phenomenal improvement. Big. Huge. Step up!!!
A lot of pros have already left Mac, but I have been holding out. However, this is the last straw. If the new FCP disappoints I will be jumping ship, buying a high-end PC and switching to Avid or Premiere. I just can't stand the frustrations anymore of watching every consumer itoy get upgraded, and then the Pro stuff getting shafted.
The time is now. The new FCP had better have something equivalent to Mercury Playback, optimization for RED footage, different HD codecs, real-time playback, 64 bit, multi-core usage, etc. If it's a dumbed-down consumer product I will be absolutely livid.
This is Bowl *****!!! Come on man....I see these claims with absolutely NO, ZERO proof to back it up...Links? Pics? Video???? IF anything, MORE people have joined the FCP camp...because more people than EVER are buying Macs! Even though Adobe and Avid are cross platform, the affordability of FCP is a real bonus. Everyone I know that uses FCP and has been using FCP has ZERO interest in flipping. Unless you have an extreme PC...Adobe makes no sense (unless you are using the Quadro nVidia cards in a Mac Pro). Sure, the Merc engine increases performance for a few transitions and filters....but rendering is still necessary in MOST cases! Today's speed of the new Macs....MBP, iMacs, Mac Pros...makes the transition from AVC, XDCam, DVCPro, etc to Pro-Res, is actually a very speedy process. Even Canon stepped up last spring with a plug in to increase transcode speeds almost a 1,000% (used to take a minute or two to transform...now done in 10 seconds or less!!!). Once in Pro Res, editing is an absolute breeze...a cake walk, easy as pie:) Especially if you have a recent generation Mac from the last couple of years.
Now...that said, absolutely, I totally agree improvements can be made. As mentioned many times....media management and better integration between other programs in the suite. However, being a long time FCP user, I'm "used" to the export/share option and don't find it too difficult.
Motion is the program I would like to see take a big step forward. I am also a heavy Adobe user and have the entire CS5 Production bundle...but NOT for Premier...I solely use PhotoShop and After Effects. AE has been my go to animated title compositor. Motion, while decent...is certainly behind the eight ball in comparison to Avid and AE for these tasks.
However...most, if not ALL of the pros I know that have been using FCP continue to do so....and there are more motion pictures, BIG ones...this year, edited on FCP than I can remember in years past. Pulling this BS out of your arse is crap. The iToy phenomenon, in my very humble opinion will actually HELP the Pro Apps...as Apple is making more money than EVER!!! This will afford them the expertise they need to develop the pro apps...more so than they've ever been able to do in the past. Keep in mind...for these iToys to be great, they need content....and again, IMHO...I think Apple knows this, and would be happy if every app, movie, song, etc...that resides in iTunes, Mac Store, App Store, etc....was created WITH their soft/hardware as well. Again, just my opinion....Apple won't shoot themselves and the entire creative community in the foot....just when they've becoming the HIGHEST gaining computer sales platform in the world!!! They're selling more computers (MB, MBP, MBair, MP, iMacs) then EVER...and I attribute that somewhat to the excellent user experience so many folks have had with their "iToys". You gotta figure some of those folks will be "Pro" creative guys. And enticed they will be (my Yoda impersonation) by the hardware and software that Apple offers....so if anything, there is Growth in the Pro sector...hardware and software both. NOT a mass exodus. Again...if you truly have proof that "All those Pros have already left Mac"...I'm all ears. If anything, they've made significant gains. Hence the reason AVID has DECREASED their pricing from the astronomical rates it used to cost...and the proprietary rigs you had to have to run the program.
Sorry for the rant. But what you've stated is absolutely NOT true my friend. Period. And THAT is a fact! If you're deciding whether or not to stick with FCP, cool...fine to make that point. Don't make up BS about other "Pros" and their Post Workflow. Other than the BBC switching to Premier, I can think of NO other real, true professionals that have abandoned FCP because it's lacking. It's still a VERY powerful program. Getting older, several places to shine it up, but it still does the job and does it well.
J
I understand that there is an issue with 24p (it's 24.000 hz not 23.976 hz as it should be) which will be corrected with Ivey Bridge, but 30p/60p/60i should work fine. I'm assuming that this feature will show up in Lion, but probably isn't yet supported in SL.
Yes...using the new MBP, 17" SB 2.2 with FCP. Works fine, regardless of frame rate...however, there are a gazillion different "flavors" of AVC and h.264. I shoot HVX/HPX/EX1 and Canon 5d2/7d cams...all either at 24p/30p/60p. And obviously not AVC...however, h.264 I have plenty of experience with... Never had an issue with ANY FR, and this MBP is zippy as hell! Comparable to my '08 Mac Pro 3ghz/8 core machine for times on rendering and compression and exporting. Love this machine and I'm anxiously awaiting the new iMac/Mac Pro updates. I almost bought the 2010 Mac Pro 12 core...but I wanted to wait out the FCP news this year, so held off. If my new MBP is indicative of the performance boost we can expect with the new Mac pro....regardless of whether they use Sandy or Ivy bridge....it's going to be a phenomenal improvement. Big. Huge. Step up!!!
A lot of pros have already left Mac, but I have been holding out. However, this is the last straw. If the new FCP disappoints I will be jumping ship, buying a high-end PC and switching to Avid or Premiere. I just can't stand the frustrations anymore of watching every consumer itoy get upgraded, and then the Pro stuff getting shafted.
The time is now. The new FCP had better have something equivalent to Mercury Playback, optimization for RED footage, different HD codecs, real-time playback, 64 bit, multi-core usage, etc. If it's a dumbed-down consumer product I will be absolutely livid.
This is Bowl *****!!! Come on man....I see these claims with absolutely NO, ZERO proof to back it up...Links? Pics? Video???? IF anything, MORE people have joined the FCP camp...because more people than EVER are buying Macs! Even though Adobe and Avid are cross platform, the affordability of FCP is a real bonus. Everyone I know that uses FCP and has been using FCP has ZERO interest in flipping. Unless you have an extreme PC...Adobe makes no sense (unless you are using the Quadro nVidia cards in a Mac Pro). Sure, the Merc engine increases performance for a few transitions and filters....but rendering is still necessary in MOST cases! Today's speed of the new Macs....MBP, iMacs, Mac Pros...makes the transition from AVC, XDCam, DVCPro, etc to Pro-Res, is actually a very speedy process. Even Canon stepped up last spring with a plug in to increase transcode speeds almost a 1,000% (used to take a minute or two to transform...now done in 10 seconds or less!!!). Once in Pro Res, editing is an absolute breeze...a cake walk, easy as pie:) Especially if you have a recent generation Mac from the last couple of years.
Now...that said, absolutely, I totally agree improvements can be made. As mentioned many times....media management and better integration between other programs in the suite. However, being a long time FCP user, I'm "used" to the export/share option and don't find it too difficult.
Motion is the program I would like to see take a big step forward. I am also a heavy Adobe user and have the entire CS5 Production bundle...but NOT for Premier...I solely use PhotoShop and After Effects. AE has been my go to animated title compositor. Motion, while decent...is certainly behind the eight ball in comparison to Avid and AE for these tasks.
However...most, if not ALL of the pros I know that have been using FCP continue to do so....and there are more motion pictures, BIG ones...this year, edited on FCP than I can remember in years past. Pulling this BS out of your arse is crap. The iToy phenomenon, in my very humble opinion will actually HELP the Pro Apps...as Apple is making more money than EVER!!! This will afford them the expertise they need to develop the pro apps...more so than they've ever been able to do in the past. Keep in mind...for these iToys to be great, they need content....and again, IMHO...I think Apple knows this, and would be happy if every app, movie, song, etc...that resides in iTunes, Mac Store, App Store, etc....was created WITH their soft/hardware as well. Again, just my opinion....Apple won't shoot themselves and the entire creative community in the foot....just when they've becoming the HIGHEST gaining computer sales platform in the world!!! They're selling more computers (MB, MBP, MBair, MP, iMacs) then EVER...and I attribute that somewhat to the excellent user experience so many folks have had with their "iToys". You gotta figure some of those folks will be "Pro" creative guys. And enticed they will be (my Yoda impersonation) by the hardware and software that Apple offers....so if anything, there is Growth in the Pro sector...hardware and software both. NOT a mass exodus. Again...if you truly have proof that "All those Pros have already left Mac"...I'm all ears. If anything, they've made significant gains. Hence the reason AVID has DECREASED their pricing from the astronomical rates it used to cost...and the proprietary rigs you had to have to run the program.
Sorry for the rant. But what you've stated is absolutely NOT true my friend. Period. And THAT is a fact! If you're deciding whether or not to stick with FCP, cool...fine to make that point. Don't make up BS about other "Pros" and their Post Workflow. Other than the BBC switching to Premier, I can think of NO other real, true professionals that have abandoned FCP because it's lacking. It's still a VERY powerful program. Getting older, several places to shine it up, but it still does the job and does it well.
