11thIndian
Apr 6, 08:05 AM
Yikes! Better offload my copy of the current version of FCS before it drops too low.
Any takers? :D
If you're planning on buying the new FCS at an "Upgrade" price, you can't sell your old version. You still need the serial # for installations.
Any takers? :D
If you're planning on buying the new FCS at an "Upgrade" price, you can't sell your old version. You still need the serial # for installations.
aiqw9182
Apr 10, 12:40 AM
Hoping for some better multi-core support(although probably going to have to wait for Lion for the newer QuickTime engine) and a UI that isn't from the 90's:
http://www.candlerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/03_ambit_fullscreen-300x232.jpg
^ Final Cut on Mac OS 9
Final Cut on Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard:
http://adobe-discount.com/product_images/o/apple_final_cut_express_hd_4__90390.jpg
Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
http://www.candlerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/03_ambit_fullscreen-300x232.jpg
^ Final Cut on Mac OS 9
Final Cut on Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard:
http://adobe-discount.com/product_images/o/apple_final_cut_express_hd_4__90390.jpg
Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
Yvan256
Apr 10, 12:02 PM
Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic...
At least the one on their website looks fine (yet still ugly), the one on MacRumors looks resized and the pixels got messed up... :confused:
At least the one on their website looks fine (yet still ugly), the one on MacRumors looks resized and the pixels got messed up... :confused:
Evangelion
Aug 18, 04:44 AM
I have to say, I actually expected the woodcrest results to be better. It really shows that the G5 was years ahead of the competition. :cool:
On some tasks, it was. Overall, it was merely competetive with what was available on the x86-world at the time (Opteron etc.). The difference was that G4 was getting massacred by x86, G5 restored parity.
Yes, G5 whooped ass on some benchmarks. And lost in some other benchmarks. But at least it wasn't getting it's ass whooped all the time and everywhere ;)
On some tasks, it was. Overall, it was merely competetive with what was available on the x86-world at the time (Opteron etc.). The difference was that G4 was getting massacred by x86, G5 restored parity.
Yes, G5 whooped ass on some benchmarks. And lost in some other benchmarks. But at least it wasn't getting it's ass whooped all the time and everywhere ;)
thunng8
Aug 31, 09:15 PM
Check it out!
http://barefeats.com/quad06.html
The 3 ghz Mac Pro is neck and neck with the G5 Quad in the Adobe benchmarks, sick considering the fact it's running under rosetta!!
It is worth noting that Barefeats has updated their comparison using much more typical photoshop operations:
http://www.barefeats.com/quad11.html
Which shows a much different picture, with the PowerPC models outperforming the MacPro by a significant margin.
http://barefeats.com/quad06.html
The 3 ghz Mac Pro is neck and neck with the G5 Quad in the Adobe benchmarks, sick considering the fact it's running under rosetta!!
It is worth noting that Barefeats has updated their comparison using much more typical photoshop operations:
http://www.barefeats.com/quad11.html
Which shows a much different picture, with the PowerPC models outperforming the MacPro by a significant margin.
neko girl
Mar 3, 11:12 PM
Invalid because it endorses something that could cause the collapse of society
This is true because you say it's true?
This is true because you say it's true?
Thex1138
Apr 19, 07:34 PM
So what's your point? The presence of competition does not harm a competitor? Seems contrary to that whole "competition" word.
And your next point is what? A successful company should allow a competitor to use it's technology/patents to compete with it? All at the same time as just taking it from all the competitors that sue Apple on the other companies' patents, right?
How many anti-Apple suing trolls here are also pro-other company suing Apple trolls in other threads?
So you don't like the way IP law works? Vote for someone who will change the legal structure. Until then, corporations are going to work in the environment your legislators and courts created. Hate the game, not the player.
Where did i say I don't like how IP works buddy? Where in my post does it read 'don't like the way IP law works' ? Wipe your tears and try again... Don't make $#!t up.
the rest of your blurb about stuff in your head that I didn't event write isn't worth responding too...
My anecdote premise was pretty straight forward...
Two dudes who come from some place where they don't read tech feeds as often as the rest of us here... they go to a city shop and get sold phones that look like the ones they heard about...iPhones... the premise is not necessarily from the US... from any country on the planet where average Joes go to a tech shop to buy a smartphone... they look and feel and work in very similar ways which causes confusion.
P.S. The whole point of Apple's patent leverage is that they have... patented everything about their devices... form factor, processes, icons and interface... When you read deep into the context and content of Apple's submission which includes these comparisons and that Samsung copied everything and then applying a slight-of-hand to make it look a little different...
:rolleyes:
Like i say.. a bunch of Jawa's selling second hand Android's
And your next point is what? A successful company should allow a competitor to use it's technology/patents to compete with it? All at the same time as just taking it from all the competitors that sue Apple on the other companies' patents, right?
How many anti-Apple suing trolls here are also pro-other company suing Apple trolls in other threads?
So you don't like the way IP law works? Vote for someone who will change the legal structure. Until then, corporations are going to work in the environment your legislators and courts created. Hate the game, not the player.
Where did i say I don't like how IP works buddy? Where in my post does it read 'don't like the way IP law works' ? Wipe your tears and try again... Don't make $#!t up.
the rest of your blurb about stuff in your head that I didn't event write isn't worth responding too...
My anecdote premise was pretty straight forward...
Two dudes who come from some place where they don't read tech feeds as often as the rest of us here... they go to a city shop and get sold phones that look like the ones they heard about...iPhones... the premise is not necessarily from the US... from any country on the planet where average Joes go to a tech shop to buy a smartphone... they look and feel and work in very similar ways which causes confusion.
P.S. The whole point of Apple's patent leverage is that they have... patented everything about their devices... form factor, processes, icons and interface... When you read deep into the context and content of Apple's submission which includes these comparisons and that Samsung copied everything and then applying a slight-of-hand to make it look a little different...
:rolleyes:
Like i say.. a bunch of Jawa's selling second hand Android's
Pro31
Apr 6, 02:10 PM
If you bought 2 Xooms would you have a Mazda?
Ensoniq
Jul 28, 12:12 AM
Just to clarify a few things...
Merom does NOT use less power than Yonah. The cause of confusion about this is that Merom DOES use less power than the Pentium M. And Conroe uses less power than the Pentium D and Pentium 4. And Woodcrest uses less power than the previous Xeon chips. So people are confusing the latter as a misrepresentation of the former.
Merom uses the same amount of power essentially per MHz as Yonah. However, it is 20% more efficient than Yonah is. So while putting Merom into any of the current machines will NOT make them cooler or use less power than the Yonah versions, they will all:
1 - Be approximately 20% faster at the same MHz rating.
2 - Have 64-bit capability.
3 - Have enhanced SSE (closer to AltiVec than previous Intel chips.)
Some of the Merom chips also have twice the L2 cache (4 MB vs. 2 MB) which would also increase speeds, but the other items above are more important in the grand scheme of things.
Merom does NOT use less power than Yonah. The cause of confusion about this is that Merom DOES use less power than the Pentium M. And Conroe uses less power than the Pentium D and Pentium 4. And Woodcrest uses less power than the previous Xeon chips. So people are confusing the latter as a misrepresentation of the former.
Merom uses the same amount of power essentially per MHz as Yonah. However, it is 20% more efficient than Yonah is. So while putting Merom into any of the current machines will NOT make them cooler or use less power than the Yonah versions, they will all:
1 - Be approximately 20% faster at the same MHz rating.
2 - Have 64-bit capability.
3 - Have enhanced SSE (closer to AltiVec than previous Intel chips.)
Some of the Merom chips also have twice the L2 cache (4 MB vs. 2 MB) which would also increase speeds, but the other items above are more important in the grand scheme of things.
Tailpike1153
Apr 27, 08:58 AM
I think it was not a bug, nut data waiting to be sent to Apple for profit generating purposes.
But if Apple has been using this acquired data, why on earth is it allowing Google and others to eat away at its mobile & tablet marketshare? Why collect data if it isn't relevant to you business.
