daneoni
Aug 25, 02:58 PM
Well i guess they've become so popular it hurts...literally
Employed Lloyd
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?
There are plenty of ways to put FCP outputs on blu-ray.
If it's commercially worthless, that's news to the hundreds of thousands of us who make our living using it every single day.
There are plenty of ways to put FCP outputs on blu-ray.
If it's commercially worthless, that's news to the hundreds of thousands of us who make our living using it every single day.
wmmk
Aug 20, 01:04 AM
Anyone ever check and see if Quicktime was Universal
if i'm not mistaken, it's been universal since osx for intel was released.
if i'm not mistaken, it's been universal since osx for intel was released.
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:46 PM
Great argument, except that OK Go are signed to a major label, Capitol Records, only one of the most histroically great labels!! Please see: The Beach Boys, Pink Floyd, The Beatles, Nat King Cole, etc.)! :rolleyes: YouTube doesn't sell music; just look at OK Go's numbers, they are mediocre at best. One hugely popular viral video is not going to move that many CDs.
Also, as an aside, they are not "recording studios," they are "recording labels," or more commonly, "record labels."
Those bands became what they are in different times my friend.
And sorry about the recording studios thing, I am not a native english speaker.
Also, as an aside, they are not "recording studios," they are "recording labels," or more commonly, "record labels."
Those bands became what they are in different times my friend.
And sorry about the recording studios thing, I am not a native english speaker.
Shasterball
Apr 19, 01:58 PM
Parties do not understate potential damages in a lawsuit. No way. No how.
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 05:02 PM
We should either stay out of ALL interference, or else put on the damn star-spangled cape and superhero tights and get to business already. Wherever evil is, we must go and fight it! :rolleyes:
That's what it might look like from your shores. Fortunately, the world and life isn't so black and white.
Quite right. So far the whole Libya affair has a lot more in common with Desert Fox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Iraq_(December_1998)) than Iraq...
Operationally, perhaps. But politically, more in line with Bosnia, a civil war on Europe's borders involving genocide... with the added complications of Gaddafi's record, set in context of uprisings across the entire region.
It's much easier than actually addressing your real views... it's a defense mechanism which she uses to avoid serious debate.
Chuckle of the evening. Serious debate? You have no idea what debate is, endlessly unthinkingly recycling the same garbage that's so easily shot down from Heritage and other paid shills, thinking Fox News is a news organisation and Newt Gingrich is some kind of debating genius. Newt Gingrich, the idiot-savant, who only two weeks ago was urging the president:
Asked, �what would you do about Libya?� Gingrich responded:
Exercise a no-fly zone this evening. � We don�t need to have the United Nations. All we have to say is that we think that slaughtering your own citizens is unacceptable and that we�re intervening.
and now is saying:
wiz khalifa amber rose tattoo
Wiz Khalifa Tattoos Amber
amber rose and wiz khalifa
Wiz Khalifa Claims Amber Rose
wiz khalifa tattoos amber rose
wiz khalifa and amber rose
wiz khalifa and amber rose
wiz khalifa and amber rose.
wiz khalifa and amber rose.
So Wiz Khalifa and Amber Rose
wiz khalifa and amber rose.
wiz khalifa and amber rose.
Wiz Khalifa in Billionaire
That's what it might look like from your shores. Fortunately, the world and life isn't so black and white.
Quite right. So far the whole Libya affair has a lot more in common with Desert Fox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Iraq_(December_1998)) than Iraq...
Operationally, perhaps. But politically, more in line with Bosnia, a civil war on Europe's borders involving genocide... with the added complications of Gaddafi's record, set in context of uprisings across the entire region.
It's much easier than actually addressing your real views... it's a defense mechanism which she uses to avoid serious debate.