J
guzhogi
Jul 20, 10:07 AM
First of all, you assume that it is possible to make "one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores". I don't think it is possible to do this (at least not with the x86 architecture using today's technology.)
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
I remember hearing about how it is possible to make multiple cores act like one (Idon't remember where I heard this). Anyways, whether 8 cores acting separately or together like 1 big processor has an advantage depends on the program you use. If the program is multi-threaded, then the cores acting separately might have the advantage while single threaded apps will have an advantage if the cores are acting like one. However, many apps today won't see that much improvement either way (like a simple calculator, or solitare and word processing).
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
I remember hearing about how it is possible to make multiple cores act like one (Idon't remember where I heard this). Anyways, whether 8 cores acting separately or together like 1 big processor has an advantage depends on the program you use. If the program is multi-threaded, then the cores acting separately might have the advantage while single threaded apps will have an advantage if the cores are acting like one. However, many apps today won't see that much improvement either way (like a simple calculator, or solitare and word processing).
Benjy91
Mar 31, 02:30 PM
Lol, the fragmentation that "doesnt exist".
I knew it would bite them in the ass someday.
I knew it would bite them in the ass someday.
realitymonkey
Apr 6, 06:52 AM
Hmm we have a Blu Ray burner in our duplication bay in 3 years and approx 1500 hrs of Broadcast HD TV it has only been used so editors can take home personal projects to screen them.
Really do not see the need for Blu Ray at all there are so many other better suited formats.
Really do not see the need for Blu Ray at all there are so many other better suited formats.
Prom1
Aug 6, 03:28 AM
My Predictions:
Mac Pro:
-Fastest pro Mac ever shipped
-Hard drives, BTO 750gb, perpendicular recording
-New displays with HDMI, iSight & IR, even brighter
-Wireless-WiMax or 802.11n-whatever's ready first, otherwise BT 2.0+EDR, AE
-Multiple graphics card in a SLI/Crossfire like mode for extremely powerful graphics and stereo 3D, Quadro FX5500 and maybe also first Mac to be supported by the new Quadro Plex. 256MB std, 512MB BTO
-HD Audio
Isight on displays built-in but I only want that with higher resolution with Auto Focus ability.
> New displays with a thinner bezel around the LCD; higher contrast ratio 1200:1 minimum; denser pixel count, DLP technology with LEDs or with Zenon technology for the DLP; but more richer BLACK!
> BTO Bluetooth 2.0+EDR has been on the PowerBooks for at least 2 generations & on the MB+MBP!
> WiMax although sweet its long away; HUGE battery gobbler. 2 years minimum.
> I'd love for the MacBookPRO lineup to be more PRO with DUAL HDD configuration but without creating more heat.
> THe MBP should be equal in computing & graphical performance as the cheapest MacPro!
Mac Pro:
-Fastest pro Mac ever shipped
-Hard drives, BTO 750gb, perpendicular recording
-New displays with HDMI, iSight & IR, even brighter
-Wireless-WiMax or 802.11n-whatever's ready first, otherwise BT 2.0+EDR, AE
-Multiple graphics card in a SLI/Crossfire like mode for extremely powerful graphics and stereo 3D, Quadro FX5500 and maybe also first Mac to be supported by the new Quadro Plex. 256MB std, 512MB BTO
-HD Audio
Isight on displays built-in but I only want that with higher resolution with Auto Focus ability.
> New displays with a thinner bezel around the LCD; higher contrast ratio 1200:1 minimum; denser pixel count, DLP technology with LEDs or with Zenon technology for the DLP; but more richer BLACK!
> BTO Bluetooth 2.0+EDR has been on the PowerBooks for at least 2 generations & on the MB+MBP!
> WiMax although sweet its long away; HUGE battery gobbler. 2 years minimum.
> I'd love for the MacBookPRO lineup to be more PRO with DUAL HDD configuration but without creating more heat.
> THe MBP should be equal in computing & graphical performance as the cheapest MacPro!
Macaroony
Mar 5, 02:53 AM
I never said heterosexual people should stop having sex and produce children, I don't know where you got that from. Next time, please be more clear about who and what you're quoting and what your exact response is. Thank you.
Logic is such a rational thing. The world population is exponentially increasing. 50 years ago, the estimated number was at 6 billion, 10 years ago, it jumped the 7-billion mark and in 2050 they are predicting the world population to reach a staggering amount of 10 billion.
Society isn't going anywhere - no matter how many gays you have out there. Straight men will find dozens of fertile women to makes babies with - wanted and unwanted.
I recently saw a report about homeless children in India who aren't even recognized as citizens and are having tremendous problems getting by day by day. There should be programs that integrate these children into society and I'm certain that many gays are more willing to do so then straight people.
And next time, please give more than one-sentence answers, it is hard getting a deeper understanding of your world view and logic. After all, this is a forum and not Twitter.
Logic is such a rational thing. The world population is exponentially increasing. 50 years ago, the estimated number was at 6 billion, 10 years ago, it jumped the 7-billion mark and in 2050 they are predicting the world population to reach a staggering amount of 10 billion.
Society isn't going anywhere - no matter how many gays you have out there. Straight men will find dozens of fertile women to makes babies with - wanted and unwanted.
I recently saw a report about homeless children in India who aren't even recognized as citizens and are having tremendous problems getting by day by day. There should be programs that integrate these children into society and I'm certain that many gays are more willing to do so then straight people.
And next time, please give more than one-sentence answers, it is hard getting a deeper understanding of your world view and logic. After all, this is a forum and not Twitter.
THX1139
Jul 21, 04:56 PM
I've already got one. A SuperMac C500 to be precise! (Well, actually it's an Apus 2000, but in the US it was the C500).
SuperMac was the brandname UMAX used for thier Mac clones. Check out
http://home.earthlink.net/~supermac_insider/
:)
I'm just curious about your post. Why would anyone in their right mind maintain a website for a product/company that no longer exists? Seems like a big waste of time and resources. I can see doing something similar for archival purposes, but that link leads to a complete website that has the appearance that it is still active.
Some peoples choice of hobby boggles my mind.
SuperMac was the brandname UMAX used for thier Mac clones. Check out
http://home.earthlink.net/~supermac_insider/
:)
I'm just curious about your post. Why would anyone in their right mind maintain a website for a product/company that no longer exists? Seems like a big waste of time and resources. I can see doing something similar for archival purposes, but that link leads to a complete website that has the appearance that it is still active.
Some peoples choice of hobby boggles my mind.
smithrh
Apr 25, 01:43 PM
The Feds are bored.
I understand that you didn't read the article then.
It wasn't filed by the Feds.
I understand that you didn't read the article then.
It wasn't filed by the Feds.
nilk
Apr 6, 03:07 PM
For a programmer dealing with Terminal, Xcode, Netbeans, Eclipse, etc (not graphic intensive softwares), would this macbook air be a better deal than the 13/15" Macbook pro?
Anyone?
The main thing keeping me from wanting a MBA for software development is the 4GB RAM limit. If you're not running any virtual machines you'd probably do just fine with 4GB, but as soon as you need to run a Windows VM things will get painful (especially if you're running Visual Studio in it).
If could get a MBA with 8GB of RAM and Thunderbolt I would get it instead of a MBP for my next machine, at least if the MBP stays the way it is (16GB of RAM option on a MBP would change things for me; I'll take all the RAM I can get).
Edit: One minor thing to note is that the 13" MBA has the 13" MBP beat on screen resolution. That's completely silly considering the MBP updates came well after the MBA updates.
Anyone?
The main thing keeping me from wanting a MBA for software development is the 4GB RAM limit. If you're not running any virtual machines you'd probably do just fine with 4GB, but as soon as you need to run a Windows VM things will get painful (especially if you're running Visual Studio in it).
If could get a MBA with 8GB of RAM and Thunderbolt I would get it instead of a MBP for my next machine, at least if the MBP stays the way it is (16GB of RAM option on a MBP would change things for me; I'll take all the RAM I can get).
Edit: One minor thing to note is that the 13" MBA has the 13" MBP beat on screen resolution. That's completely silly considering the MBP updates came well after the MBA updates.
solvs
Aug 27, 12:37 AM
That $100 million that Apple just wasted on Creative could have meant new supercooled mobile G5's if it would have been pumped into IBM (Power.org).
Ha! $100 million wouldn't come close to even paying for 1 factory to be built, let alone continued costs. I would have loved more PPC machines, but it is what it is, and the new Intel chips are pretty good. At least better than the crappy P4s they're replacing. The G4/5s could have been great, but IBM and Moto/Freescale dropped the ball, and would have continued to do so unless Apple spent somewhere more in the billions, not millions. Maybe not even then. It sucks that quality has gone down as costs have, but such is the nature of the beast. Hopefully something comes of all the complaints, and Apple can get it's act together as well as further find a way to drive down costs without becoming like Dell. I just had to deal with Dell support, and let me tell you, it was not fun.
And for the record, they've been using the same somewhat standard PC parts for awhile now, minus their proprietary chipsets, which BTW are still proprietary.
Ha! $100 million wouldn't come close to even paying for 1 factory to be built, let alone continued costs. I would have loved more PPC machines, but it is what it is, and the new Intel chips are pretty good. At least better than the crappy P4s they're replacing. The G4/5s could have been great, but IBM and Moto/Freescale dropped the ball, and would have continued to do so unless Apple spent somewhere more in the billions, not millions. Maybe not even then. It sucks that quality has gone down as costs have, but such is the nature of the beast. Hopefully something comes of all the complaints, and Apple can get it's act together as well as further find a way to drive down costs without becoming like Dell. I just had to deal with Dell support, and let me tell you, it was not fun.
And for the record, they've been using the same somewhat standard PC parts for awhile now, minus their proprietary chipsets, which BTW are still proprietary.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 04:30 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
I'm not comparing it to system restore but to Volume Shadow Copy from Windows Server 2003. File-by-file snapshot by MS 3 years ago!
I think Time Machine looks and probably is good, but after having seen all the pictures of the banners at WWDC mocking Vista, I expected someting REALLY NEW, not just warmed up. If they can't show the super super secret new stuff yet, then they shouldn't have used those banners. I find that arrogant...
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
I'm not comparing it to system restore but to Volume Shadow Copy from Windows Server 2003. File-by-file snapshot by MS 3 years ago!
I think Time Machine looks and probably is good, but after having seen all the pictures of the banners at WWDC mocking Vista, I expected someting REALLY NEW, not just warmed up. If they can't show the super super secret new stuff yet, then they shouldn't have used those banners. I find that arrogant...
goobot
Apr 25, 01:42 PM
I dont understand how anyone would get the info from your phone.
*LTD*
Apr 6, 07:51 AM
Impossible.
Apple's no longer supposed to care about their Pro software.
This will never happen.
Apple's no longer supposed to care about their Pro software.
This will never happen.
RawBert
Apr 6, 02:10 PM
Apple doesn't need competition the way the PC me-too companies do. Apple has had its eye on the tablet space for over half a decade with no competition to speak of, but they produced a world-class 1.0 version of the iPad anyway. They have a vision of the future and are forging ahead regardless of what the copycats are doing. They are not going to stagnate as long as Steve is around.
Time to drop the tired "I sure like having competition for Apple" cliche. Ths ain't Microsoft were talking about.
Amen. Preach on!
Time to drop the tired "I sure like having competition for Apple" cliche. Ths ain't Microsoft were talking about.
Amen. Preach on!
HelloKitty
Jul 20, 08:52 PM
Well..I wonder if Apple indeed comes up with the Mac Pro update using even the top-of-the-line Xeon, who's gonna buy one knowing that a quad-core processor is coming up in the near future? I mean, I would hold off buying a Woodcrest machine if there's a quad-core is coming up next year..
I know people will always say that "if you need one, buy one. Don't wait for new machines." But hey, it's a 2 grand machine!
Perhaps we won't be seeing a Woodcrest Mac Pro at this year's WWDC at all. Perhaps we'll be seeing a quad-core Mac Pro proto-type that will be available in Novemeber or something like that:D !
I know people will always say that "if you need one, buy one. Don't wait for new machines." But hey, it's a 2 grand machine!
Perhaps we won't be seeing a Woodcrest Mac Pro at this year's WWDC at all. Perhaps we'll be seeing a quad-core Mac Pro proto-type that will be available in Novemeber or something like that:D !
k995
Apr 20, 05:56 PM
No, it wasn't shown before the iPhone, the F700 had a different interface when it was shown.
I am talking about lg prada among others if you bothered to read my post you would see that .
I am talking about lg prada among others if you bothered to read my post you would see that .
Benjy91
Apr 25, 01:34 PM
They cant lose this surely?
Even Android stores your location in the exact same way iOS does.
Even Android stores your location in the exact same way iOS does.
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.
dadoftwogirls
Apr 6, 04:07 PM
Like someone an early poster said, you want a little competition to keep Apple moving forward. But 100k in two months? Apple's motto seems to be defeat, crush and humiliate your opponents then dominate. It's going to be hard for competition facing that.
gregarious119
Jul 14, 02:34 PM
To charge $1800 for a system that only has 512MB is a real disappoitment. 1GB RAM oughta be standard, especially with Leopard being on the horizon.
Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.
Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.
No comments:
Post a Comment