tortoise
Aug 7, 09:14 PM
Lots of ways it COULD be implemented. Looks at Suns new file system ZFS. It is basically "Copy on Write". With a file system you can do things even fancier then with a DBMS. For example a "block" (i-node) exists physicaly on the disk only once but it could be maped into any numbr of files. If a file in only an orderd set of block numbers then to copy a copy all you need to copy is the set of numbers which is on the order of 1000 times shorter then the data itself.
Ahem, a modern relational database system can do everything a file system can. In fact, they are both databases, but optimized for different tasks and slightly different semantics. The same behaviors can be achieved with both; it is a matter of design bias, not capability. File systems like ZFS actually converge on normal MVCC database behavior, which durably journals all writes but with more flexibility with respect to atomicity and version cleanup than a file system. File system semantics, even versioning ones, are more primitive and less capable than database ones, but with substantially increased performance over what would be possible from an MVCC database for the same task.
Same theory, different optimizations. The balancing act has always been between the power fully ACID-compliant MVCC semantics and the basic speed of simple file system semantics. Apple and Sun are burning some excess performance capacity to deliver features that are closer to the database ideal.
Ahem, a modern relational database system can do everything a file system can. In fact, they are both databases, but optimized for different tasks and slightly different semantics. The same behaviors can be achieved with both; it is a matter of design bias, not capability. File systems like ZFS actually converge on normal MVCC database behavior, which durably journals all writes but with more flexibility with respect to atomicity and version cleanup than a file system. File system semantics, even versioning ones, are more primitive and less capable than database ones, but with substantially increased performance over what would be possible from an MVCC database for the same task.
Same theory, different optimizations. The balancing act has always been between the power fully ACID-compliant MVCC semantics and the basic speed of simple file system semantics. Apple and Sun are burning some excess performance capacity to deliver features that are closer to the database ideal.
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 18, 10:37 PM
I hate how some people think the ~800 standard cars are going to look like GT4 cars. Obviously they wont, because even at half the poly density of the premium cars they would still look gorgeous.
Meh, haters gonna hate as the kids say.
I just hope the it has a 2008 cobalt in the game. My friend claims the focus is one of the worst cars ever made but he drives a cobalt :rolleyes: So i want to pit them against each other on a track.
Meh, haters gonna hate as the kids say.
I just hope the it has a 2008 cobalt in the game. My friend claims the focus is one of the worst cars ever made but he drives a cobalt :rolleyes: So i want to pit them against each other on a track.
JesterJJZ
Apr 12, 07:52 PM
No, it hasn't.
Yeah no kidding...they should have taken the "New" off the page at least a year ago.
Yeah no kidding...they should have taken the "New" off the page at least a year ago.
MrCrowbar
Aug 16, 11:13 PM
I did...:D
DIE POWER PC...DIE!!!
ROFL. A true classic. ;)
DIE POWER PC...DIE!!!
ROFL. A true classic. ;)
Billicus
Nov 28, 10:07 PM
Jeez... I don't think it will happen. The music companies need to keep their grubby fingers off the iPod. :mad:
11thIndian
Apr 11, 11:24 PM
Looking forward to the new final cut studio.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
Motion has a funny reputation. I find it quite powerful and very intuitive now that I've been using it almost exclusively for over a year. I know a lot of AE users find it very hard to make the mental leap to the different methodology, and I totally understand that as it took me several months of regular work to really adjust my headspace to the new way of thinking.
How the different parts of the Studio might be merged or changed is one of the more interesting questions for me. You could overload FCP if you tried to cram all the other apps together, but there's no question there's room for tighter integration.
It would be very surprising to see the different programs sold separately thought the appStore. The programs themselves aren't too massive [and may have been streamlined more] but the extra content for loops would make it a HEAFTY download for anyone!
This evening can't come soon enough, glad to have all the speculation over with and concentrate on what it actually is [and isn't].
If anyone comes up with a good liveblog or ustream of the presentation, remember to post it here. So far, the best coverage I can find it twitter feeds for people like Larry Jordan or Philip Hodgetts who will be in attendance.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
Motion has a funny reputation. I find it quite powerful and very intuitive now that I've been using it almost exclusively for over a year. I know a lot of AE users find it very hard to make the mental leap to the different methodology, and I totally understand that as it took me several months of regular work to really adjust my headspace to the new way of thinking.
How the different parts of the Studio might be merged or changed is one of the more interesting questions for me. You could overload FCP if you tried to cram all the other apps together, but there's no question there's room for tighter integration.
It would be very surprising to see the different programs sold separately thought the appStore. The programs themselves aren't too massive [and may have been streamlined more] but the extra content for loops would make it a HEAFTY download for anyone!
This evening can't come soon enough, glad to have all the speculation over with and concentrate on what it actually is [and isn't].
If anyone comes up with a good liveblog or ustream of the presentation, remember to post it here. So far, the best coverage I can find it twitter feeds for people like Larry Jordan or Philip Hodgetts who will be in attendance.
mazola
Nov 29, 12:11 PM
Why just the other day I was thinking to myself, 'There ought to be an easier way to get my money to UMG.'
This sure beats taking out a fin, finding an envelope and stamp, digging out an address, and making the trek out to the mailbox.
Let's face it, the Universal Music Group DESERVES our money. Sure I don't listen to Ashlee Simpson, Lindsay Lohan, or the Doggy Style All Stars but who am I to say where my money should go?
And why on earth should an independent society for artist rights like ASCAP, BMI, or SOCAN be responsible for distributing money collected from what amounts to an MP3 tax? They'll just divy up the money to artists and music publishers according to boring criteria like record sales/radio play, etc.
I want my money going directly to the LABEL to do whatever they see fit with no public oversight! Maybe the artists don't need the money this month and the coke-head A&R guy needs it instead? Did you ever think of that?
Thank God UMG is FINALLY standing up for its rights and Microsoft had the good sense to listen when it agreed to implement a UMG tax in the Zune!
Apple, pay attention, or I'll just have to mail my money to UMG instead of buying an iPod!
This sure beats taking out a fin, finding an envelope and stamp, digging out an address, and making the trek out to the mailbox.
Let's face it, the Universal Music Group DESERVES our money. Sure I don't listen to Ashlee Simpson, Lindsay Lohan, or the Doggy Style All Stars but who am I to say where my money should go?
And why on earth should an independent society for artist rights like ASCAP, BMI, or SOCAN be responsible for distributing money collected from what amounts to an MP3 tax? They'll just divy up the money to artists and music publishers according to boring criteria like record sales/radio play, etc.
I want my money going directly to the LABEL to do whatever they see fit with no public oversight! Maybe the artists don't need the money this month and the coke-head A&R guy needs it instead? Did you ever think of that?
Thank God UMG is FINALLY standing up for its rights and Microsoft had the good sense to listen when it agreed to implement a UMG tax in the Zune!
Apple, pay attention, or I'll just have to mail my money to UMG instead of buying an iPod!
domness
Mar 26, 09:02 PM
To be fair, 10.7 on my machine is rather stable, however the features in it seem just like a small upgrade like 10.6 was, albeit I don't really like the new features as it seems a bit more dumbed down. The only thing I like is that the latest PHP version comes preinstalled and didn't have any problems installing MySQL as I did with 10.6. 'spose that comes as a bonus.
Object-X
Aug 26, 05:44 PM
Anyone know of benchmarks comparing the core duo with the core 2 duo?
Fabio_gsilva
Jul 28, 04:52 PM
Thanks, and yes, me too. I just hope they do something to fill that headless hole between the mini and pro. And I hope the innards are more accessible than the mini.
A headless iMac would be very nice to mee, indeed. I own a Mini, so I don't want to throw my keyboard, mouse and display right now... And I don't have enough money to replace them now too.
A headless iMac would be very nice to mee, indeed. I own a Mini, so I don't want to throw my keyboard, mouse and display right now... And I don't have enough money to replace them now too.
notabadname
Mar 22, 03:42 PM
To store data temporally. That is what RAM does.
I believe the question was about what App on the iPad 2 is hindered by the amount of RAM. What are you trying to do, with what App, that needs 1GB? If the RAM isn't enhancing the experience, than what is the point other than to increase cost? You could put 4GB in an iPad too, but you will likely notn use it (with the current 1/3 million Apps). So what is the magic number that works seamlessly for 99% of what people use the device for?
I believe the question was about what App on the iPad 2 is hindered by the amount of RAM. What are you trying to do, with what App, that needs 1GB? If the RAM isn't enhancing the experience, than what is the point other than to increase cost? You could put 4GB in an iPad too, but you will likely notn use it (with the current 1/3 million Apps). So what is the magic number that works seamlessly for 99% of what people use the device for?
bibbz
Jun 15, 11:36 AM
Se after some clarification, heres the process...
We cant guarantee you a phone, but if you "reserve" and have a pin number, you will get a phone. We just cant make a promise, guarantee, or anything like that per apple.
The same still applies, if we take 10 pins, we get 10 phones.
We cant guarantee you a phone, but if you "reserve" and have a pin number, you will get a phone. We just cant make a promise, guarantee, or anything like that per apple.
The same still applies, if we take 10 pins, we get 10 phones.
daver969
Sep 13, 11:05 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
gorgeousninja
Mar 23, 09:32 AM
LG and others had semi-smartphones with 3.5" screens back in 2006 and early 2007
If you ever used one of the LG phones or the numerous Japanese keitai's of that time then you'd know, that even though they were cutting edge for the time, they were still nowhere near being 'smartphones'.
Terrible UI with endless menu's, confusing icons, and new features randomly bolted on.
No matter how much the petty minded haters want to see it, the truth is that Apple made a quantum leap forward with the iPhone, and some people ought to be a little less bitter and more thankful for it.
If you ever used one of the LG phones or the numerous Japanese keitai's of that time then you'd know, that even though they were cutting edge for the time, they were still nowhere near being 'smartphones'.
Terrible UI with endless menu's, confusing icons, and new features randomly bolted on.
No matter how much the petty minded haters want to see it, the truth is that Apple made a quantum leap forward with the iPhone, and some people ought to be a little less bitter and more thankful for it.
dudemac
Aug 7, 04:05 PM
Features I want:
-iChat screen sharing (awesome idea!) and video effects
-Spaces (finally a Apple OS-level implementation)
-Time Machine (I want a friggin wormhole on my computer!)
I wish they'd show us the Top Secret features.
But seriously, so one even saw Time Machine coming. That was a surprise!
Kim Kardashian Cellulite
kim kardashian cellulite
kim kardashian cellulite
kim kardashian cellulite
-iChat screen sharing (awesome idea!) and video effects
-Spaces (finally a Apple OS-level implementation)
-Time Machine (I want a friggin wormhole on my computer!)
I wish they'd show us the Top Secret features.
But seriously, so one even saw Time Machine coming. That was a surprise!
Westside guy
Aug 7, 03:50 PM
Hey nice to see osx will have system restore =D
Time machine isn't even similar to MS's System Restore. Time Machine is basically like having CVS or Subversion underneath the file system. It rocks. I don't believe there's ever been anything like it on a client-type computer (a similar feature was present in the server OS VMS, I believe).
You might want to do some reading about CVS and Subversion.
Edit: Now that I think about it, it wouldn't be surprising to find that CVS/Subversion code is the foundation for Time Machine.
Time machine isn't even similar to MS's System Restore. Time Machine is basically like having CVS or Subversion underneath the file system. It rocks. I don't believe there's ever been anything like it on a client-type computer (a similar feature was present in the server OS VMS, I believe).
You might want to do some reading about CVS and Subversion.
Edit: Now that I think about it, it wouldn't be surprising to find that CVS/Subversion code is the foundation for Time Machine.
jaxstate
Aug 11, 02:58 PM
Who wants to go through the trouble of doing a software change to unlock their phone.
I seem to be missing some information...:confused:
First, a locked phone is ONLY a problem if you have cdma. If you go GSM the "locking" is software based and can be unlocked. The networks here unlock it for you for a fee. (others do that too but that is another story...)
Secondly, if the "iPone" is GSM based you an sell the same phone both locked and unlocked. The question whether a phone will be "subsidized" is a deal between Apple and the carrier. Just how much the phone will be is up to the carrier.
As an example: Here in europe we have vendors that sell cellphones where you can pick which carrier you want and pay different prices for the phone dependent on what carrier and type of contract you pick. However, you can also buy the buy the phone without a contract (unlocked)
...so why do we have this discussion whether this or that carrier will carry it?
If the new "iPhone" is a hit everybody will carry it. Of course, assuming Apple allows it.
I seem to be missing some information...:confused:
First, a locked phone is ONLY a problem if you have cdma. If you go GSM the "locking" is software based and can be unlocked. The networks here unlock it for you for a fee. (others do that too but that is another story...)
Secondly, if the "iPone" is GSM based you an sell the same phone both locked and unlocked. The question whether a phone will be "subsidized" is a deal between Apple and the carrier. Just how much the phone will be is up to the carrier.
As an example: Here in europe we have vendors that sell cellphones where you can pick which carrier you want and pay different prices for the phone dependent on what carrier and type of contract you pick. However, you can also buy the buy the phone without a contract (unlocked)
...so why do we have this discussion whether this or that carrier will carry it?
If the new "iPhone" is a hit everybody will carry it. Of course, assuming Apple allows it.
�algiris
Apr 6, 03:30 PM
But hey, haven't you heard, Honeycomb is a real tablet OS. (Whatever the heck that means.)
Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.
The Google brainwashing continues. ;)
Real tablet OS, Full internet, True multitasking - the list's expanding fast :D
Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.
The Google brainwashing continues. ;)
Real tablet OS, Full internet, True multitasking - the list's expanding fast :D
rdrr
Nov 28, 07:42 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.
If the record labels would stop forcing artist to pump out albums with ten bad songs and only one or two good ones, then maybe I would consider spending more than 15 dollars for a CD.
I don't expect something for nothing, but I do expect quality for every dollar I spend.
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.
If the record labels would stop forcing artist to pump out albums with ten bad songs and only one or two good ones, then maybe I would consider spending more than 15 dollars for a CD.
I don't expect something for nothing, but I do expect quality for every dollar I spend.
AppleScruff1
Apr 9, 10:01 PM
I'd wait for Haswell or maybe even Rockwell which will be the 16nm shrink of Haswell.
BlizzardBomb
Jul 27, 10:22 AM
Well there's always going to be some die-hard PPC and Core Duo users who will vote negative on this story :p
Well Apple, get those Core 2 Duos in the iMacs and MacBook Pros, and a Woodcrest... No... 2 Woodcrests in the Mac Pros.
Well Apple, get those Core 2 Duos in the iMacs and MacBook Pros, and a Woodcrest... No... 2 Woodcrests in the Mac Pros.
Tones2
Apr 19, 01:33 PM
I'm sure quite sure what Apple hopes to accomplish here. Every smart phone steals from every other one. I don't know if you can differentiate design "concepts". It's like suing someone because the chords for his blues song goes in a 1-4-5 pattern like yours does. It's just part of the genre.
Tony
Tony
michaelrjohnson
Aug 7, 04:46 PM
So the cat won't be out of the bag until Spring 2007?
I thought Leopard was slated for December?
Maybe that means it will actually be launched at MWSF in January ...
January is not Spring. Do not expect a release in January; Expect a full-featured preview, with an announcement of a final shipping-date.
I thought Leopard was slated for December?
Maybe that means it will actually be launched at MWSF in January ...
January is not Spring. Do not expect a release in January; Expect a full-featured preview, with an announcement of a final shipping-date.
ten-oak-druid
Mar 22, 04:24 PM
This is just a preview of the future, Android based tablets will clean the iPads clock. Apple made the so-called iPad 2 as a 1.5. Low res camera, not enough RAM, and low res screen. It's going to be a verrrry long 2012 for Apple. Sure it's selling like hot cakes now, but when buyers see tablets that they don't have to stand inline for, that have better equipment and are cheaper ... Apples house of cards will come crashing down around them.
The only strength that Apple has is the app ecosystem; which is why they are going after Amazon for spiting on the sidewalk. They know the world of hurt coming their way.
It will be hard for the ipad competition to play the same game they play with computers. You know, subsidizing decent computers with bulk sales of low end devices. They tried this with tablets and they failed. Tablets are a luxury above and beyond a personal computer. No one buying a Dell for $300 is going to add on a tablet.
So how are they going to match Apple's price with the same quality if they can't subsidize with low end garbage? Well samsung did it by using contracts. That is why you find it on amazon rankings not as a tablet but as a mobile phone.
So take your pick. An ipad or a competitor of equal quality with a 2 year contract.
I wonder if Samsung ever sold those 2 million units of the original galaxy that they shipped? And what was the true return rate anyway?
The only strength that Apple has is the app ecosystem; which is why they are going after Amazon for spiting on the sidewalk. They know the world of hurt coming their way.
It will be hard for the ipad competition to play the same game they play with computers. You know, subsidizing decent computers with bulk sales of low end devices. They tried this with tablets and they failed. Tablets are a luxury above and beyond a personal computer. No one buying a Dell for $300 is going to add on a tablet.
So how are they going to match Apple's price with the same quality if they can't subsidize with low end garbage? Well samsung did it by using contracts. That is why you find it on amazon rankings not as a tablet but as a mobile phone.
So take your pick. An ipad or a competitor of equal quality with a 2 year contract.
I wonder if Samsung ever sold those 2 million units of the original galaxy that they shipped? And what was the true return rate anyway?
No comments:
Post a Comment