But if Apple has been using this acquired data, why on earth is it allowing Google and others to eat away at its mobile & tablet marketshare? Why collect data if it isn't relevant to you business.
Eraserhead
Jul 14, 02:35 PM
As usual though they come with 50% of the necessary RAM :rolleyes:, why Apple can't get this right I don't know.
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
Acerone
Apr 6, 10:50 AM
can we also expect, ?
-backlit keys
-brighter display, colors, and ips
-hd facetime
all would be greatly appreciated along with the sandy bridge
fingers crossed for no over-heating issues, you know how those turbo speeds can get and how they've treated the 13'' pros
+1
-backlit keys
-brighter display, colors, and ips
-hd facetime
all would be greatly appreciated along with the sandy bridge
fingers crossed for no over-heating issues, you know how those turbo speeds can get and how they've treated the 13'' pros
+1
scotty321
Apr 7, 10:46 PM
Anybody who knows anything about the people who work at Best Buy will tell you that they are all a bunch of untrustworthy backstabbing liars, and you can't trust a thing they do or a thing they tell you. Best Buy is the worst.
macfan881
Nov 12, 12:21 PM
http://www.viddler.com/explore/PSBlogEU/videos/858/
peeInMyPantz
Jul 28, 12:50 AM
I'm hoping for Merom news at WWDC but Fujitsu announced Merom laptops that will only be available sometime in Q4 I hope the same isn't true for the MBP.
http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/27/fujitsu-to-add-core-2-duo-options-to-lifebook-n6400-series/
at least they made an announcement.
do you think apple will try to release core 2 duo notebooks as soon as possible, before Leopard? so that once Leopard is released, more users have to buy it separately. the longer the wait, chances are there are less users that will switch from their current MBP to the new MBP knowing that Leopard's release date is soon.
http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/27/fujitsu-to-add-core-2-duo-options-to-lifebook-n6400-series/
at least they made an announcement.
do you think apple will try to release core 2 duo notebooks as soon as possible, before Leopard? so that once Leopard is released, more users have to buy it separately. the longer the wait, chances are there are less users that will switch from their current MBP to the new MBP knowing that Leopard's release date is soon.
DJMastaWes
Aug 26, 04:10 PM
So, if Merom is out the 28th and possiblity of Merom MBPs comeing out the 29th? or sometime BEFORE September.
Snowy_River
Jul 28, 05:37 PM
That looks stunningly beautiful. wish there were 3 or 4 card slots though.
Well, I was trying to hit the mid-point. The PM has four, and the Mini has none, so I put in two. If I had put in a third one, I would have had to make it taller.
(Of course, I realize that both the two and the four aren't quite accurate, as the PM has one slot taken up by the video card, so it's really three, as does my M++ so it's really only got one. But a strong argument can be made that people who need more than one expansion slot should really get a full sized system...)
Well, I was trying to hit the mid-point. The PM has four, and the Mini has none, so I put in two. If I had put in a third one, I would have had to make it taller.
(Of course, I realize that both the two and the four aren't quite accurate, as the PM has one slot taken up by the video card, so it's really three, as does my M++ so it's really only got one. But a strong argument can be made that people who need more than one expansion slot should really get a full sized system...)
8CoreWhore
Mar 26, 03:33 AM
The Initial Golden Master Sorta Kinda pre Platinum - Maybe Version. :cool:
zacman
Apr 19, 02:53 PM
What is the present smartphone marketshare?
For Q1/11 aprox. 15% for Apple.
Q4/10 numbers were:
http://www.canalys.com/pr/images/r2011013.gif
Again: Apple sold 3 million more devices in Q4/10 than they did in Q3/10 (16 million compared to 13 million in total numbers) but they lost 0.7% marketshare in that 3 month (Q3/10: 16.7% marketshare, see first graph, Q4/10: 16.0%, see above).
For Q1/11 aprox. 15% for Apple.
Q4/10 numbers were:
http://www.canalys.com/pr/images/r2011013.gif
Again: Apple sold 3 million more devices in Q4/10 than they did in Q3/10 (16 million compared to 13 million in total numbers) but they lost 0.7% marketshare in that 3 month (Q3/10: 16.7% marketshare, see first graph, Q4/10: 16.0%, see above).
