Koadoc
Nov 29, 08:27 AM
Just goes to show you how corrupt the music business really is!:mad:
moogs
Sep 13, 10:57 AM
Would it be smart to wait for these 8 core mac pros or are they still a long ways away?
Popeye206
Apr 11, 12:48 PM
Enough with all the damn secrets. What other company keeps you in the dark about their products?! I've noticed a lot of people get tired of the same old waiting game with the iPhone and go ahead and get something else. Sometimes they like it and stick to the brand instead of Apple. This secrecy strategy was good at first but now it's starting to work against Apple.
I've noticed that too with their products all being top sellers! :rolleyes:
Personally, I like that they keep things under wraps. Why do I care until something is released anyway. Others do it as a sign of desperation to try and hold off people from buying something else. Obviously, this strategy really worked well for Moto and the Xoom.... lots of pre-ship hype and big flop afterwards.
I've noticed that too with their products all being top sellers! :rolleyes:
Personally, I like that they keep things under wraps. Why do I care until something is released anyway. Others do it as a sign of desperation to try and hold off people from buying something else. Obviously, this strategy really worked well for Moto and the Xoom.... lots of pre-ship hype and big flop afterwards.
Matthew Yohe
Apr 7, 10:41 PM
:mad:Best Buy told me today that they had them in but Apple would not let them sell them. I have been going for two weeks every other day and they finally tell me they have them and can't sell them. I hate this crap. I want my IPad 2.
Well of course they say they have it now, because they can't sell you any. They also probably had it the various times you went in, and yet lied to you.
Well of course they say they have it now, because they can't sell you any. They also probably had it the various times you went in, and yet lied to you.
PeterQVenkman
Apr 5, 08:12 PM
Nobody's using Blu-Ray, in my experience.
There is a whole thread about that, though. Don't read it.
Perhaps a little hasty of me, I was simply meant to say that in my experience I've not ever been required to deliver anything on Blu-Ray, and that to my mind it was a purely consumer format.
I've been to quite a few film festivals that take entries on Blu-Ray.
Apple has two mountains to climb: 1) to keep up with their competition where they used to lead. (2) They have to convince users that the mac as a pro platform is a good investment.
There is a whole thread about that, though. Don't read it.
Perhaps a little hasty of me, I was simply meant to say that in my experience I've not ever been required to deliver anything on Blu-Ray, and that to my mind it was a purely consumer format.
I've been to quite a few film festivals that take entries on Blu-Ray.
Apple has two mountains to climb: 1) to keep up with their competition where they used to lead. (2) They have to convince users that the mac as a pro platform is a good investment.
ugp
Jun 23, 12:41 PM
If the whole Region down here for Florida only got 139 I doubt Radio Shack got many iPhone 4s at all. Either that or all of them went to the huge Markets like New York and other areas like such.
ergle2
Sep 15, 12:25 PM
A cancelled Digital RISC CPU.
Although, some of the ideas for the cancelled CPU ended up in the Alpha chips.
NT was originally designed for the i860, which was codenamed the N-10 (hence NT).
Anything for Digital would have been while Cutler was at Digital, I imagine, rather than after he joined Microsoft.
Although, some of the ideas for the cancelled CPU ended up in the Alpha chips.
NT was originally designed for the i860, which was codenamed the N-10 (hence NT).
Anything for Digital would have been while Cutler was at Digital, I imagine, rather than after he joined Microsoft.
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.
BeefUK
Jul 27, 09:59 AM
Merom in a macbook is all I want, add in 2GB of RAM, and that'll do me. Although they'll be released in the MBP first............looks like more waiting for my first mac!!!:(
PLEASE PLEASE hurry, I wanna get rid of my PC. The case in like a wind turbine and the CRT monitor is like a heater!
PLEASE PLEASE hurry, I wanna get rid of my PC. The case in like a wind turbine and the CRT monitor is like a heater!
yg17
Feb 28, 12:54 PM
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Why do you care what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home?
Why do you care what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home?
Le Big Mac
Apr 27, 08:27 AM
And here I thought that data wasn't sent to Apple? At least they encrypted it so that you can't tell what actually is sent.
How much is it costing me to send the data to apple so they can crowdsource locations for everyone? I doubt AT&T isn't counting this towards data use.
How much is it costing me to send the data to apple so they can crowdsource locations for everyone? I doubt AT&T isn't counting this towards data use.
HecubusPro
Aug 26, 05:57 PM
NOT true, I think. Macbooks already have new features like a magnetic latch and easy upgradeability. We will see this at the very least in the next MBP update, as Apple has never let consumer features be absent from pro machines for long
I certainly hope this is true. Of course, if the MBP doesn't have some of the cool features in the MB (upgradable HDD, etc.) it's not going to deter me from getting the merom MPB when it starts shipping. Still, it wouldn't hurt.
I certainly hope this is true. Of course, if the MBP doesn't have some of the cool features in the MB (upgradable HDD, etc.) it's not going to deter me from getting the merom MPB when it starts shipping. Still, it wouldn't hurt.
Multimedia
Aug 23, 12:49 AM
Yeah im not surprised. I went to my local store today and saw one in all its glory attached to a 30" ACD. It was VERY fast, system prefs launched in micro seconds, a meaty FCP project opened in less than 5 seconds same for Aperture & Logic, 1080p HD trailers were chewed and spit out using less than 10% of processing power. Totally amazing and best part...its very quiet. I played with a Quad G5 once and it sounded like a jet engine taking off.
I defo want one but it'll cost me an arm and leg. Sigh...My Quad G5 is dead silent all the time. Those noisy Quads should have been sent off for repair. I was told the Quad in the Santa Clara Apple Store was also very loud. That is not normal. Properly serviced they run very silent.
I defo want one but it'll cost me an arm and leg. Sigh...My Quad G5 is dead silent all the time. Those noisy Quads should have been sent off for repair. I was told the Quad in the Santa Clara Apple Store was also very loud. That is not normal. Properly serviced they run very silent.
daneoni
Aug 27, 05:54 PM
I was just checking out the CD vs C2D comparison at Anandtech, pretty interesting stuff.
My question is this, is Santa Rosa strictly the mobile platform? I'm a student holding off for an iMac revision, and am wondering if apple utilizes Conroe in the iMac, will the faster FSB's be supported? Is an updated platform already available for Conroe? (I guess I had more than one question )
Thanks
Santa Rosa is for mobile platforms only. As far as i can tell the Conroe chips already have a rich FSB by default 1066MHz i think. Apple may use conroe and may use merom but conroe is looking to be the slated candidate.
My question is this, is Santa Rosa strictly the mobile platform? I'm a student holding off for an iMac revision, and am wondering if apple utilizes Conroe in the iMac, will the faster FSB's be supported? Is an updated platform already available for Conroe? (I guess I had more than one question )
Thanks
Santa Rosa is for mobile platforms only. As far as i can tell the Conroe chips already have a rich FSB by default 1066MHz i think. Apple may use conroe and may use merom but conroe is looking to be the slated candidate.
amin
Aug 19, 09:42 AM
You make good points. I guess we'll learn more as more information becomes available.
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
dscuber9000
Mar 1, 08:13 AM
Yet another case of straight people telling gay people how being gay works. I just don't get it.:rolleyes:
netdog
Aug 12, 02:40 AM
I'll be happy as long as it resurrects the Wild Eep.
princealfie
Nov 29, 08:58 AM
Time for Apple to change the paradigm again. I think it's time for Apple to start putting together a music production house. Offer musicians the ability to go direct to iTunes with all the marketing necessary to promote their catalogs. I'm not very familiar with the music industry, but I "think" Apple is quite prepared to create their own studios, handle their own promotion/marketing and already have a HIGHLY efficient distribution system in place. Granted, they are not supposed to be creating music according to their Apple Music agreement, but if they just bought Apple Music outright it would make a great fit, eh?
B
Perhaps we need to have a iTube website eh?
B
Perhaps we need to have a iTube website eh?
stormj
Aug 11, 01:51 PM
The US GSM carriers suck. T-Mobile has great customer service, but their coverage stinks. Cingular has great coverage, but they have BY FAR the worst customer service.
Plus EVDO beats the pants off of EDGE. And Verizon + Sprint + Amp'd + US Cellular + a bunch of other, smaller CDMA carriers account for over 60million potential customers in the US. If they only do a GSM version of the phone, it'll be a big mistake.
EDGE is not meant to compare with EVDO, UTMS is.
Can you imagine them making the phone only for CDMA? That translates to "US only." There will be a GSM version, it will most likely support UTMS, which is as good or better than EVDO.
Even assuming for the sake of argument, which I don't in reality, that CDMA is better than GSM for voice, the annoyance of not being able to swap SIM cards is enough for me to avoid it.
That and the fact I can't use it anywhere outside the US.
Plus EVDO beats the pants off of EDGE. And Verizon + Sprint + Amp'd + US Cellular + a bunch of other, smaller CDMA carriers account for over 60million potential customers in the US. If they only do a GSM version of the phone, it'll be a big mistake.
EDGE is not meant to compare with EVDO, UTMS is.
Can you imagine them making the phone only for CDMA? That translates to "US only." There will be a GSM version, it will most likely support UTMS, which is as good or better than EVDO.
Even assuming for the sake of argument, which I don't in reality, that CDMA is better than GSM for voice, the annoyance of not being able to swap SIM cards is enough for me to avoid it.
That and the fact I can't use it anywhere outside the US.
psionic001
Nov 28, 07:50 PM
Actually, they do. They also got paid on every blank tape sold when cassettes were big. I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth?
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
That's it!.... I'm not buying any more tapes...
Actually I think two things should happen:
1) Universal should pay an anual feel to be on ITS.
2) Universal should pay a further industry fee to Apple (or DAP manufacturers) to go towards DRM R&D.
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
That's it!.... I'm not buying any more tapes...
Actually I think two things should happen:
1) Universal should pay an anual feel to be on ITS.
2) Universal should pay a further industry fee to Apple (or DAP manufacturers) to go towards DRM R&D.
eb6
Sep 19, 09:50 AM
Can't we stop all this Mac on Mac hate and just get along?:)
Iconoclysm
Apr 19, 08:24 PM
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
Actually, you're WRONG!!!! to say he's wrong. You're trying to say that every GUI element was created at Xerox? EVERY one of them? Sorry, but your argument here is akin to something Fox News would air.
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
Actually, you're WRONG!!!! to say he's wrong. You're trying to say that every GUI element was created at Xerox? EVERY one of them? Sorry, but your argument here is akin to something Fox News would air.
NY Guitarist
Apr 5, 07:36 PM
Also, I'm waiting for the RED Scarlet camera to hit the market, and have heard speculation that RED and Apple will release a new highly efficient compression codec based on RED's Redcode called REDRay.
The speculation is that REDRay will be used for everything from 4K DCP playback in movie theaters to a download/streaming version that will be usable for buying up to 4K movies through iTunes.
RED hired plugin developer Graeme Nattress awhile ago and he has been pushing the REDcode science forward with excellent results.
The speculation is that REDRay will be used for everything from 4K DCP playback in movie theaters to a download/streaming version that will be usable for buying up to 4K movies through iTunes.
RED hired plugin developer Graeme Nattress awhile ago and he has been pushing the REDcode science forward with excellent results.
shrimpdesign
Aug 7, 11:56 PM
does anyone see a potential for a security breach with the ichat feature that lets you take over someone's desktop? (the purpose is of course to collaborate or to help them fix a problem)
I think it's an invitation .. like "Come share my screen with me" not "Let me use your screen"
So basically you have to allow your screen to be shared with someone you don't trust ... which is generally a bad idea anyways.
If there's a problem, you can always unplug the computer.
I think it's an invitation .. like "Come share my screen with me" not "Let me use your screen"
So basically you have to allow your screen to be shared with someone you don't trust ... which is generally a bad idea anyways.
If there's a problem, you can always unplug the computer.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar