Lollypop
Aug 5, 05:17 PM
*BitTorrent - Integrated into Leopard as a core technology, much like Spotlight. Used in Software Update and a new version of Safari.
*iChat Phone - Call numbers through iChat as part of .Mac... I guess you could make a conference with a combination of multiple phone numbers/iChatters.
I like the BitTorrent idea, would make downloading software updates very fast, could also be cool if its used for that movie store we have been hearing so much about :p
Im a bit phone geek but just a plain revision to iChat to compete with aduim will make me a very happy camper already!
*iChat Phone - Call numbers through iChat as part of .Mac... I guess you could make a conference with a combination of multiple phone numbers/iChatters.
I like the BitTorrent idea, would make downloading software updates very fast, could also be cool if its used for that movie store we have been hearing so much about :p
Im a bit phone geek but just a plain revision to iChat to compete with aduim will make me a very happy camper already!
leekohler
Feb 28, 12:28 PM
Does he feel same-sex attractions or doesn't he? The reporter says that the priest is "gay." The article tells that the priest denied both accusations. If he denied both accusations, he denied that he was gay.
The reporter or the college goofed. Being "gay" isn't contrary to Catholic teachings. Living a "gay lifestyle" is contrary to them.
What is a "gay lifestyle" exactly? We get up, take a shower, brush our teeth, go to work and come home to our families just like anyone else.
The reporter or the college goofed. Being "gay" isn't contrary to Catholic teachings. Living a "gay lifestyle" is contrary to them.
What is a "gay lifestyle" exactly? We get up, take a shower, brush our teeth, go to work and come home to our families just like anyone else.
sukanas
Apr 25, 01:36 PM
money grubbers
maelstromr
Apr 25, 02:55 PM
Where did I say Apple is exploiting me?:confused:
Apple did a shoddy programming job by not encrypting the data. Thaty is why Apple is under pressure by the various govenments and rightfully so. Nobody says Apple is using this data in a malicious way. (aside of this lawsuit but that is only here in the USA and stupid and greed driven by lawyers and totally besides the real issue)
Maybe next time read the post you are responding to - rather negatively to boot. The post I quoted discussed Apple exploiting people.
Apple did a shoddy programming job by not encrypting the data. Thaty is why Apple is under pressure by the various govenments and rightfully so. Nobody says Apple is using this data in a malicious way. (aside of this lawsuit but that is only here in the USA and stupid and greed driven by lawyers and totally besides the real issue)
Maybe next time read the post you are responding to - rather negatively to boot. The post I quoted discussed Apple exploiting people.
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
hcho3
Apr 19, 08:15 PM
Samsung is the worst company with ideas. They just copied off apple on everything they make, period.
Yes, their Nexus S phones have almost as same packaging as iPhone 3GS or iPhone 4 packaging.
Yes, their icons are so similar.
Yes, their UI is very identical to Apple's iOS.
Their new Samsung 9 series laptop has drop ports and original macbook air had this as well.
Samsung just copies apple. Good to see apple is suing them. Love competitions, but apple spent money on investing, marketing and entering the market with the new design. Samsung? No. They just copied.
They deserve to lose and they will lose in this trial.
Yes, their Nexus S phones have almost as same packaging as iPhone 3GS or iPhone 4 packaging.
Yes, their icons are so similar.
Yes, their UI is very identical to Apple's iOS.
Their new Samsung 9 series laptop has drop ports and original macbook air had this as well.
Samsung just copies apple. Good to see apple is suing them. Love competitions, but apple spent money on investing, marketing and entering the market with the new design. Samsung? No. They just copied.
They deserve to lose and they will lose in this trial.
shamino
Jul 20, 09:58 AM
No I think you are confused. :) I meant "Is having more cores, lets say 8, more efficient than one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores?"
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.
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.
TripHop
Jun 10, 05:55 PM
Gazelle (http://www.gazelle.com/) buys old iPhones too. :)
iJon
Apr 5, 05:19 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?
Final Cut Pro supports Blu Ray authoring but it does the bare minimum only. A DVD Studio Pro like program would be nice.
Final Cut Pro supports Blu Ray authoring but it does the bare minimum only. A DVD Studio Pro like program would be nice.
MattSepeta
Apr 27, 02:13 PM
1. You opened it in Illustrator, not InDesign.
2. After I opened it in Illustrator like you did it did reveal some interesting things. It seems that fields #20 and #22 are on individual layers.
http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/6643/picture1hz.png (http://img163.imageshack.us/i/picture1hz.png/)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)
I am fairly confident that rather than pointing to a conspiracy, this simply shows that when scanned, the operator had enabled some sort of "auto-text" option that attempted to read and convert then embed the raw text info in the PDF, as to make the text "selectable" in preview programs.
It only worked on certain text, as is par for the course.
2. After I opened it in Illustrator like you did it did reveal some interesting things. It seems that fields #20 and #22 are on individual layers.
http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/6643/picture1hz.png (http://img163.imageshack.us/i/picture1hz.png/)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)
I am fairly confident that rather than pointing to a conspiracy, this simply shows that when scanned, the operator had enabled some sort of "auto-text" option that attempted to read and convert then embed the raw text info in the PDF, as to make the text "selectable" in preview programs.
It only worked on certain text, as is par for the course.
MACRUS
Apr 7, 12:32 AM
Not again..
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
where did you get such a non existing info? Apple has not attend the NAB for years now.
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?
not everyone will agree with you but I do. not that all the work I do needs to be on blu-ray but some does and because DVDSP has not seen a real update since 2005 I think. I just had to ditch it. along with the outdated apps. I got Adobe's Creative Suite.
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
where did you get such a non existing info? Apple has not attend the NAB for years now.
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?
not everyone will agree with you but I do. not that all the work I do needs to be on blu-ray but some does and because DVDSP has not seen a real update since 2005 I think. I just had to ditch it. along with the outdated apps. I got Adobe's Creative Suite.
RWinOR
Mar 31, 09:21 PM
I am so happy my android phone is open source and can be tweaked at any time by the various phone manufactures. Where else could I end up with a phone that thinks I am so Eastern European country in he morning, and some South Pacific island in the afternoon, while I really have never left the North West of the U.S. Lets here it for android and open source. This problem has be going on for about 1.5 years I have been told it is not a problem and I need to learn to live with it.
I would take Apples approach any day. If only the I phone was available on my preferred carrier. Not a fan of ATT and my wife dislikes Verizon. Bummer for me.
I would take Apples approach any day. If only the I phone was available on my preferred carrier. Not a fan of ATT and my wife dislikes Verizon. Bummer for me.
cult hero
Mar 31, 06:58 PM
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Exactly. What we need are more objective, balanced and rational sounding opinions like yours.
Exactly. What we need are more objective, balanced and rational sounding opinions like yours.
Chupa Chupa
Apr 5, 05:49 PM
I wonder if this new version will be back end changes, front end or both. I wouldn't even mention front end, but I never thought they would have done such a radical make over of iMovie either until they did. I'm not a huge fan if the new iMovie but the FCP front end it quite crusty -- what a decade or so old.
HecubusPro
Sep 19, 10:02 AM
But the implication that many posts had, such as that the world was coming to an end, was pretty darn ridiculous.
But do you honestly think people believe that? That's as silly as me asking you if you "honestly think people believe that."
Venting can sometimes turn into frustrated anger, transforming into "apple bashing" specific to this forum. I use discernment to simply ignore flame posts and move on to the posts that are intelligently worded, with thought behind them. This thread may host more of the former than the latter, but I just move beyond those. I don't become one of those people and vent angrily at how people are behaving either. I'm not their parent or their moderator.
So MBP with swappable HDD, magnetic latch, x1800, and merom. Discuss. :)
But do you honestly think people believe that? That's as silly as me asking you if you "honestly think people believe that."
Venting can sometimes turn into frustrated anger, transforming into "apple bashing" specific to this forum. I use discernment to simply ignore flame posts and move on to the posts that are intelligently worded, with thought behind them. This thread may host more of the former than the latter, but I just move beyond those. I don't become one of those people and vent angrily at how people are behaving either. I'm not their parent or their moderator.
So MBP with swappable HDD, magnetic latch, x1800, and merom. Discuss. :)
FasterQuieter
Mar 22, 08:53 PM
This seems to me to be good news in 2 ways:
1. It makes a few foolish people think twice about purchasing an iPad 2, so I can get mine a little sooner.
2. It puts the wind up Apple's behind and they work that little bit harder to get us the iPad 3 with the ultra HD display or iPad 2 Retina Christmas Special or whatever else they might call it.
The iPhone 4 display "changed everything" as Apple like to say, and the sooner they get that thing on the iPad, the better. Then my humdrum life will finally be complete.
1. It makes a few foolish people think twice about purchasing an iPad 2, so I can get mine a little sooner.
2. It puts the wind up Apple's behind and they work that little bit harder to get us the iPad 3 with the ultra HD display or iPad 2 Retina Christmas Special or whatever else they might call it.
The iPhone 4 display "changed everything" as Apple like to say, and the sooner they get that thing on the iPad, the better. Then my humdrum life will finally be complete.
ergle2
Sep 13, 01:00 PM
So Merom(Merom Santa Rosa)/Conroe/Woodcrest(Clovertown) are the end of the road of separate chips. No more mobile/desktop/sever chip... all are the same (should expect mobiles to have the lowest MHz, then desktop, then toping out with server)
I think you've misunderstood.
Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest are one microarch now. That's Intel's point -- the core is essentially the same. Then they package as appropriate for a given market. Merom is lower-voltage/lower-clockspeed, Woodcrest has the external pins for multi-processor exposed and has a higher FSB, etc.
There will still be different chips for different markets, but the arch is the same across the board. This is a significant difference from the Pentium-4/Pentium-M days, where the arch was very, very different.
The other big difference is the support chipsets -- the Xeon range use a different chipset that supports FBDIMM vs DDR2 for the Core 2 branded chips. This is the reason Intel kept the memory controller off the CPU die, so that they had more flexibility with memory types.
I think you've misunderstood.
Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest are one microarch now. That's Intel's point -- the core is essentially the same. Then they package as appropriate for a given market. Merom is lower-voltage/lower-clockspeed, Woodcrest has the external pins for multi-processor exposed and has a higher FSB, etc.
There will still be different chips for different markets, but the arch is the same across the board. This is a significant difference from the Pentium-4/Pentium-M days, where the arch was very, very different.
The other big difference is the support chipsets -- the Xeon range use a different chipset that supports FBDIMM vs DDR2 for the Core 2 branded chips. This is the reason Intel kept the memory controller off the CPU die, so that they had more flexibility with memory types.
starnox
Aug 5, 04:51 PM
Can someone confirm my calculations?
The keynote will start 8PM UK time?
The keynote will start 8PM UK time?
usptact
Apr 11, 02:12 AM
Get me right but i get negative impression about Apple reading this : "Canon was told last night that Apple has demanded ALL “lecturn” or stage time exclusively."
It is ok to be ambitious but not imperialistic and mean!
It is ok to be ambitious but not imperialistic and mean!
aafuss1
Jul 14, 11:54 PM
Interesting question, but I don't think any of us here will have the answers.
PCs don't use EFI. I don't know if a generic AGP/PCIe card can be initialized by EFI, or if the card will need some EFI code to be on-board.
As for OS X, I think we can be fairly certain that Apple will only bundle drivers for cards that Apple sells. If you install a third-party card, they will probably tell you that you'll need a driver from the card's manufacturer - that's what they've historically told customers.
Generic VGA drivers? I'm sure they were developed - they'd be very useful during that time when OS X/Intel was internal-only. But I wouldn't expect them to be bundled with a shipping copy of the system software.
Now, assuming that the Mac firmware (including whatever EFI drivers they include in it) is capable of initializing a generic video card, then there should be no need for more than a device driver, which the card vendors can probably provide, if they are so inclined. If the cards will require special ROM code for EFI, however, then we're back to the same problem that plagued the PPC systems.
I agree-eg. to add a Crossfire configuration would mean that Apple would need to have a preference pane to configure that, which they don't-they supply a driver only.
PCs don't use EFI. I don't know if a generic AGP/PCIe card can be initialized by EFI, or if the card will need some EFI code to be on-board.
As for OS X, I think we can be fairly certain that Apple will only bundle drivers for cards that Apple sells. If you install a third-party card, they will probably tell you that you'll need a driver from the card's manufacturer - that's what they've historically told customers.
Generic VGA drivers? I'm sure they were developed - they'd be very useful during that time when OS X/Intel was internal-only. But I wouldn't expect them to be bundled with a shipping copy of the system software.
Now, assuming that the Mac firmware (including whatever EFI drivers they include in it) is capable of initializing a generic video card, then there should be no need for more than a device driver, which the card vendors can probably provide, if they are so inclined. If the cards will require special ROM code for EFI, however, then we're back to the same problem that plagued the PPC systems.
I agree-eg. to add a Crossfire configuration would mean that Apple would need to have a preference pane to configure that, which they don't-they supply a driver only.
squeeks
Apr 28, 06:10 PM
Look...I'll be the first to admit..there are some wacko Christians out there..like this dude from florida who burned the Quran..i mean wth was he thinking? but we're not all wacko as alot of you suggest... the posts a lot of people on here make, lump ALL of us together. And thats just not cool...
Same goes for conservatives and tea party members...Yes a lot of tea party members are quite radical. But not ALL of them you can probably safely say 99% of racists would consider themselves tea party..but that doesn�t mean everyone in the tea party is racist...
Consider this please before any of you go lumping all of a particular group into one derogatory name..
Same goes for conservatives and tea party members...Yes a lot of tea party members are quite radical. But not ALL of them you can probably safely say 99% of racists would consider themselves tea party..but that doesn�t mean everyone in the tea party is racist...
Consider this please before any of you go lumping all of a particular group into one derogatory name..
CFreymarc
Mar 31, 05:59 PM
This is a smart move. It had to happen sooner or later.
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Tightening controls? How about Google having final right of refusal toward any mass production Bill of Materials for any Android phone going into production? That will keep the manufacturing accountants from screwing over the developers taking a $0.76 of parts out to save on a run but generate a million man hours of bug fixing in the third party developer community.
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Tightening controls? How about Google having final right of refusal toward any mass production Bill of Materials for any Android phone going into production? That will keep the manufacturing accountants from screwing over the developers taking a $0.76 of parts out to save on a run but generate a million man hours of bug fixing in the third party developer community.
Yvan256
Apr 6, 01:45 PM
Once people start buying and using software (even freeware), the game is over. Most people don't want to lose what they use right now, it's their "personal software libraries".
That's why Microsoft Windows still dominates the desktop and even a free OS like Linux cannot compete. More than two decades of Windows near-monopoly on the desktop can't be pushed aside as easily as OSS folks would like to, though they did win on the server side.
That's also why the iPad currently dominates the tablet market and probably will for at least a few years down the road. The only chance competitors have is to sell a tablet for at most half the price of the iPad, with equivalent features (browser, music, videos, books). Unfortunately for them, the iPad can also run software made for the iPhone and iPod touch, so they are much more than a year late as far as "personal software libraries" go.
Apple, on the other hand, are simply competing with themselves. Their goal doesn't appear to be "beat the competitors products", it's probably "beat the previous iteration of our own product".
Twice as much RAM, faster dual-core CPU, up to 9 times faster GPU, facetime cameras... the iPad 1 just can't compare to the iPad 2. Imagine what's to come for future models.
