danielespejo
Apr 5, 10:59 PM
sorry but that's not the case. While some contend it's jaw-dropping, that's only because they're stacking it up against what FCS is currently.
.....
While some may find the new FCS exciting, and it does have some bells and whistles, it's typical Apple doing an incremental bump to keep up with what others are doing. Sad really.
Which 'new FCS' are you speaking about? Are you referring to the version that will allegedly be released at NAB? If so, how did you see it? You must be important!
.....
While some may find the new FCS exciting, and it does have some bells and whistles, it's typical Apple doing an incremental bump to keep up with what others are doing. Sad really.
Which 'new FCS' are you speaking about? Are you referring to the version that will allegedly be released at NAB? If so, how did you see it? You must be important!
BRLawyer
Aug 6, 02:10 PM
"The Name Mac Pro is our Trademark, not Apple's"
good luck for you.
I would not put up a fight against a giant like Apple.
Plus, I don't see having a computer named Mac Pro would interfere with your business in a bad way. Actually, I think it would be good thing for you.
It's not relevant, the marks are registered in different fields of activity...if these guys are real, they don't have a case anyway.
good luck for you.
I would not put up a fight against a giant like Apple.
Plus, I don't see having a computer named Mac Pro would interfere with your business in a bad way. Actually, I think it would be good thing for you.
It's not relevant, the marks are registered in different fields of activity...if these guys are real, they don't have a case anyway.
citizenzen
Mar 22, 06:54 PM
As others have pointed out, killing a peaceful protester (or non-involved innocent civilian for that matter) is never justified.
I'm not trying to justify it.
What I'm asking is, does it justify the action that we're taking?
That, I'm not sold on.
I'm not trying to justify it.
What I'm asking is, does it justify the action that we're taking?
That, I'm not sold on.
pilotkev1
Apr 10, 02:10 AM
But it does worry me that the program could become more for mass audience and no longer the pro application it has been for the past decade.
The pro of today is no longer the pro of the past decade. Pro is a far broader term in 2011. Nearly anyone could be a 'pro' with a little interest, work, and dedication.
The pro of today is no longer the pro of the past decade. Pro is a far broader term in 2011. Nearly anyone could be a 'pro' with a little interest, work, and dedication.
NoSmokingBandit
Nov 24, 08:17 PM
Mine is installing right now too. The install process is rather long and tedious, but I can't wait to try out the Top Gear track first if I can. I wonder how many petrolheads are going to do that first? :D
Idk how long it took, i put the disc in and got lunch. When i came back it was done :)
So far i'm loving it. The physics are a huge step forward from any other console sim, the AI is much better than GT4 (though still not great), and the xp system works really well. I agree with the reviews though, its an incredible sim but lacks in other areas, like leaderboards and whatnot. Luckily i bought the game simply to drive and collect cars, so its pretty perfect for me.
Idk how long it took, i put the disc in and got lunch. When i came back it was done :)
So far i'm loving it. The physics are a huge step forward from any other console sim, the AI is much better than GT4 (though still not great), and the xp system works really well. I agree with the reviews though, its an incredible sim but lacks in other areas, like leaderboards and whatnot. Luckily i bought the game simply to drive and collect cars, so its pretty perfect for me.
11thIndian
Apr 9, 10:07 PM
Uh, except I said "lots of professionals" and then you claimed I meant "professionals that I know" and then you acknowledged that it's not just professionals that I know.
Yes, I agreed there are professionals, but not LOTS of professionals. You don't know, cause... you don't know them, and neither do I. So these "lots" outside of your field of view may or may not be looking to switch. You see the difference, yes?
Yes, I agreed there are professionals, but not LOTS of professionals. You don't know, cause... you don't know them, and neither do I. So these "lots" outside of your field of view may or may not be looking to switch. You see the difference, yes?
povman
Aug 7, 05:46 PM
From Vista Help:
"Previous versions of files and folders are copies that Windows automatically saves as part of a restore point. Any file or folder that was modified since the last restore point was made (usually 24 hours earlier) is saved and made available as a previous version. You can use previous versions of files to restore files that you accidentally modified or deleted, or that were damaged."
I can use this now but without childish animations. Simple right-click the folder and select "restore previous versions".
from your description, the 'restore previous files' thing is more like backup&restore
If apple really is using zfs in leopard, then time machine is going to be a lot more than just saving files and restoring them.... It's more like 'hey we got some extra disk space. instead of overwriting this file, lets write it somewhere else so the old version is still there :D'
i.e. ALL versions of all files are saved until you run out of space, then you start to lose old stuff. Well i guess there might be some modifications so it only applies to certain files or something...
i do hope they lose the space stars background on it though... replace it with a rotating spiral and i'd be happy :D
"Previous versions of files and folders are copies that Windows automatically saves as part of a restore point. Any file or folder that was modified since the last restore point was made (usually 24 hours earlier) is saved and made available as a previous version. You can use previous versions of files to restore files that you accidentally modified or deleted, or that were damaged."
