ccrandall77
Aug 11, 03:36 PM
You know as well as I do that has to do with the signal, not whether it is Code division or time division. If you claim differently, show me reputable references.
Uh, actually tower handoff has relatively little to do with signal... it's two totally different things.
Want a reference? Is the IEEE reputable enough for you?
http://www.ieee.or.com/Archive/diversity_in_3g/diversity_in_3g.pdf
Page 6: Why CDMA? Allows soft handoffs.
Enuff said.
Care to back up any of your assumptions with reputable references?
Uh, actually tower handoff has relatively little to do with signal... it's two totally different things.
Want a reference? Is the IEEE reputable enough for you?
http://www.ieee.or.com/Archive/diversity_in_3g/diversity_in_3g.pdf
Page 6: Why CDMA? Allows soft handoffs.
Enuff said.
Care to back up any of your assumptions with reputable references?
LethalWolfe
Apr 5, 08:07 PM
As someone who's attended NAB yearly, (and again this year) Apple has not had a presence there since and currently are NOT on the exhibitor list for this years convention. Will take pics if I'm wrong though.
The Supermeet is a meet-up of Final Cut Pro User Groups from across the country that coincides with NAB. It is not a part of NAB itself.
Lethal
The Supermeet is a meet-up of Final Cut Pro User Groups from across the country that coincides with NAB. It is not a part of NAB itself.
Lethal
mgauss
Sep 19, 01:18 AM
Several other companies have 2 lb laptops. Where is my Mac 2 lb laptop?
hcuar
Sep 19, 11:58 AM
http://playstation3.joystiq.com/2005/07/29/kutaragi-on-ps3-itll-be-expensive/
magic kingdom disney world
The Walt Disney company began
Disney world magic kingdom
Walt Disney World is
Magic Kingdom, in Disney World
Magic Kingdom Walt Disney
As soon as Disneyworld opened
Walt Disney World
The parade is part of Disney#39;s
tour and Disney World does
Running through the Magic
KINGDOM; DISNEY WORLD
Disney World Magic Kingdom
Walt Disney World prepares for
at Disney Magic Kingdom
McGarvels
Nov 28, 06:46 PM
I can't wait until Steve laughs in their faces. Who the hell do these guys think they are?
ugp
Jun 11, 01:57 PM
We are being told that inventory will be limited for non preorder customers. Basically, if you want one, you better preorder.
About opening before apple stores...
Thats what i thought too, but the only thing we were told is no later than 8am opening. Basically we can open anytime up to 8am.
I am praying that the Managers here get told the same thing by the DMs as well. Would make things a lot easier. If Radio Shack announces they are opening before everyone else you better prepare for a lot of customers.
About opening before apple stores...
Thats what i thought too, but the only thing we were told is no later than 8am opening. Basically we can open anytime up to 8am.
I am praying that the Managers here get told the same thing by the DMs as well. Would make things a lot easier. If Radio Shack announces they are opening before everyone else you better prepare for a lot of customers.
Silentwave
Jul 14, 05:34 PM
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
Quarter 4 this year will see the X6900 conroe extreme at 3.2GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
8 core should be out sometime between end of 2006 and beginning of 2007 with the quad core Clovertown processors (based on woodcrest) available in dual chip configurations. And it'll only get better from there.
Which reminds me, though slightly OT... this is a good reason why iMac may well get Conroe now or perhaps get Merom now but transition to a desktop chip by the time Santa Rosa comes out. The new chipset/socket means new logic board, and by the time that comes out the Kenstfield quad core chips on the consumer desktop end will start arriving. I don't yet know how far kentsfield will be scaling either up or down as far as clock speed/heat, but if quad core starts moving into the consumer dekstop market, they will need a very powerful processor: either Conroe or Kentsfield.
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
Quarter 4 this year will see the X6900 conroe extreme at 3.2GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
8 core should be out sometime between end of 2006 and beginning of 2007 with the quad core Clovertown processors (based on woodcrest) available in dual chip configurations. And it'll only get better from there.
Which reminds me, though slightly OT... this is a good reason why iMac may well get Conroe now or perhaps get Merom now but transition to a desktop chip by the time Santa Rosa comes out. The new chipset/socket means new logic board, and by the time that comes out the Kenstfield quad core chips on the consumer desktop end will start arriving. I don't yet know how far kentsfield will be scaling either up or down as far as clock speed/heat, but if quad core starts moving into the consumer dekstop market, they will need a very powerful processor: either Conroe or Kentsfield.
KnightWRX
Mar 26, 07:58 AM
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
citizenzen
Mar 22, 08:19 PM
It is obvious the UN has taken sides here, no doubt about it. Do you disagree with that decision?
The U.N. Security Council perhaps, but not the entire assembly. It would have been interesting to open that issue up to debate and seen how all the members would have voted.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
The U.N. Security Council perhaps, but not the entire assembly. It would have been interesting to open that issue up to debate and seen how all the members would have voted.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
bad03xtreme
Apr 25, 02:21 PM
More of my tax dollars hard at work. :rolleyes:
andy721
Mar 25, 11:58 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7A341 Safari/528.16)
If this is a standard $129 upgrade I don't see anything here worth that price sadly. That is unless somehow my 2009 mac pro will run 2x as fast but I am not keeping my fingers crossed.
If it is $129.00 he can shove this up his A$$, unless like you said my Mac Pro will run 2x faster.
If this is a standard $129 upgrade I don't see anything here worth that price sadly. That is unless somehow my 2009 mac pro will run 2x as fast but I am not keeping my fingers crossed.
If it is $129.00 he can shove this up his A$$, unless like you said my Mac Pro will run 2x faster.
THX1139
Aug 21, 12:40 PM
That's great info. Would you please tell us:
1. How fast that is compared to what Mac model-speed you are currently using?
2. IE Were you impressed or not so impressed with how fast-slow it rendered?
3. What kind of speed were you expecting?
I'm no expert, but my guess is that the lack of RAM may have been the culprit. Need more independent tests like this from other FCP users. Thanks a lot. :)
1. Since I'm currently using a G4 titanium powerbook, the Macpro screams in comparrison!! :eek: (Don't ask why I'm using such an old machine...it's a long story).
2. Yes, I was impressed with the render. It was the timeline playback of uncompressed footage that sucked.
3. I was happy with the render speed. I was expecting the rendered footage to play back without dropping frames.
You're correct to assume ram might help. Hard disk speed is another factor because the CPU has to read the data from disk. If the disk can't keep up, then FCP is forced to drop frames. I'm not sure if upgrading to ATI card is going to help or not, as I doubt that FCP utilizes the GPU to any extent.
I'm thinking that anyone who plans to use the Woodcrest to handle uncompressed footage (especially HD), is going to need a breakout box or a raid setup. The way is see it, stock Woodcrest isn't going to cut it for high end compositing. Although, most video editors don't work in uncompressed so that may not be a problem for them, and besides, they usually have a raid setup.
I'm anxious to get a Woodcrest so that I can test it with more ram. I'll definitely go with a raid or 10K drive for the occasional time I need to work with uncompressed footage.
1. How fast that is compared to what Mac model-speed you are currently using?
2. IE Were you impressed or not so impressed with how fast-slow it rendered?
3. What kind of speed were you expecting?
I'm no expert, but my guess is that the lack of RAM may have been the culprit. Need more independent tests like this from other FCP users. Thanks a lot. :)
1. Since I'm currently using a G4 titanium powerbook, the Macpro screams in comparrison!! :eek: (Don't ask why I'm using such an old machine...it's a long story).
2. Yes, I was impressed with the render. It was the timeline playback of uncompressed footage that sucked.
3. I was happy with the render speed. I was expecting the rendered footage to play back without dropping frames.
You're correct to assume ram might help. Hard disk speed is another factor because the CPU has to read the data from disk. If the disk can't keep up, then FCP is forced to drop frames. I'm not sure if upgrading to ATI card is going to help or not, as I doubt that FCP utilizes the GPU to any extent.
I'm thinking that anyone who plans to use the Woodcrest to handle uncompressed footage (especially HD), is going to need a breakout box or a raid setup. The way is see it, stock Woodcrest isn't going to cut it for high end compositing. Although, most video editors don't work in uncompressed so that may not be a problem for them, and besides, they usually have a raid setup.
I'm anxious to get a Woodcrest so that I can test it with more ram. I'll definitely go with a raid or 10K drive for the occasional time I need to work with uncompressed footage.
jhedges3
Aug 11, 03:24 PM
First, what makes you think the cellusage is similar to internet????? Mind blowing step here.
Secondly, Europa has 291 million internet users; North america US&Canada 227 milion; Rest of the world 500 million
Hence europe would be close to 30% of the total market???? What about india??? Japan??? china??? come on you cant say jack *** from this statistics
World demographics are not the point. US consumers do not make their cell phone purchasing decisions based on signal standards in 'Europa' or elsewhere.
Secondly, Europa has 291 million internet users; North america US&Canada 227 milion; Rest of the world 500 million
Hence europe would be close to 30% of the total market???? What about india??? Japan??? china??? come on you cant say jack *** from this statistics
World demographics are not the point. US consumers do not make their cell phone purchasing decisions based on signal standards in 'Europa' or elsewhere.
sittnick
Apr 19, 01:50 PM
BREAKING NEWS --- 1979 --
http://www.thetelemediagroup.com/images/monitors/pg5/3_ab121w.jpghttp://www.thetelemediagroup.com/images/monitors/pg5/4_gebw.jpg
RCA Launches Suit Against General Electric for infringement of 9" b&w television interface and "look and feel."
Spokesmen for RCA maintain that GE's misappropriation of the LīfLīk� Trūwūd� woodgrain finish, leading consumers to confuse the GE imitation with the RCA original.
Also note GE's nearly identical VHF and UHF controllers ... placed in the same location on the chassis as the RCA original. Even the speaker is located in the same way.
RCA patented the use of separate VHF and UHF knobs in 1958, the click-stop UHF knob in 1972, and the ergonomically efficient upper right location of tuner knobs in 1952. The characteristics are innovations that help the consumer recognize an RCA television, and any use of these unique features without RCA's explicit permission is a breach of patent, trademark and copyright.
http://www.thetelemediagroup.com/images/monitors/pg5/3_ab121w.jpghttp://www.thetelemediagroup.com/images/monitors/pg5/4_gebw.jpg
RCA Launches Suit Against General Electric for infringement of 9" b&w television interface and "look and feel."
Spokesmen for RCA maintain that GE's misappropriation of the LīfLīk� Trūwūd� woodgrain finish, leading consumers to confuse the GE imitation with the RCA original.
Also note GE's nearly identical VHF and UHF controllers ... placed in the same location on the chassis as the RCA original. Even the speaker is located in the same way.
RCA patented the use of separate VHF and UHF knobs in 1958, the click-stop UHF knob in 1972, and the ergonomically efficient upper right location of tuner knobs in 1952. The characteristics are innovations that help the consumer recognize an RCA television, and any use of these unique features without RCA's explicit permission is a breach of patent, trademark and copyright.
Sol
Mar 23, 12:44 AM
Is MacRumors branching out to coverage of all tablets and media players now? I can't speak for everyone who visits the site but I come here to read about Apple products, not the competition's knock-offs.
MrXiro
Mar 26, 10:00 AM
I really want Lion, for the number one reason being TRIM support. I eagerly want to finally start using an SSD (specifically one from Crucial, since they make the fastest ones on the market), but have avoided doing so since the latest version Snow Leopard does not support TRIM.
It's a shame Apple is waiting so long to finally include TRIM support. Windows 7 already includes it.
I think I'll wait until 10.7.3 comes out before upgrading, though. If there are bugs in the TRIM implementation, I fear it may corrupt data.
I have the crucial drive on Snow Leopard... you are plain missing out by waiting... honestly... and you DO know you can just do a secure wipe of the drive and it'll restore any bad blocks right (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=841182)?