That's why Microsoft Windows still dominates the desktop and even a free OS like Linux cannot compete. More than two decades of Windows near-monopoly on the desktop can't be pushed aside as easily as OSS folks would like to, though they did win on the server side.
That's also why the iPad currently dominates the tablet market and probably will for at least a few years down the road. The only chance competitors have is to sell a tablet for at most half the price of the iPad, with equivalent features (browser, music, videos, books). Unfortunately for them, the iPad can also run software made for the iPhone and iPod touch, so they are much more than a year late as far as "personal software libraries" go.
Apple, on the other hand, are simply competing with themselves. Their goal doesn't appear to be "beat the competitors products", it's probably "beat the previous iteration of our own product".
Twice as much RAM, faster dual-core CPU, up to 9 times faster GPU, facetime cameras... the iPad 1 just can't compare to the iPad 2. Imagine what's to come for future models.
jclardy
Mar 26, 11:14 AM
This. Until this happens displays won't advance any further for actual computers (non-tablet) because there are so many form factors.
Apple can spend the time to make graphics for each flavor of iPhone or iPad because there aren't that many to deal with. It becomes a lot more difficult to do this across a large range of products. Besides, computers are getting to the point where they are too powerful for most users (hence the popularity of the iPad). A retina display option would give people more incentive to upgrade their desktops, laptops, etc. I think?
As a designer, I'd love a retina 27" ACD. 300dpi right on my screen, almost perfect. Now if we could just get the color/brightness a little more accurate...
I really don't see the point of a display anywhere near 300DPI for a desktop or laptop. My MBP 15" with the 1680x1050 display has a DPI of 128, and with this I can only see the pixels of the fonts if my face is 6" away from the screen, which is above the keyboard. If you have a monitor on a desk it is going to be at least a foot away, but probably more like 1.5-2 feet.
Some of Apples displays are still around 90-100 DPI which I could see upgrading from those to around 150 or so. The main reason they aren't doing it right now is because the menu bar and all other interface elements would be tiny. On my MBP they are already pretty small along with all the default fonts and that is only at 128DPI.
So some kind of resolution independence is necessary, I am hoping for a general fix and not just a retina display fix (2x) because there will be no in between. With a general fix they could implement a slider that allows you to resize everything to fit any resolution.
But back on topic, I am pretty surprised if this is true. I guess they are pushing for a summer release, but I guess they could be pretty much feature complete by now and just need to work out bugs.
Apple can spend the time to make graphics for each flavor of iPhone or iPad because there aren't that many to deal with. It becomes a lot more difficult to do this across a large range of products. Besides, computers are getting to the point where they are too powerful for most users (hence the popularity of the iPad). A retina display option would give people more incentive to upgrade their desktops, laptops, etc. I think?
As a designer, I'd love a retina 27" ACD. 300dpi right on my screen, almost perfect. Now if we could just get the color/brightness a little more accurate...
I really don't see the point of a display anywhere near 300DPI for a desktop or laptop. My MBP 15" with the 1680x1050 display has a DPI of 128, and with this I can only see the pixels of the fonts if my face is 6" away from the screen, which is above the keyboard. If you have a monitor on a desk it is going to be at least a foot away, but probably more like 1.5-2 feet.
Some of Apples displays are still around 90-100 DPI which I could see upgrading from those to around 150 or so. The main reason they aren't doing it right now is because the menu bar and all other interface elements would be tiny. On my MBP they are already pretty small along with all the default fonts and that is only at 128DPI.
So some kind of resolution independence is necessary, I am hoping for a general fix and not just a retina display fix (2x) because there will be no in between. With a general fix they could implement a slider that allows you to resize everything to fit any resolution.
But back on topic, I am pretty surprised if this is true. I guess they are pushing for a summer release, but I guess they could be pretty much feature complete by now and just need to work out bugs.
No comments:
Post a Comment