CorvusCamenarum
Feb 28, 08:54 PM
But threads like this are above further research. Not sure why you'd want to mess up a perfectly good party.
I was aiming to make a valuable contribution. To what, I'm not so sure. ;)
I was aiming to make a valuable contribution. To what, I'm not so sure. ;)
kuebby
Apr 27, 01:18 PM
obamacare in its smallest form is extreme
stimulus bill is extreme (and extrememly $$)
The extreme people he hires, etc.
Don't lose faith in his craziness just because he's postponed driving our country into the ground.
And it's a good thing he showed his birth certificate. How embarrassing would it be for us to look back, and the man who did all the damage wasn't even born here?
If you want america to be like europe. Go to europe and pretend you're in america. Don't jack up America for those of us who love it for what it was founded on.
(insert here where some smart-A responds with "slavery?" or something equally inapplicable)
I see what you did there... but unfortunately slavery IS [one] of the things this country was founded upon. The 3/5ths compromise is in the Constitution.
It's not that people want America to be more like Europe (which in some ways would be nice), it's just that we don't want America to be a third world country (like our education statistics already kind of show, as well as the batshit crazy ideas people believe and politicians they elect).
stimulus bill is extreme (and extrememly $$)
The extreme people he hires, etc.
Don't lose faith in his craziness just because he's postponed driving our country into the ground.
And it's a good thing he showed his birth certificate. How embarrassing would it be for us to look back, and the man who did all the damage wasn't even born here?
If you want america to be like europe. Go to europe and pretend you're in america. Don't jack up America for those of us who love it for what it was founded on.
(insert here where some smart-A responds with "slavery?" or something equally inapplicable)
I see what you did there... but unfortunately slavery IS [one] of the things this country was founded upon. The 3/5ths compromise is in the Constitution.
It's not that people want America to be more like Europe (which in some ways would be nice), it's just that we don't want America to be a third world country (like our education statistics already kind of show, as well as the batshit crazy ideas people believe and politicians they elect).
yoak
Apr 11, 08:28 AM
Then that just begs the question, "why haven't these people left already?" FCP has been fairly stagnant for years. There are plenty of other alternatives, so doesn't that kinda make them fanboyish too for sticking it out when up to this point Apple has given zero hints about when or how it will take FCP to the next level?
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
It's costly to change. It takes time to learn new software, time that could be spent working instead. Then it's all the money already invested in the platform.
At least here, premiere is not really an option if you work in broadcast or film since everyone either use final cut or avid
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
It's costly to change. It takes time to learn new software, time that could be spent working instead. Then it's all the money already invested in the platform.
At least here, premiere is not really an option if you work in broadcast or film since everyone either use final cut or avid
onigami
Apr 10, 06:22 AM
Something is rotten in the state of Denmark, and it ain't the whole fact that Apple pushed aside every professional vid company just to announce their product. It's that they never have announced pro-level products at/alongside professional trade shows prior to this. CES is one thing, but I don't ever recall Apple ever placing any presence at/during NAB or AES (the latter of which they would present something related to the Logic Pro) before. Even for egotists like Apple, this is completely unusual. In recent years, new makes of Logic and Final Cut have dropped with no warning whatsoever. Furthermore, this is a Usergroup meetup. This lacks the professionalism of a standard Apple product announcement.
Besides, why would anyone from the upper ranks of Apple (Ives, Cook, Jobs) even meet with a professional usergroup? I don't recall any of those guys ever talking about Final Cut or Logic in any Apple event, precisely because they are niche products that target an audience a hundredth, maybe a thousandth the size of the main Apple demographic. You don't need to utilize executive charisma to sell these products.
Finally, while I don't know whether software stocks are different from hardware stocks, I just checked Apple's website, and FCS, FCE, and FCServer are readily available for shipping within 24 hours.
My theory? This isn't Apple, but a very elaborate prank being pulled by some con artists.
(also: Why the hell is there an idle timer that automatically logs me out after 10 minutes of inactivity?)
Besides, why would anyone from the upper ranks of Apple (Ives, Cook, Jobs) even meet with a professional usergroup? I don't recall any of those guys ever talking about Final Cut or Logic in any Apple event, precisely because they are niche products that target an audience a hundredth, maybe a thousandth the size of the main Apple demographic. You don't need to utilize executive charisma to sell these products.
Finally, while I don't know whether software stocks are different from hardware stocks, I just checked Apple's website, and FCS, FCE, and FCServer are readily available for shipping within 24 hours.
My theory? This isn't Apple, but a very elaborate prank being pulled by some con artists.
(also: Why the hell is there an idle timer that automatically logs me out after 10 minutes of inactivity?)
pkson
Apr 5, 11:43 PM
I wonder if they're gonna add (slightly useless) stuff from iMovie like face recognition (It's a great idea, but it takes too long to go through all the clips..)
I hope FCP is just awesome beyond comprehension.
I hope FCP is just awesome beyond comprehension.
MacRumors
Mar 31, 02:21 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/31/google-tightening-control-over-android-as-fragmentation-increases/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/31/152050-android_honeycomb_icon.jpg
2012 Ford Mustang Boss 302 5.0
2012 Mustang Boss 302 Wheel
THE BOSS IS BACK: 2012 FORD
Ford Mustang Boss 302
2012 mustang boss wallpaper.
2012 mustang boss wallpaper.
2012 Ford Mustang Boss 302
2012 Mustang Boss 302 Pricing
2012 mustang boss white.
2012 mustang boss pictures.
2012 mustang boss gt.
2012 mustang boss pictures.
Yellow Blaze 2012 Mustang Boss
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/31/152050-android_honeycomb_icon.jpg
handsome pete
Apr 6, 12:42 PM
What businesses out there can just switch operating systems on a whim because they latest and greatest came out for another platform?
Not that I disagree with what he said, but there are a good share of big post houses that had switched from Avid to FCP or vice versa. Also, from Avid/FCP/other to Adobe.
Not on a whim of course, but it's certainly not crazy to think companies will switch platforms if a better solution is out there.
Not that I disagree with what he said, but there are a good share of big post houses that had switched from Avid to FCP or vice versa. Also, from Avid/FCP/other to Adobe.
Not on a whim of course, but it's certainly not crazy to think companies will switch platforms if a better solution is out there.
majorp
Sep 19, 05:08 AM
Im still on for today, 4 hours and counting.
fastlane1588
Jul 27, 12:19 PM
thats a pretty cool concept i must say
thevofl
Aug 7, 05:32 PM
1) When I did a system restore at work, it restored everything back on the date. I lost all my work since the date.
2) Something tells me that the Super Duper top secret stuff has more to do with multimedia integration: a skype-type feature for calling a phone number using iChat, expansion of bonjour, a multimedia hub similar to tivo.
3) For those at the conference, what was under the black sheet covered banners?
2) Something tells me that the Super Duper top secret stuff has more to do with multimedia integration: a skype-type feature for calling a phone number using iChat, expansion of bonjour, a multimedia hub similar to tivo.
3) For those at the conference, what was under the black sheet covered banners?
iJawn108
Jul 20, 04:55 PM
New MacPro rev2.
8 cores = 24Ghz
(with Free fire extinguisher and ear plugs) :p
I really laughed out loud at that. :p
8 cores = 24Ghz
(with Free fire extinguisher and ear plugs) :p
I really laughed out loud at that. :p
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
Cachiro
Apr 6, 04:10 PM
There is one thing some people don't see, this is one company against an entire army of companies & this one company is doing a hole lot better. Apple will alway be on top when it comes to all this type of gadget get over it people and by the way, I always thought this was Mac rumor forum.
Maybe they should change there name :apple: :D
Maybe they should change there name :apple: :D
gregorsamsa
Aug 27, 11:36 AM
Thanks mate, of course I vent my disappointment regarding the overall quality issues. In any case, it should not be luck to catch a good piece of hardware from a company like APPLE, right? It seems as if the hardware quality has in general decreased, I suspect partly because of the place where this hardware is now manufactured... CHINA. I have my own experience on a corporate level with a large mobile phone manufacturer...
I found that there is a general lack of understanding what quality should be, and especially how long it should last:rolleyes:
CIAO
I agree, it shouldn't be luck. Also, whilst I'm trying to keep an open mind about these issues, I think it's pertinent that quite a few people have pointed to the China-connection as partly responsible for some of the hardware problems. I guess a company like Dell, who sell some very cheap computers, can always get away with imperfect products more so. Because people buying Apple know that they're paying a premium for a certain extra Apple quality, they're entitled to expect Apple to consistently deliver.
I'm definitely not going to excuse Apple for a seemingly alarming number of faults with their first batch of Intel laptops. There's an apparent problem here, however debatable the degree of it, & it needs sorting out. I'd be interested, however, in seeing some statistics about the percentage of faulty laptops from Apple, perhaps over a 12 month period, & how that compares with similarly-priced PC laptops.
Certainly, before I make my next computer purchase (a 15.4" laptop next year), I'll be paying careful attention to Macrumors, & particularly any postings about the quality, or otherwise, of the latest Mac computers.
I found that there is a general lack of understanding what quality should be, and especially how long it should last:rolleyes:
CIAO
I agree, it shouldn't be luck. Also, whilst I'm trying to keep an open mind about these issues, I think it's pertinent that quite a few people have pointed to the China-connection as partly responsible for some of the hardware problems. I guess a company like Dell, who sell some very cheap computers, can always get away with imperfect products more so. Because people buying Apple know that they're paying a premium for a certain extra Apple quality, they're entitled to expect Apple to consistently deliver.
I'm definitely not going to excuse Apple for a seemingly alarming number of faults with their first batch of Intel laptops. There's an apparent problem here, however debatable the degree of it, & it needs sorting out. I'd be interested, however, in seeing some statistics about the percentage of faulty laptops from Apple, perhaps over a 12 month period, & how that compares with similarly-priced PC laptops.
Certainly, before I make my next computer purchase (a 15.4" laptop next year), I'll be paying careful attention to Macrumors, & particularly any postings about the quality, or otherwise, of the latest Mac computers.
JAT
Apr 6, 03:53 PM
What you and every other non-informed are missing is the Xoom lack of apps is a not really a con for 2 reason.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
Scale?? Access to each other??
I'm beginning to wonder if you have ever used EITHER iOS or Android.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
Scale?? Access to each other??
I'm beginning to wonder if you have ever used EITHER iOS or Android.
toddybody
Apr 6, 11:40 AM
what do you think Games on a Mac are? Jeeze dude, thats why I own a gaming PC. You couldnt dream of playing the majority of current titles at max settings on a mac...they need to start giving them real GPU's
Multimedia
Jul 21, 12:20 PM
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
azentropy
Apr 5, 05:31 PM
Not again..
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
Probably not at NAB, but many of the lines are due or overdue and they have made plenty of releases around NAB before (pretty much every year they have released something).
4/2010 - Macbook Pro
4/2008 - iMacs
4/2007 - Mac Pros
4/2006 - Macbook Pro
4/2005 - Power Macs
4/2004 - iBooks/iMacs
4/2003 - iBooks
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
Probably not at NAB, but many of the lines are due or overdue and they have made plenty of releases around NAB before (pretty much every year they have released something).
4/2010 - Macbook Pro
4/2008 - iMacs
4/2007 - Mac Pros
4/2006 - Macbook Pro
4/2005 - Power Macs
4/2004 - iBooks/iMacs
4/2003 - iBooks
iJohnHenry
Mar 21, 02:38 PM
It is in fact somewhat problematic. At present, the government is basically run by moneyed interests that supply the funding needed for the candidates to get into office
Exactly, he's doing the best he can, given the situation he is in.
Perhaps sysiphus could do a better job, without being a broken man as a result? ;)
Exactly, he's doing the best he can, given the situation he is in.
Perhaps sysiphus could do a better job, without being a broken man as a result? ;)
eMagius
Aug 7, 07:36 PM
As others have said, Time Machine is likely either a direct port of Sun's ZFS, or an equivalent implementation in HFS+.
I don't think we can say exactly how things work underneath. Windows 2003 offers differential snapshots without making massive changes to NTFS, for example. It would be neat if Apple did throw its weight behind ZFS, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen with 10.5.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
I don't see how this would work for anything other than other Leopard (maybe Tiger, with a software update) Macs. Spotlight has to have the indexes pre-generated, after all.
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret?
Call me a cynic, but I'd say Apple either hasn't implemented them yet or hasn't thought of them yet.
I don't think we can say exactly how things work underneath. Windows 2003 offers differential snapshots without making massive changes to NTFS, for example. It would be neat if Apple did throw its weight behind ZFS, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen with 10.5.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
I don't see how this would work for anything other than other Leopard (maybe Tiger, with a software update) Macs. Spotlight has to have the indexes pre-generated, after all.
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret?
Call me a cynic, but I'd say Apple either hasn't implemented them yet or hasn't thought of them yet.
dclocke
Sep 19, 09:43 AM
You're so wrong. Most people posting in this thread don't have a clue what 64 bit computing really means. They just think they have to have it because it's the newest thing.
That doesn't mean they think they need a 64-bit processor just so they can use a lot of RAM. I may be wrong, but the content of your post certainly doesn't justify this assertion.
That doesn't mean they think they need a 64-bit processor just so they can use a lot of RAM. I may be wrong, but the content of your post certainly doesn't justify this assertion.
0815
Apr 25, 02:01 PM
What I don't understand is even if Apple is tracking us, why did Steve Jobs simply lie about the claims, thats whats fishy about all this..
Because Apple is not tracking you. Apple does not get any of that data, they will never see or touch it. It is data that is stored locally on your phone out of reach from everyone except you. "Apple tracks you" would mean that the phone is sending the data 'home', but it doesn't. APPLE HAS NO IDEA WHERE THE F YOU ARE OR WERE (and they probably couldn't care less)
Because Apple is not tracking you. Apple does not get any of that data, they will never see or touch it. It is data that is stored locally on your phone out of reach from everyone except you. "Apple tracks you" would mean that the phone is sending the data 'home', but it doesn't. APPLE HAS NO IDEA WHERE THE F YOU ARE OR WERE (and they probably couldn't care less)
Multimedia
Jul 27, 11:48 PM
Ahh so many announcments !!! Kill me now ! I'm waiting for the end of august then I'm buying whatever I can get.You might want to make that til Tuesday September 12 when the Paris Apple Expo opens with an Apple keynote.
"Otellini said the company expects to ship its 1 millionth Core 2 Duo processor in a little less than seven weeks after launch. In comparison, it took Pentium a year to reach that level of ramp-up. (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/27/core2duo/index.php)"
Two million cores shipped by this time in September. Wow!
"Otellini said the company expects to ship its 1 millionth Core 2 Duo processor in a little less than seven weeks after launch. In comparison, it took Pentium a year to reach that level of ramp-up. (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/27/core2duo/index.php)"
Two million cores shipped by this time in September. Wow!
rdowns
Apr 27, 02:46 PM
Really guys? We're going to argue it may be a forgery now. :rolleyes:
No comments:
Post a Comment