I was worried at first too... but damn I don't regret that 400 dollar purchase any longer. Holy crap my MBP is fast as hell.
It's a shame Apple is waiting so long to finally include TRIM support. Windows 7 already includes it.
I think I'll wait until 10.7.3 comes out before upgrading, though. If there are bugs in the TRIM implementation, I fear it may corrupt data.
I have the crucial drive on Snow Leopard... you are plain missing out by waiting... honestly... and you DO know you can just do a secure wipe of the drive and it'll restore any bad blocks right (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=841182)?
I was worried at first too... but damn I don't regret that 400 dollar purchase any longer. Holy crap my MBP is fast as hell.
Bregalad
Mar 26, 02:26 AM
There can only be one golden master.
In traditional development software is designed, coded, reaches alpha (all features coded), reaches beta (no known defects serious enough to consider any feature incomplete), and then reaches the final candidate stage (known defect count below release threshold prior to testing). Eventually an FC does well enough in testing to be declared the GM.
Agile works differently prior to beta, but you still have final candidates that eventually boil down to a single GM.
I think your source is wrong. Look at 10.6.7 for example. There were something like 7 builds released to developers that contained the infamous "no known issues" before they finally released it. That was a minor point release not a whole new version. Lion is literally months away from GM.
In traditional development software is designed, coded, reaches alpha (all features coded), reaches beta (no known defects serious enough to consider any feature incomplete), and then reaches the final candidate stage (known defect count below release threshold prior to testing). Eventually an FC does well enough in testing to be declared the GM.
Agile works differently prior to beta, but you still have final candidates that eventually boil down to a single GM.
I think your source is wrong. Look at 10.6.7 for example. There were something like 7 builds released to developers that contained the infamous "no known issues" before they finally released it. That was a minor point release not a whole new version. Lion is literally months away from GM.
MacRumors
Aug 5, 03:23 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
With the 2006 Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) quickly approaching, the Mac rumor scene has been buzzing with rumors and reports. As usual, MacRumors provides this Rumor Roundup as a summary of major rumors circulating around the Mac Web before the big event. In last year's WWDC roundup, we summarized the possibility of an Intel-based Mac (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/06/20050605001340.shtml). Readers should remember that it was only a year ago that Apple first announced they would be switching to the Intel platform.
Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard)
Apple has already announced that Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) will be discussed and demonstrated at WWDC 2006. In fact, a recent slip-up (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060803151315.shtml) on Apple's developers pages indicates that Apple will be distributing a Developer's Preview of Leopard at WWDC.
Detailed information about Leopard, however, has been very limited. Very few reliable sources of information have come forward. The earliest rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060324092148.shtml) pointed to Virtualization software to be built into Leopard, but this was flatly denied (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060709120049.shtml) by Phil Schiller.
Job postings (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/01/20060126125042.shtml), Patent applications (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060314174322.shtml) and Page 2 rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/10/20051021014014.shtml) point to a focus on updating Finder with extensive and improved integration with Spotlight. This has even been the topic of some presumed fake (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060804154559.shtml) screenshots.
Perhaps the most corroborated claims are ones of Apple's iChat 4.0 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060628195853.shtml). Appleinsider claimed that iChat 4.0 will incorporate the ability to call traditional phone lines much like existing Voice over IP services, with similar reports elsewhere on the web.
While MacOSXRumors have offered a list of other possible features: virtual desktops (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060802154741.shtml), collaborative features (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060609041938.shtml), tabbed iChat (http://www.macosxrumors.com/articles/2006/08/05/more-on-leopard-revamped-ical-tabbed-chat-improved-developer-tools-and-more/), the reliability of this source is not entirely certain.
Mac Pro
The Intel-update to the PowerMac line remains highly anticipated. The first hints at a name-change came in January 2006 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/01/20060130215832.shtml) when Apple was revealed to have trademarked the term "Mac Pro". This was largely dismissed until Steve Jobs revealed the plan to change the name of the existing PowerBook and iBook lines to "MacBook" and "MacBook Pro". Meanwhile, we received early confirmation in May (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/05/20060531215206.shtml) that the Mac Pro was indeed targeted for release at WWDC 2006.
In July (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060711225142.shtml), Appleinsider felt confident that Apple had chosen the Woodcrest (dual-core Xeon) process for use in the upcoming Mac Pros. While similar to the recently released Core 2 Duo (Conroe) chips in architecture, the Woodcrest processors allow for multi-processor configurations which have been a feature of the high end PowerMacs. Meanwhile, ThinkSecret believes (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060704122932.shtml) that the Mac Pro will instead use the Core 2 Duo (Conroe) chips that were recently released. One Page 2 rumor (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060802151736.shtml) claimed Apple would incorporate both Conroe and Woodcrest into different Mac Pro models, but the validity of this information has been cast in serious doubt.
Other features also rumored include substantially different (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060704122932.shtml) enclosures, dual optical drives (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060714150350.shtml) and an Intel-designed motherboard (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/12/20051227133503.shtml).
iPhone
Despite ongoing unsubstantiated claims (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060802215346.shtml) that the iPhone will be released soon, there has been very little credible evidence that the iPhone will be seen at WWDC.
iPod
iPod rumors are more difficult to pin down, as iPod rumors have been circulating in full force for months. Rumors of a full video iPod (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/01/20060119104515.shtml) started in early but peaked (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060309183950.shtml) in late March due to Apple's impending 30th anniversary. Subsequent rumors of video iPod delays (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/04/20060413131333.shtml) and difficult Hollywood negotiations (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060621163959.shtml) have pushed off the release further, with one analyst (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060802114855.shtml) believing September-October to be a more likely timeframe. In July, however, ThinkSecret (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060718164759.shtml) had mentioned the possibility of iPod nano updates at WWDC.
Coverage
Steve Jobs will present the Keynote address starting at 10am Pacific Time on Monday August 7th. MacRumors.com will provide live text-transcript coverage of the event on MacRumorsLive.com (http://www.macrumorslive.com/). The MacRumorsLive system uses the latest web technologies to efficiently provide dynamic text updates.
Stay tuned, as last minute leaks are not unusual in the final moments before an event.
With the 2006 Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) quickly approaching, the Mac rumor scene has been buzzing with rumors and reports. As usual, MacRumors provides this Rumor Roundup as a summary of major rumors circulating around the Mac Web before the big event. In last year's WWDC roundup, we summarized the possibility of an Intel-based Mac (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/06/20050605001340.shtml). Readers should remember that it was only a year ago that Apple first announced they would be switching to the Intel platform.
Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard)
Apple has already announced that Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) will be discussed and demonstrated at WWDC 2006. In fact, a recent slip-up (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060803151315.shtml) on Apple's developers pages indicates that Apple will be distributing a Developer's Preview of Leopard at WWDC.
Detailed information about Leopard, however, has been very limited. Very few reliable sources of information have come forward. The earliest rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060324092148.shtml) pointed to Virtualization software to be built into Leopard, but this was flatly denied (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060709120049.shtml) by Phil Schiller.
Job postings (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/01/20060126125042.shtml), Patent applications (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060314174322.shtml) and Page 2 rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/10/20051021014014.shtml) point to a focus on updating Finder with extensive and improved integration with Spotlight. This has even been the topic of some presumed fake (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060804154559.shtml) screenshots.
Perhaps the most corroborated claims are ones of Apple's iChat 4.0 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060628195853.shtml). Appleinsider claimed that iChat 4.0 will incorporate the ability to call traditional phone lines much like existing Voice over IP services, with similar reports elsewhere on the web.
While MacOSXRumors have offered a list of other possible features: virtual desktops (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060802154741.shtml), collaborative features (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060609041938.shtml), tabbed iChat (http://www.macosxrumors.com/articles/2006/08/05/more-on-leopard-revamped-ical-tabbed-chat-improved-developer-tools-and-more/), the reliability of this source is not entirely certain.
Mac Pro
The Intel-update to the PowerMac line remains highly anticipated. The first hints at a name-change came in January 2006 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/01/20060130215832.shtml) when Apple was revealed to have trademarked the term "Mac Pro". This was largely dismissed until Steve Jobs revealed the plan to change the name of the existing PowerBook and iBook lines to "MacBook" and "MacBook Pro". Meanwhile, we received early confirmation in May (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/05/20060531215206.shtml) that the Mac Pro was indeed targeted for release at WWDC 2006.
In July (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060711225142.shtml), Appleinsider felt confident that Apple had chosen the Woodcrest (dual-core Xeon) process for use in the upcoming Mac Pros. While similar to the recently released Core 2 Duo (Conroe) chips in architecture, the Woodcrest processors allow for multi-processor configurations which have been a feature of the high end PowerMacs. Meanwhile, ThinkSecret believes (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060704122932.shtml) that the Mac Pro will instead use the Core 2 Duo (Conroe) chips that were recently released. One Page 2 rumor (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060802151736.shtml) claimed Apple would incorporate both Conroe and Woodcrest into different Mac Pro models, but the validity of this information has been cast in serious doubt.
Other features also rumored include substantially different (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060704122932.shtml) enclosures, dual optical drives (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060714150350.shtml) and an Intel-designed motherboard (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/12/20051227133503.shtml).
iPhone
Despite ongoing unsubstantiated claims (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060802215346.shtml) that the iPhone will be released soon, there has been very little credible evidence that the iPhone will be seen at WWDC.
iPod
iPod rumors are more difficult to pin down, as iPod rumors have been circulating in full force for months. Rumors of a full video iPod (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/01/20060119104515.shtml) started in early but peaked (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060309183950.shtml) in late March due to Apple's impending 30th anniversary. Subsequent rumors of video iPod delays (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/04/20060413131333.shtml) and difficult Hollywood negotiations (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060621163959.shtml) have pushed off the release further, with one analyst (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060802114855.shtml) believing September-October to be a more likely timeframe. In July, however, ThinkSecret (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060718164759.shtml) had mentioned the possibility of iPod nano updates at WWDC.
Coverage
Steve Jobs will present the Keynote address starting at 10am Pacific Time on Monday August 7th. MacRumors.com will provide live text-transcript coverage of the event on MacRumorsLive.com (http://www.macrumorslive.com/). The MacRumorsLive system uses the latest web technologies to efficiently provide dynamic text updates.
Stay tuned, as last minute leaks are not unusual in the final moments before an event.
rolandf
Aug 8, 05:14 AM
I just went through my older posts, concerning Apple's strategy and future, e.g. the role of Vista. I still think, what I said several month ago is still an issue. Having seen Leopard as it stands is not very promising for Apple's future.
Let me remember you, that some of the key people at Apple left the company! In the posts there has been "monolithic kernel" and "NEXT" bashing.
Question: Did they improve the kernel?
Question: How much will the integration / interoperability be with Unix / Linux?
Question: Is there still a future for the Open Source community, or is Leopard just making OS X more proprietary?
Question: Are they continuing to water down their PRO Apps, intermingling it with the OS and making everything more childish?
Question: Is this OS 10.5 usable for a tablet PC? How strong are features like handwriting and speech recognition? (Remember, we are approaching 2010!)
Question: Will they still continue to make the UI more heterogeneous and disorganised, this mix of unmotivated 3D, lack of resolution independence, for every single task a separate application etc.
Question: Virtualisation is a standard for many OS's in the Unix world. A company that sells servers, should be comfortable with that.
Question: How efficient will the OS be, given the arrival of multi-core processors, e.g. quad etc.?
But as it seems, OS X still lives from the legacy, from the NEXT computer that quantum leap in computer history and meanwhile MS with Vista just improved a lot the feel and look, so as others also remarked it, the need to switch to Mac is not given for an everyday user.
Apple conveys to me the image of a company working on too many things at the same time, loosing focus, innovation and good people. Further since the Intel switch even the motivation to further push the design of the hardware did not happen, and the "products we wanted to build, but could not" did not appear.
Will at least the Playstation 3 be the highlight of the year and the direction for the future?
Let me remember you, that some of the key people at Apple left the company! In the posts there has been "monolithic kernel" and "NEXT" bashing.
Question: Did they improve the kernel?
Question: How much will the integration / interoperability be with Unix / Linux?
Question: Is there still a future for the Open Source community, or is Leopard just making OS X more proprietary?
Question: Are they continuing to water down their PRO Apps, intermingling it with the OS and making everything more childish?
Question: Is this OS 10.5 usable for a tablet PC? How strong are features like handwriting and speech recognition? (Remember, we are approaching 2010!)
Question: Will they still continue to make the UI more heterogeneous and disorganised, this mix of unmotivated 3D, lack of resolution independence, for every single task a separate application etc.
Question: Virtualisation is a standard for many OS's in the Unix world. A company that sells servers, should be comfortable with that.
Question: How efficient will the OS be, given the arrival of multi-core processors, e.g. quad etc.?
But as it seems, OS X still lives from the legacy, from the NEXT computer that quantum leap in computer history and meanwhile MS with Vista just improved a lot the feel and look, so as others also remarked it, the need to switch to Mac is not given for an everyday user.
Apple conveys to me the image of a company working on too many things at the same time, loosing focus, innovation and good people. Further since the Intel switch even the motivation to further push the design of the hardware did not happen, and the "products we wanted to build, but could not" did not appear.
Will at least the Playstation 3 be the highlight of the year and the direction for the future?
cmaier
Apr 19, 10:46 PM
But App Store is like Coke, right? Of course it's ok if Apple does it. They've becoming one of the most hypocritical companies on the planet. Maybe Steve suffers from extreme paranoia?
No. "App Store" wouldn't qualify as a famous mark, I should think.
Here's a website that lists some factors:
http://www.quizlaw.com/trademarks/what_is_a_famous_trademark.php
No. "App Store" wouldn't qualify as a famous mark, I should think.
Here's a website that lists some factors:
http://www.quizlaw.com/trademarks/what_is_a_famous_trademark.php
WildCowboy
Aug 15, 01:04 PM
has adobe dropped any hints as to when CS3 will be available
In March they were saying (http://www.forbes.com/2006/03/23/adobe-chizen-earnings_cz_dal_0324adobe.html?partner=links) the second quarter of next year.
In March they were saying (http://www.forbes.com/2006/03/23/adobe-chizen-earnings_cz_dal_0324adobe.html?partner=links) the second quarter of next year.
Nuvi
Apr 11, 05:35 AM
I think the point is apple is trying to break the mold of traditional NLE editing. Many tools and terms we use in FCP and other NLEs are derived from linear tape editing from 20+ years ago. They are trying to push to the future of editing in a new direction and that may involve rethinking aspects of how we edit. Whether it's going to work or not I guess we'll have to see...
Don't think so. I think they want to make FCP a tool for consumers who have no idea about narrative structure and storytelling. FCP isn't useful for Apple any more. Regarding editing conventions, they are far older then 20 or so years. However, they've been around for a very long time and those conventions will be here to stay. Why? Because in the end of the day stories are linear and that fact won't change one bit even if Apple releases iMovie Pro.
Don't think so. I think they want to make FCP a tool for consumers who have no idea about narrative structure and storytelling. FCP isn't useful for Apple any more. Regarding editing conventions, they are far older then 20 or so years. However, they've been around for a very long time and those conventions will be here to stay. Why? Because in the end of the day stories are linear and that fact won't change one bit even if Apple releases iMovie Pro.
Super Dave
Aug 6, 01:29 PM
Mac OS X Leopard
Introducing Vista 2.0
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=207241438&size=l
:D
B
Is that Vista 2.0 thing real? I hadn't seen it before.
David :cool:
Introducing Vista 2.0
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=207241438&size=l
:D
B
Is that Vista 2.0 thing real? I hadn't seen it before.
David :cool:
~Shard~
Aug 11, 02:45 PM
I would add
No comments:
Post a Comment