Chuckle of the evening. Serious debate? You have no idea what debate is, endlessly unthinkingly recycling the same garbage that's so easily shot down from Heritage and other paid shills, thinking Fox News is a news organisation and Newt Gingrich is some kind of debating genius. Newt Gingrich, the idiot-savant, who only two weeks ago was urging the president:
Asked, �what would you do about Libya?� Gingrich responded:
Exercise a no-fly zone this evening. � We don�t need to have the United Nations. All we have to say is that we think that slaughtering your own citizens is unacceptable and that we�re intervening.
and now is saying:
batitombo
Apr 25, 02:20 PM
I'm so over this ****
rotarydialz
Apr 27, 08:58 AM
correct. wasn't sure how long it would take for people in general to get up in arms about location privacy on the idevices... what did people think was going to happen??
such it is, our electronic tethers are really leashes.
It's not very accurate information apparently. I would like to know just how accurate this location tracking is before I get too excited.
such it is, our electronic tethers are really leashes.
It's not very accurate information apparently. I would like to know just how accurate this location tracking is before I get too excited.
eMagius
Aug 8, 07:31 AM
hmmm, most of the features are already in windows? what version of windows do you have?
2003.
2003.
mc68k
Dec 7, 12:47 AM
well i bought a delorean s2. hadn't seen it come up before in the used lot, and ive been checking pretty much every time. was at the bottom of the list and i had to sell a few of my cars before i could buy it. 517K! not even something i can win high HP races with, but damn cool :cool:
MrCrowbar
Jul 27, 06:50 PM
Ok, here goes. (Quick pass)
http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/3350/macminidblwidepk4.jpg
Eeek. Not so sure I like that.
Hmmm... maybe with just one slot?
http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/4436/macminidblwideunislotvr9.jpg
A little better. I personally prefer the taller narrower one, though.
Actually I like the one with 2 slots. Perfect for all those people wanting 2 drives. :-)
http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/3350/macminidblwidepk4.jpg
Eeek. Not so sure I like that.
Hmmm... maybe with just one slot?
http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/4436/macminidblwideunislotvr9.jpg
A little better. I personally prefer the taller narrower one, though.
Actually I like the one with 2 slots. Perfect for all those people wanting 2 drives. :-)
macfan881
Aug 6, 08:24 PM
I'm hoping for a major bombshell of an announcement when it comes to Leopard. I've said it before and I will say it again - the gap between Windows and OS X will narrow with Vista. Yes we are all aware that Vista in all likelihood is going to be just as buggy as 10.0 when it was released. But keep in mind that this will probably be the last version of OS X to be released for the next 18+ months. (When its all said and done its prob going to be close to 2 years with 10.4->10.5) That time frame is more then enough time for MS to release SP1 and SP2 which WILL happen once its released, the general public (a.k.a Beta testers.) get their hands on it, and MS starts getting those crash reports.
Leopard needs to go up against MS's next generation and to be honest while 10.4 vs. XP is a non contest the same can't be said between 10.4 and Vista. That gap is narrowed. Apple needs to do something more then Expose, Spotlight, Dashboard, icon changes, and migrating more and more of their graphic subsystem onto the video card. All of those changes are good and worthy additions to OS X but it's incremental. It's Apple doing cleanup from the days of 10.0. It's Apple resting on their laurels. This simply can't happen anymore. The gap between Windows and OS X NEEDS to widen again. If it doesn't the "its good enough" mentality that many PC users have will only increase because like it or not Vista IS a major revamp of Windows under the hood. Yes a revamp with many key missing technologies but a revamp of the core OS nonetheless.
We need something that was as revolutionary as 9.x ->10.0. While I'm under no illusions that Apple isn't ready to revamp the entire GUI they HAVE to have been working on new stuff over the last 6 years. There has to be something that almost done baking in the bowels of Cupertino that can make it into 10.5.
PS- Please Apple; FTFF.
i agree i think there will be something unexpected we didnt think of for leapord maybe that would be full native suport of windows programs with out dual booting something like parcells sp? or even possible we finaly get a media center type of system we heard rumors about to
Leopard needs to go up against MS's next generation and to be honest while 10.4 vs. XP is a non contest the same can't be said between 10.4 and Vista. That gap is narrowed. Apple needs to do something more then Expose, Spotlight, Dashboard, icon changes, and migrating more and more of their graphic subsystem onto the video card. All of those changes are good and worthy additions to OS X but it's incremental. It's Apple doing cleanup from the days of 10.0. It's Apple resting on their laurels. This simply can't happen anymore. The gap between Windows and OS X NEEDS to widen again. If it doesn't the "its good enough" mentality that many PC users have will only increase because like it or not Vista IS a major revamp of Windows under the hood. Yes a revamp with many key missing technologies but a revamp of the core OS nonetheless.
We need something that was as revolutionary as 9.x ->10.0. While I'm under no illusions that Apple isn't ready to revamp the entire GUI they HAVE to have been working on new stuff over the last 6 years. There has to be something that almost done baking in the bowels of Cupertino that can make it into 10.5.
PS- Please Apple; FTFF.
i agree i think there will be something unexpected we didnt think of for leapord maybe that would be full native suport of windows programs with out dual booting something like parcells sp? or even possible we finaly get a media center type of system we heard rumors about to
kdarling
Apr 6, 02:32 PM
As was pointed out by a previous poster, iOS was developed for tablet use.
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first, although its idea of using a touch UI was not.
As Jobs explained, there was a simple UI demo done on a touch device originally designed to be a keyboard input prototype. That demo gave him the idea to go all touch on the iPhone. That's what he meant by "the tablet came first".
Since we know that during summer/fall the first iPhone UI concepts were done using iPods with wheels, his touch "eureka" moment probably came in late with the UI demo almost certainly done under OSX.
According to all known histories, the actual creation of iOS didn't begin until 2006. Prior to that, some at Apple were still proposing using Linux for the phone OS.
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first, although its idea of using a touch UI was not.
As Jobs explained, there was a simple UI demo done on a touch device originally designed to be a keyboard input prototype. That demo gave him the idea to go all touch on the iPhone. That's what he meant by "the tablet came first".
Since we know that during summer/fall the first iPhone UI concepts were done using iPods with wheels, his touch "eureka" moment probably came in late with the UI demo almost certainly done under OSX.
According to all known histories, the actual creation of iOS didn't begin until 2006. Prior to that, some at Apple were still proposing using Linux for the phone OS.
wizard
Mar 26, 10:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
It is pretty incredible that the ignorance around Mac OS releases never stops. For one thing if you loose data on a computer, the only person to blame is the one staring at you in the mirror.
Even the whine about nothing worthwhile for the user is a bit old and reflects what we heard about SL. Yet SL on my early 2008 MBP was a drastic improvement for the user right out of the box and just got better with each update. User facing features are the only reason to update, fixes to underlying facilities can go a long way to justifying the software update.
As to the server integration, it hasn't and never will be a product worth $500. It is great that Apple is adding support to the base install but people need to realize a few things. One is that Mac OS is UNIX, people need to get that through their heads. Thus Apples server product only really adds in what is already seen in many UNIX intallations in a base install. Speaking of which much of that functionality is well established open source. Second the pricing of "server" software seems to be tailored to fit the mentality of the corporate world, where they feel they need to pay big bucks for something trivial. It is no wonder that Linux as established itself as a server OS in the SOHO world and at some of the more forward thinking larger corporations. As others have pointed out the basics of UNIX have been around for ages now, very little new territory is being cleared here, thus little justification for up charges on server software.
Finally it is a bit cowardly to avoid the future because you see nothing of value there for you personally. It is frightenly similar to the attitude seen in those that cut their own wrists.
It is pretty incredible that the ignorance around Mac OS releases never stops. For one thing if you loose data on a computer, the only person to blame is the one staring at you in the mirror.
Even the whine about nothing worthwhile for the user is a bit old and reflects what we heard about SL. Yet SL on my early 2008 MBP was a drastic improvement for the user right out of the box and just got better with each update. User facing features are the only reason to update, fixes to underlying facilities can go a long way to justifying the software update.
As to the server integration, it hasn't and never will be a product worth $500. It is great that Apple is adding support to the base install but people need to realize a few things. One is that Mac OS is UNIX, people need to get that through their heads. Thus Apples server product only really adds in what is already seen in many UNIX intallations in a base install. Speaking of which much of that functionality is well established open source. Second the pricing of "server" software seems to be tailored to fit the mentality of the corporate world, where they feel they need to pay big bucks for something trivial. It is no wonder that Linux as established itself as a server OS in the SOHO world and at some of the more forward thinking larger corporations. As others have pointed out the basics of UNIX have been around for ages now, very little new territory is being cleared here, thus little justification for up charges on server software.
Finally it is a bit cowardly to avoid the future because you see nothing of value there for you personally. It is frightenly similar to the attitude seen in those that cut their own wrists.
mc68k
Dec 6, 01:20 PM
I have only done one. But I didn't feel as if I could start the race, leave, come back and have won. The race I did, I watched. My guy was in 1st the up until the last lap, and the person in 2nd over took him. I am sure if I was not there to instruct him to "over take" he would not have done it and I would have gotten 2nd.
Maybe I just need to level up?yeah your bspec driver will really suck until he's leveled up a bit. still havent figured out why you would want more than one bspec driver, prob for the later enduro races? got my bspec up to 12, he's racing and overtaking much better now. the amount the bspec driver levels up every time is small, so it's very grind-y but at least you don't have to watch it, and you get some diff gift cars than the same race in a-spec
Maybe I just need to level up?yeah your bspec driver will really suck until he's leveled up a bit. still havent figured out why you would want more than one bspec driver, prob for the later enduro races? got my bspec up to 12, he's racing and overtaking much better now. the amount the bspec driver levels up every time is small, so it's very grind-y but at least you don't have to watch it, and you get some diff gift cars than the same race in a-spec
Tommyg117
Aug 11, 10:44 AM
My phone plan runs out next month, hopefully it comes out soon.
janstett
Sep 15, 08:26 AM
And of course, NT started as a reimplementation of VMS for a failed Intel RISC CPU...
More pedantic details for those who are interested... :)
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
More pedantic details for those who are interested... :)
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
Zadillo
Aug 27, 07:49 PM
From the benchmarks I've seen, the 3000/X3000 stuff (the 965 integrated graphics) is *slower* than the 945 integrated graphics. The only advantage it offers is SM 3.0 (pixel shaders), which are required for Vista compliance -- and that nice little sticker that all new PC systems will want for this holiday season. I wouldn't consider it an upgrade.
Do you mean Vista Premium compliance? I'm pretty sure I've seen "Ready for Vista" stickers on plenty of current notebooks featuring GMA950 graphics, for example.
And btw, I have to say "good job" to Apple for doing whatever was necessary to avoid having to put a bunch of goofy decals on their computers. The most amazing thing to me is the number of PC notebook users that leave all those stickers on (I've even seen some people leave the "features" stickers on).
Do you mean Vista Premium compliance? I'm pretty sure I've seen "Ready for Vista" stickers on plenty of current notebooks featuring GMA950 graphics, for example.
And btw, I have to say "good job" to Apple for doing whatever was necessary to avoid having to put a bunch of goofy decals on their computers. The most amazing thing to me is the number of PC notebook users that leave all those stickers on (I've even seen some people leave the "features" stickers on).
deconai
Aug 11, 03:48 PM
No, not EVERYONE. I own 4 cell phones. By your logic, I would be counted as 4 people.
I suppose you would be by the cell company.
I suppose you would be by the cell company.
hansen
Aug 8, 01:47 AM
WOW, leopard looks so promising
Time machine and mail enhancements with notes and to-do's would make it all worthwhile for me. I was actually working on to-do's from mail myself as I needed it so bad. Time machine looks like the best solution to the backup/versioning problem I've ever seen. Wow, again! Can't wait.
Time machine and mail enhancements with notes and to-do's would make it all worthwhile for me. I was actually working on to-do's from mail myself as I needed it so bad. Time machine looks like the best solution to the backup/versioning problem I've ever seen. Wow, again! Can't wait.
shawnce
Sep 13, 11:36 AM
Do you mean like how BeOS did things?
Yeah BeOS had this great feature called magic pixel dust. :rolleyes:
All that BeOS had was separate threads per window at the UI level. This does nothing for parallelizing compute tasks. These extra thread that BeOS had spent most of their time doing absolutely nothing.
What Mac OS X has now is several operating services that will automatically scale up to use as many cores possible (while still making sense). Many of the "Core" framework do this without any work by application authors other then then those authors deciding to use those services instead of rolling their own.
For example ColorSync color correction, audio conversion, audio mixing, etc.
...and yes Mac OS X 10.5 is expanding the OS services that will do the right thing (TM) as well as making it easier for developers to transparently and directly utilize the cores available in a system.
Yeah BeOS had this great feature called magic pixel dust. :rolleyes:
All that BeOS had was separate threads per window at the UI level. This does nothing for parallelizing compute tasks. These extra thread that BeOS had spent most of their time doing absolutely nothing.
What Mac OS X has now is several operating services that will automatically scale up to use as many cores possible (while still making sense). Many of the "Core" framework do this without any work by application authors other then then those authors deciding to use those services instead of rolling their own.
For example ColorSync color correction, audio conversion, audio mixing, etc.
...and yes Mac OS X 10.5 is expanding the OS services that will do the right thing (TM) as well as making it easier for developers to transparently and directly utilize the cores available in a system.
devman
Aug 6, 02:00 PM
With the iSight and IR sensor rumored to be integrated into the new line of Cinema Displays, i guess apple's gonna adopt HDMI as the IO interface, making Apple one of the first corps to do so. Plus with a HDMI enabled Mac Pro and Leopard fully support it. Why? HDMI is just like ADC, plus its an industry standard port. U need only one cable to have all the communications (FW+USB+Sound+...) going, without having to clutter yr desktop with multiple cables. I see it coming!
I think they'll go UDI instead of HDMI (and save fees). The really interesting question here though is HDCP and what means for all existing hardware including cinema displays...
I think they'll go UDI instead of HDMI (and save fees). The really interesting question here though is HDCP and what means for all existing hardware including cinema displays...
notjustjay
Nov 28, 11:52 PM
i would love if the government changed the royalty law to extend only to the artists and not the record companies.....
Not only would I support this, I would GLADLY pay an "iPod levy" if somehow it was guaranteed to land in the pockets of the artists who I listened to.
It's corporate greed that I refuse to bow down to.
Not only would I support this, I would GLADLY pay an "iPod levy" if somehow it was guaranteed to land in the pockets of the artists who I listened to.
It's corporate greed that I refuse to bow down to.
~Shard~
Jul 15, 01:31 PM
The point is that Apple doesn't have an option for potential buyers that want a high performance, customisable and upgradable consumer level product (not all-in-one). There are no Apple product to compare those $1199 Conroe PCs to. The closest thing is the iMac.
Exactly. As I said above, a PowerMac is overkill (on both price and power) for many users. The iMac might suit their needs from this perspective, however many people do not like the fact that they are not upgradeable (apart from the RAM). What if I want a larger HDD in my iMac? What if I want two HDDs? What if I want to swap in a new burner? What if the HDD fails? It would be nice to pop a new one in, not have to buy a whole new machine. And then there's the display. If the HDD goes, as in my example above, how many people would like to throw away that nice 20" display which still works perfectly? Or, vice versa, what if the display goes? The rest of the computer is perfectly fine...
A Conroe mini-tower would be perfect for many people. The gap between Mac mini/iMac and PowerMac is simply too large for many people. :cool:
Exactly. As I said above, a PowerMac is overkill (on both price and power) for many users. The iMac might suit their needs from this perspective, however many people do not like the fact that they are not upgradeable (apart from the RAM). What if I want a larger HDD in my iMac? What if I want two HDDs? What if I want to swap in a new burner? What if the HDD fails? It would be nice to pop a new one in, not have to buy a whole new machine. And then there's the display. If the HDD goes, as in my example above, how many people would like to throw away that nice 20" display which still works perfectly? Or, vice versa, what if the display goes? The rest of the computer is perfectly fine...
A Conroe mini-tower would be perfect for many people. The gap between Mac mini/iMac and PowerMac is simply too large for many people. :cool:
No comments:
Post a Comment