I can use this now but without childish animations. Simple right-click the folder and select "restore previous versions".
from your description, the 'restore previous files' thing is more like backup&restore
If apple really is using zfs in leopard, then time machine is going to be a lot more than just saving files and restoring them.... It's more like 'hey we got some extra disk space. instead of overwriting this file, lets write it somewhere else so the old version is still there :D'
i.e. ALL versions of all files are saved until you run out of space, then you start to lose old stuff. Well i guess there might be some modifications so it only applies to certain files or something...
i do hope they lose the space stars background on it though... replace it with a rotating spiral and i'd be happy :D
aswitcher
Aug 7, 06:58 PM
Norton's GoBack, which was purchased from some other company, has a similar feature for restoring single files. This isn't quite the same thing, but the whole concept isn't entirely new. GoBack was introduced well before Microsoft came out with System Restore... That said, I think its a great feature to include and I'm sure I'll find many uses for it.
GoBack was key to my last 2 years as a PC owner.
GoBack was key to my last 2 years as a PC owner.
whoson1st0
Aug 25, 02:58 PM
I had the same problem with their battery recall site. My PB s/n was valid but it said my battery was not.
I tried calling the apple support number provided but every time I pressed '5' to talk to someone about the battery issue, I would get disconnected.
Eventually I reached tech support (after a 30 minute wait, I assume because others were having the same problem as me and also calling tech support) and the analyst said the database of valid batteries was not yet complete and they were telling everyone to check back today (I have not checked yet).
What bothered me, of course, is why couldn't they post this information on the battery support page? Or put it on the message when you call apple support? Instead the message over the phone simply pointed users back to the website, which of course wasn't working, and thus I spent almost an hour wasting my time on something that apple knew wasn't working yet.
I mean sure, this entire incident wasn't the worst thing in the world, but it certainly doesn't raise my confidence in apple support or customer satisfaction.
I tried calling the apple support number provided but every time I pressed '5' to talk to someone about the battery issue, I would get disconnected.
Eventually I reached tech support (after a 30 minute wait, I assume because others were having the same problem as me and also calling tech support) and the analyst said the database of valid batteries was not yet complete and they were telling everyone to check back today (I have not checked yet).
What bothered me, of course, is why couldn't they post this information on the battery support page? Or put it on the message when you call apple support? Instead the message over the phone simply pointed users back to the website, which of course wasn't working, and thus I spent almost an hour wasting my time on something that apple knew wasn't working yet.
I mean sure, this entire incident wasn't the worst thing in the world, but it certainly doesn't raise my confidence in apple support or customer satisfaction.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 11, 01:09 PM
Iphone 5 on Sprint?
miamijim
Apr 8, 01:35 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)
I was at BB yesterday and inquired about buying one. They has them but the manager wouldn't sell me one. He refuses to tell me why and I was told that he was instructed to hault sales temporarily. Hmmm
He does not have to tell you anything... in fact if he did his job would be on the line.
I was at BB yesterday and inquired about buying one. They has them but the manager wouldn't sell me one. He refuses to tell me why and I was told that he was instructed to hault sales temporarily. Hmmm
He does not have to tell you anything... in fact if he did his job would be on the line.
28monkeys
Apr 7, 10:32 PM
Obviously you know little about retail and accounting.
Obviously you know nothing about retail.
Obviously you know nothing about retail.
iStudentUK
Apr 11, 11:26 AM
They should stick to the June update each year. I know it may not be their fault but Apple need to keep the iPhone up to date, otherwise they will lose ground. Mobile phones are very competitive.
brepublican
Nov 28, 10:29 PM
This is ridiculous. The record companies are obsessed with money. They didnt seek royalties on CD players but iPods are somehow different. They are MUSIC PLAYERS. They record industry should have no part in music hardware, its just ridiculous.:mad:
I'm glad I'm not the only one who doesnt understand why they would want money for every iPod sold. Is this how Microsoft plans to "kill" the iPod with their Zune? By distorting the mp3 market with such kind of BS :mad:
Idiots
I'm glad I'm not the only one who doesnt understand why they would want money for every iPod sold. Is this how Microsoft plans to "kill" the iPod with their Zune? By distorting the mp3 market with such kind of BS :mad:
Idiots
gnasher729
Jul 27, 05:59 PM
but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
With most processors, especially the Intel/AMD processors, "instructions per cycle" is not a useful number. These processors have both simple instructions (add register number 3 to register number 6) and complex instructions (add register number 3 to the number whose address is in register number 6). A PowerPC has the simple instructions, but not the complex ones. Instead it would need three instructions "load the number whose address is in register number 6, and move it to register 7", "add register 3 to register 7", "store register 7 to the location whose address is in register 6". But the Intel processor doesn't magically do three times as much work. Instead, it splits the complex instruction into three so-called "macro-ops", and does exactly the same work. So in this case, the PowerPC would execute three times as many instructions per cycle (3 instead of 1), but because it doesn't do more actual work, that is pointless. Instead you would count the number of operations, and they are more or less the same.
Intel is indeed moving towards shorter pipelines. They have done that already with the Core Duo chips. Longer pipelines have the advantage that each pipeline step is a bit faster, so you can get higher clockspeed. Shorter pipelines have the advantage that they take much less energy (very important; at some point your chips just melt), they are much faster handling branches, and they are just much much easier to design. Pentium 4 needed absolutely heroic efforts to produce it, and would have needed twice the heroics to improve it. Instead, the Core Duo has a much simpler design, that is just as powerful, and because it was so simple, Core 2 Duo could improve it.
And Core 2 Duo can now execute up to four "micro-ops" per cycle, same as the G5, compared to three for Core Duo, Pentium 4 and G4. It also has some clever features that reduce the number of micro-ops needed up to 10 percent, and some other improvements.
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
With most processors, especially the Intel/AMD processors, "instructions per cycle" is not a useful number. These processors have both simple instructions (add register number 3 to register number 6) and complex instructions (add register number 3 to the number whose address is in register number 6). A PowerPC has the simple instructions, but not the complex ones. Instead it would need three instructions "load the number whose address is in register number 6, and move it to register 7", "add register 3 to register 7", "store register 7 to the location whose address is in register 6". But the Intel processor doesn't magically do three times as much work. Instead, it splits the complex instruction into three so-called "macro-ops", and does exactly the same work. So in this case, the PowerPC would execute three times as many instructions per cycle (3 instead of 1), but because it doesn't do more actual work, that is pointless. Instead you would count the number of operations, and they are more or less the same.
Intel is indeed moving towards shorter pipelines. They have done that already with the Core Duo chips. Longer pipelines have the advantage that each pipeline step is a bit faster, so you can get higher clockspeed. Shorter pipelines have the advantage that they take much less energy (very important; at some point your chips just melt), they are much faster handling branches, and they are just much much easier to design. Pentium 4 needed absolutely heroic efforts to produce it, and would have needed twice the heroics to improve it. Instead, the Core Duo has a much simpler design, that is just as powerful, and because it was so simple, Core 2 Duo could improve it.
And Core 2 Duo can now execute up to four "micro-ops" per cycle, same as the G5, compared to three for Core Duo, Pentium 4 and G4. It also has some clever features that reduce the number of micro-ops needed up to 10 percent, and some other improvements.
gnomeisland
Apr 27, 08:18 AM
I wish they would leave it on and let me use it. I consider it a feature. It would help me track hours at job sites automatically for billing. I thought of writing an app just for that.
That's an interesting idea.
I actually like Apple's response. I do think that being able to turn OFF the feature was an oversight on their part but I do wish there was a way to leave it on. I'd actually welcome a way to import that database into Aperture and use it geotag my photos. Yes, there are apps to do that but I have an iPhone 3G and so backgrounding those apps isn't really possible.
That's an interesting idea.
I actually like Apple's response. I do think that being able to turn OFF the feature was an oversight on their part but I do wish there was a way to leave it on. I'd actually welcome a way to import that database into Aperture and use it geotag my photos. Yes, there are apps to do that but I have an iPhone 3G and so backgrounding those apps isn't really possible.
gregorypierce
Apr 11, 02:31 AM
Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic...
It probably looks great when in motion on a TV screen.....
hey I tried :)
It probably looks great when in motion on a TV screen.....
hey I tried :)
manu chao
Apr 25, 02:00 PM
... sorry, but in what ways do I benefit by having apple track my whereabouts to the day and meter? why isn't there an opt-in (apart from the general 'eat **** or die' TOU) or at least an opt-out for this? why is it so easy to access the data?
And any cellular provider is tracking and storing your whereabouts equally.
The difference is that MSP might storing this for billing purposes or even because it is mandated by law (for use by law enforcement). If Apple has no need for these data (which they do not have if they are not transmitted to them), they should not store them.
And any cellular provider is tracking and storing your whereabouts equally.
The difference is that MSP might storing this for billing purposes or even because it is mandated by law (for use by law enforcement). If Apple has no need for these data (which they do not have if they are not transmitted to them), they should not store them.
MacSync
Aug 25, 03:14 PM
Ahh did any one see this?
http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/08/23/apple.tops.pc.mag.survey/
Hmm. I've had a G5 DP worked on lately and had great support.
*Edit Nevermind, they are linking the PC mag story too.
http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/08/23/apple.tops.pc.mag.survey/
Hmm. I've had a G5 DP worked on lately and had great support.
*Edit Nevermind, they are linking the PC mag story too.
bigandy
Jul 20, 09:18 AM
yeah i have a suspicion they were pushed for Apple's intel power macs.
it just feels like it.
a tingling in my.... er.... um.... let's say "eyelid". ;) :rolleyes:
it just feels like it.
a tingling in my.... er.... um.... let's say "eyelid". ;) :rolleyes:
BGil
Aug 8, 04:32 AM
Have to agree with you on just about everything. If MS tried to release something like this, as anything other than a service pack, their user base would (quite rightly) crucify them.
The TimeMachine mirrors the same functionality that was announced for Vista about a week ago,
It's kinda unfair to say Microsoft just announced PreviousDocs/Shadow Copy "about a week ago" because it's been in every build for the last year.
Winsupersite on build 5219:
Windows Vista build 5219 also includes an integrated Shadow Copy client, which you manage from the Shadow Copies tab of the Properties dialog for your hard drive (Figure). This feature, which first originated in Windows Server lets you cache older versions of data files so that you can recover information in the event of an error. So if you overwrite a critical file, or inadvertently change part of a document, you can "go back in time" and access older versions.
Let's see how this works. First, you need to enable Shadow Copies from the aforementioned dialog. Then, after you've mucked up a file, you can access its Properties dialog in Explorer and navigate to the Previous Versions pane (Figure). Here, you can select between various different versions of the document (and your time travel experience is complete). This is a great feature, and I'm glad to see it being added to the Windows client.
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista-5219-review-26.jpg
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista-5219-review-25.jpg
That build was released in September of 2005.
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_5219.asp
Even before that Bob Muglia, who head the Longhorn Server project, said it would be integrated into NTFS.
MS also ships a shadow copy client for XP.
If anything, Apple has known about Previous Docs for over a year now.
The TimeMachine mirrors the same functionality that was announced for Vista about a week ago,
It's kinda unfair to say Microsoft just announced PreviousDocs/Shadow Copy "about a week ago" because it's been in every build for the last year.
Winsupersite on build 5219:
Windows Vista build 5219 also includes an integrated Shadow Copy client, which you manage from the Shadow Copies tab of the Properties dialog for your hard drive (Figure). This feature, which first originated in Windows Server lets you cache older versions of data files so that you can recover information in the event of an error. So if you overwrite a critical file, or inadvertently change part of a document, you can "go back in time" and access older versions.
Let's see how this works. First, you need to enable Shadow Copies from the aforementioned dialog. Then, after you've mucked up a file, you can access its Properties dialog in Explorer and navigate to the Previous Versions pane (Figure). Here, you can select between various different versions of the document (and your time travel experience is complete). This is a great feature, and I'm glad to see it being added to the Windows client.
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista-5219-review-26.jpg
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista-5219-review-25.jpg
That build was released in September of 2005.
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_5219.asp
Even before that Bob Muglia, who head the Longhorn Server project, said it would be integrated into NTFS.
MS also ships a shadow copy client for XP.
If anything, Apple has known about Previous Docs for over a year now.
NoSmokingBandit
Sep 1, 12:40 PM
I'd rather have 1000 equally modeled cars, but when you are dealing with 1000 cars it has to be a touch decision to make. Even so, they wouldnt have to redo anything, just copy a higher res model into the resource server.
The premium cars sure are gorgeous though.
The premium cars sure are gorgeous though.
Yamcha
Mar 26, 04:00 PM
I'm looking forward to it, but what would be really amazing if on the next major release of Mac OS they add support for running .EXE files. I know there are third party applications out there to do that, but If it could be legally done and done properly where we don't see any major performance hits then it would truly be the end of using Windows for me, and I'm sure for most others..
I think that would be awesome.. But I know probably unlikely..
I think that would be awesome.. But I know probably unlikely..
MrCrowbar
Aug 26, 05:51 PM
Well, I have some problems with my MacBook (LCD backlighting flickers horribly sometimes and from time to time the power goes off without reason, even 1 second after powering the mashine on). So I will bring it to the apple store in New Jersey soon. Did you know you can buy an Apple laptop anywhere in the world and get it repaired anywhere else? I bought it in Europe and can get it fixed here. Neato.
Now I wonder if I should wait one or two weeks just in case they want to give me a new one :)
Now I wonder if I should wait one or two weeks just in case they want to give me a new one :)
No comments:
Post a Comment