WiiDSmoker
Apr 19, 01:39 PM
Apple better not win this case and anyone who thinks that they should are a fool.
marksman
Mar 31, 03:49 PM
This is the right move for Google as Android has become a cluster...
That being said it does go directly against how they have built android up, and how they have pitched it to businesses and consumers alike. This is a very significant change.
I think this actually opens the window for Microsoft and their mobile OS now. It is not free, but now it becomes a legitimate option compared to Android for all handset makers outside of Apple and perhaps HP if they ever make handsets.
It is funny one of the first things some people here would say when Android was brought up is "It is open!". You can hem and haw all you want, but for all intents and purposes it is no longer open. Google signing off on all changes and them having no timetable for releasing Honeycomb source code is not open in any way shape or form.
That being said it does go directly against how they have built android up, and how they have pitched it to businesses and consumers alike. This is a very significant change.
I think this actually opens the window for Microsoft and their mobile OS now. It is not free, but now it becomes a legitimate option compared to Android for all handset makers outside of Apple and perhaps HP if they ever make handsets.
It is funny one of the first things some people here would say when Android was brought up is "It is open!". You can hem and haw all you want, but for all intents and purposes it is no longer open. Google signing off on all changes and them having no timetable for releasing Honeycomb source code is not open in any way shape or form.
evil89
Mar 31, 04:32 PM
That's ridiculous.. If It was for HTC, my Hero would have it's support blocked in a 2.1 buggish system with a daylong battery life.. Thanks to "cooked" rom I've 2.3 Gingerbread with an overclocked phone, terminal access and 5 day of battery...
Stupid.. stupid move indeed...
Stupid.. stupid move indeed...
Evangelion
Apr 8, 05:03 AM
[B]Until Apple can get more of its own stores it needs BB more than BB needs it. So I doubt Apple went all hurt or p.o.'d girlfriend on them.
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
Amazing Iceman
Mar 23, 08:28 AM
And every new version of itunes requires a bigger and faster computer to run, your point? Hardware moves on , every companys takes advantage of that.
office 2010 runs fine on older hardware just like windows 7 does. I would suggest you tr it out yourself before making such statements. Office 2010 runs fine on my 5 year old computer my wife uses.
If you read my original post, you'll notice that I was referring to the fact that many programmers are careless about optimizing their code all because they can count on a large amount of resources, and because they get lazy.
That's why recently Microsoft made a big deal about some of their new software being either rewritten or optimized, when the case is that it was already expected from them to deploy optimized software.
Most Mac programmers are good at optimizing, while many Windows programmers are not.
I have seen Office for Windows run on several computers, as I provide IT support. I know how it works, not just because I see it, but because the users complain about it. Surely, it may run decent on a system with a large size of RAM, but if they didn't have that much RAM and the previous version ran fine with what they had, and now the new one runs slow while adding not enough functionality, then that's being a sloppy programmer.
I don't want to start a discussion about Office I don't really have a problem about it, plus it gets off topic.
office 2010 runs fine on older hardware just like windows 7 does. I would suggest you tr it out yourself before making such statements. Office 2010 runs fine on my 5 year old computer my wife uses.
If you read my original post, you'll notice that I was referring to the fact that many programmers are careless about optimizing their code all because they can count on a large amount of resources, and because they get lazy.
That's why recently Microsoft made a big deal about some of their new software being either rewritten or optimized, when the case is that it was already expected from them to deploy optimized software.
Most Mac programmers are good at optimizing, while many Windows programmers are not.
I have seen Office for Windows run on several computers, as I provide IT support. I know how it works, not just because I see it, but because the users complain about it. Surely, it may run decent on a system with a large size of RAM, but if they didn't have that much RAM and the previous version ran fine with what they had, and now the new one runs slow while adding not enough functionality, then that's being a sloppy programmer.
I don't want to start a discussion about Office I don't really have a problem about it, plus it gets off topic.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario