THX1139
Aug 17, 03:22 PM
I don't like Adobe anymore. :mad:
They have become the Microsoft of the graphics world. See what having lots of money can do to you? Makes you cocky. That's one big reason I don't want Apple to gain much more market share. I want them to have just enough to keep them working hard... not so much to make them fat and lazy and greedy.
They have become the Microsoft of the graphics world. See what having lots of money can do to you? Makes you cocky. That's one big reason I don't want Apple to gain much more market share. I want them to have just enough to keep them working hard... not so much to make them fat and lazy and greedy.
jonharris200
Aug 5, 04:53 PM
I think that that we'll have to wait for Paris for the iMac update and new iPods.
France would be a stunning choice of location for the launch of something that's iTunes related! I'm sure that that irony hasn't escaped Jobs & Co in their product scheduling. ;)
France would be a stunning choice of location for the launch of something that's iTunes related! I'm sure that that irony hasn't escaped Jobs & Co in their product scheduling. ;)
oingoboingo
Aug 17, 03:23 AM
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
I guess one extra thing to consider if you're taking that point of view is that the Quad 2.5GHz G5 costs US $3299 with 512MB RAM, and the Quad 2.66GHz MacPro only costs US $2499 with 1GB RAM, plus a superior case design. Even if the MacPro is only the same speed as the Quad G5, it's substantially cheaper.
And that can't be a bad thing.
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
I guess one extra thing to consider if you're taking that point of view is that the Quad 2.5GHz G5 costs US $3299 with 512MB RAM, and the Quad 2.66GHz MacPro only costs US $2499 with 1GB RAM, plus a superior case design. Even if the MacPro is only the same speed as the Quad G5, it's substantially cheaper.
And that can't be a bad thing.
JackSYi
Aug 6, 03:09 AM
I really think Apple should buy out Quicksilver and implement it with Spotlight.
skunk
May 1, 04:09 AM
While there are some racists who tried to jump on the birther bandwagon, I did see plenty of non-racists have some concern about where Obama was born, or if in Hawaii, being born there before it was a state and then being a coverup to put his age right after statehood.If those people really were non-racists, they would have ignored such questions entirely, confident in the knowledge that if anything untoward was going on, the World's Greatest Intelligence Agency� would have found it out before he even got his name on the ballot.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 06:02 PM
They way I understand it, Time Machine is SUPPOSED to be used with an external...the page on the Leopard site even has an icon of an iMac connected to an External. I'm sure you can use your Internal drive if you want, but I don't see the point of that.
So how about the MacBooks?? I don't carry around an external HD all the time. So when I do changes to a document on a flight, there's no TimeMachine backup?? Cool whould be, if the programm did backups to an external HD when available and locally when there's no external HD. But as soon as one connects the extrenal HD again, those local backups should be automatically moved to the extrenal to save space on the internal HD. That would eliminate the need for an additional external backup.
So how about the MacBooks?? I don't carry around an external HD all the time. So when I do changes to a document on a flight, there's no TimeMachine backup?? Cool whould be, if the programm did backups to an external HD when available and locally when there's no external HD. But as soon as one connects the extrenal HD again, those local backups should be automatically moved to the extrenal to save space on the internal HD. That would eliminate the need for an additional external backup.
shawnce
Aug 26, 03:25 PM
Apple is now getting their parts from the same bin that PC makers use. Intel = cheap parts. Cheap parts = low quality.
Same thing with the batteries....
OS X can run on PPC and X86. Apple should target X86 to consumers and PPC for pro's Yet iBooks and PowerBooks (PPC based systems) are part of this most recent battery recall (and a prior one)... it has nothing to do with switching to Intel. Apple has been using standard commodity parts in their systems for a VERY long time now.
...and while you are at the site why not look at some non-Intel based systems...
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Titanium_PowerBook_G4
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=PowerBook_12%22
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Ibook
Same thing with the batteries....
OS X can run on PPC and X86. Apple should target X86 to consumers and PPC for pro's Yet iBooks and PowerBooks (PPC based systems) are part of this most recent battery recall (and a prior one)... it has nothing to do with switching to Intel. Apple has been using standard commodity parts in their systems for a VERY long time now.
...and while you are at the site why not look at some non-Intel based systems...
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Titanium_PowerBook_G4
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=PowerBook_12%22
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Ibook
skunk
Mar 1, 06:37 AM
No it doesn't, not when people brag about how much they sleep aroundThat is their problem, not yours.
Your link supports the idea that Greek society supported pederasty. If they have such a failing what is to say they don't have other failingsYou could say the same about the Catholic church. My link was specifically in reply to being asked for evidence - actually proof - that Plato was a homosexual. As for supporting bad stuff, the US Constitution was once quite content to support slavery and the subordination of women, and so were many of the founding fathers, both of the early church and the USA.
rape and paedophilia both involve lack of consent. Although paedophilia has to do with that the mind is attracted to pre-pubescent children in the same way that homosexuality causes attraction to the same sex. Both cases are untreatable.What absolute bollocks! Homosexuality does not need treatment, since it is not a disease.
Your link supports the idea that Greek society supported pederasty. If they have such a failing what is to say they don't have other failingsYou could say the same about the Catholic church. My link was specifically in reply to being asked for evidence - actually proof - that Plato was a homosexual. As for supporting bad stuff, the US Constitution was once quite content to support slavery and the subordination of women, and so were many of the founding fathers, both of the early church and the USA.
rape and paedophilia both involve lack of consent. Although paedophilia has to do with that the mind is attracted to pre-pubescent children in the same way that homosexuality causes attraction to the same sex. Both cases are untreatable.What absolute bollocks! Homosexuality does not need treatment, since it is not a disease.
fivepoint
Mar 22, 12:56 PM
Precisely. The UN mandate is to enforce a no-fly zone, amongst other things, tasks that are particularly suited for certain nations. I'm no gung-ho supporter of this action in Libya, but it strikes me as similar to Bosnia, with the real political pressure coming particularly from France for very real reasons.
Expect the overt US involvement to rapidly scale back soon.
Did Ronald Reagan get a go-ahead from Congress in 1986 for attacking Libya?
No he did not. It was a mistake then, it is a mistake now. The only difference is, I oppose it in all circumstances, regardless of who's president. You only oppose it when it's a Republican in office.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
william and kate wedding dress
william and kate wedding
Expect the overt US involvement to rapidly scale back soon.
Did Ronald Reagan get a go-ahead from Congress in 1986 for attacking Libya?
No he did not. It was a mistake then, it is a mistake now. The only difference is, I oppose it in all circumstances, regardless of who's president. You only oppose it when it's a Republican in office.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
SgtPepper12
Apr 27, 08:13 AM
Oh my god I knew it! Apple collects the data and does evil things with it! I can't imagine what kind of evil things they are going to do with it!
No, seriously, I really don't. Printing out huge posters with a map of your latest locations saying "LOOK AT WHERE THIS GUY WAS. HE WAS AT THE SUPERMARKET LATELY. HE SURELY BOUGHT SOME THINGS THERE, LIKE TOMATOES. YEAH THIS KIND OF THINGS." maybe.
Strange people.
No, seriously, I really don't. Printing out huge posters with a map of your latest locations saying "LOOK AT WHERE THIS GUY WAS. HE WAS AT THE SUPERMARKET LATELY. HE SURELY BOUGHT SOME THINGS THERE, LIKE TOMATOES. YEAH THIS KIND OF THINGS." maybe.
Strange people.
logandzwon
Apr 25, 03:13 PM
I love how Media and most everyone was asleep about this known issue, until just recently, and now it is some kind of emergency.
I am not an Apple apologist by any means, but it is NOT their fault if people are not securely backing up, their personal and private data.
Apple's only fault (IMHO) is not encrypting the location logfile on the phone, or the system with regards to backups. Regardless, security of data is the end user's responsibility, not the manufacturer of their computer or software.
See, I have a very different opinion.
Apple has an image of things just working. Apple actively promotes this image. The image is includes the idea that people don't have to worry about the details, like security of their devices. Even for backups, Apple makes it so all you need to have full backups is plug in an $50 usb drive.
That said, looking at the iPhone the way it is intended to be used, it's an accessory of your computer. A mobile remote with limited access to the "main" computer. If we except that view point, then;
William and royal-wedding
william kate wedding
Prince William; kate middleton
prince william kate middleton
prince william kate kate
prince william kate wedding.
prince william and kate
william and kate wedding
I am not an Apple apologist by any means, but it is NOT their fault if people are not securely backing up, their personal and private data.
Apple's only fault (IMHO) is not encrypting the location logfile on the phone, or the system with regards to backups. Regardless, security of data is the end user's responsibility, not the manufacturer of their computer or software.
See, I have a very different opinion.
Apple has an image of things just working. Apple actively promotes this image. The image is includes the idea that people don't have to worry about the details, like security of their devices. Even for backups, Apple makes it so all you need to have full backups is plug in an $50 usb drive.
That said, looking at the iPhone the way it is intended to be used, it's an accessory of your computer. A mobile remote with limited access to the "main" computer. If we except that view point, then;
Morpheus_
Jul 14, 04:54 PM
Dear Steve,
The iMac might be fine, but I don't need to pay for another monitor - I have a 20" and maybe I'll update that someday. I like expandability/flexibility in my displays, as well as my hard drives and hopefully my CPU.
The Mac Mini is not powerful enough.
The Mac Pro is too expensive, too top-end.
So Steve, will there be a "Mac" (not Pro) line? (How about "Big Mac"? Oh, that's taken...)
I basically want something that is good for gaming (in OS X and hence also in Windows, if necessary), but not ludicrously expensive. Something like I would have built myself in the years past - a good but not ridiculous CPU, a good but not ridiculous graphics card, and a nice amount of memory and storage -- then just throw it in a tower.
Maybe there will be a lower-end "Mac Pro", but it just doesn't make sense following the "Pro" nomenclature.
The iMac might be fine, but I don't need to pay for another monitor - I have a 20" and maybe I'll update that someday. I like expandability/flexibility in my displays, as well as my hard drives and hopefully my CPU.
The Mac Mini is not powerful enough.
The Mac Pro is too expensive, too top-end.
So Steve, will there be a "Mac" (not Pro) line? (How about "Big Mac"? Oh, that's taken...)
I basically want something that is good for gaming (in OS X and hence also in Windows, if necessary), but not ludicrously expensive. Something like I would have built myself in the years past - a good but not ridiculous CPU, a good but not ridiculous graphics card, and a nice amount of memory and storage -- then just throw it in a tower.
Maybe there will be a lower-end "Mac Pro", but it just doesn't make sense following the "Pro" nomenclature.
Dagless
Aug 12, 05:43 AM
GT by Citro�n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT_by_Citro�n).
Ooo I have that on GT PSP. Can't remember if it's a collectors edition bonus or whatever, but the ultra annoying thing (which I cannot wrap my head around why they would do this) is some cars cannot be transferred to the PS3 version of the game. Despite the PS3 version having the same cars and then some.
Ooo I have that on GT PSP. Can't remember if it's a collectors edition bonus or whatever, but the ultra annoying thing (which I cannot wrap my head around why they would do this) is some cars cannot be transferred to the PS3 version of the game. Despite the PS3 version having the same cars and then some.
notjustjay
Nov 29, 09:14 AM
If all of you on here bought all of your music either from iTunes or from a record store, then, absolutely, complain away if that dollar is passed on to you. But, which is likely in just about every case, you have a few songs you burned off a friend's CD or downloaded from a file-sharing site, then shut up, you are the reason this is necessary.
You're welcome to audit my iPod. I guarantee you'll find nothing but legal tunes.
Given your stance, I wonder how you feel about public libraries offering whole collections of CDs for patrons to "borrow". I think we all know what (many, not all) people are really doing with those CDs when they borrow them. Shouldn't we be doing something about these public institutions turning a blind eye to what is essentially sanctioned piracy?
You're welcome to audit my iPod. I guarantee you'll find nothing but legal tunes.
Given your stance, I wonder how you feel about public libraries offering whole collections of CDs for patrons to "borrow". I think we all know what (many, not all) people are really doing with those CDs when they borrow them. Shouldn't we be doing something about these public institutions turning a blind eye to what is essentially sanctioned piracy?
mencles
Sep 19, 01:10 AM
If they don't update their MBs before October '06 - I see myself forced to buy a PC Laptop- because I really need one for university and I am not buying an outdated product.
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:35 PM
Wrong. Just because a company released one phone that has a similar look as the iPhone doesn't mean their current offerings are a progression of that phone. It's a true testament as to who browses this forum if you honestly think that. The F700 didn't run an advanced OS, so it probably ran Symbian or used BREW. That means all Samsung did was create a theme. How does a theme they made 3 years prior to the Galaxy S mean it's a progression on the coding and UI they built? It doesn't. Here's a list of every Samsung phone: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Samsung_mobile_phones Now, pick out one of those and say it inspired all of their new devices 3 years later.
The F700 was an iPhone clone with a keyboard. It's depressing that people are saying that the iPhone copied its own clone.
Just look at his post history and you'll understand that you are arguing in vain.
The F700 was an iPhone clone with a keyboard. It's depressing that people are saying that the iPhone copied its own clone.
Just look at his post history and you'll understand that you are arguing in vain.
princealfie
Nov 29, 01:21 AM
******* Universal. May the b****** lose foreva.
EstrlM3
Apr 6, 02:13 PM
Nice...I'm glad to have a more rare piece of hardware. I love mine and have no issues, it'll only get better over time.Reminds me of the days of the RAZR, that's what the iPhone and iPad have become.
Honda sells a TON more cars than BMW by a huge factor...I'd rather drive a BMW, I guess you're all happy with the Hondas :)
In this case BMW (Apple) is far outselling Honda (Motorola) ;)
Honda sells a TON more cars than BMW by a huge factor...I'd rather drive a BMW, I guess you're all happy with the Hondas :)
In this case BMW (Apple) is far outselling Honda (Motorola) ;)
cult hero
Mar 26, 03:59 PM
Details found here :
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Apple-removes-Samba-from-Mac-OS-X-10-7-Server-1215179.html
Gist of it :
- less features than Samba
- no more Active Directory Services
- Just file sharing now.
Samba developers have also noted that the true motive behind this move might not be the GPLv3 per say, but a more global move away from the GPL. Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Anyway, Samba v4 could have given them all the "features" they implemented and much more. Their own in-house version won't necessarily be better just because it's written by Apple. The Samba team does a great job with what Microsoft puts out as documentation (if you can even call it that).
Note that from the article, this change only impacts OS X Server. The client was already an in-house solution.
Ick. None of that is good news. Although their current implementation of Samba is old anyway. Things aren't going to get worse... they're just not going to get any better. That's a bummer.
Looks like I'll continue using Linux for my domain controllers then. (Not that I take issue with this.)
Personally, I think it's GPL3. Apple isn't the only company reacting negatively to it. Who knows though? I certainly don't.
On the upside that means Apple won't advertise that their server will work as a domain controller anymore which they do now despite the fact that nowhere do they say, "Hey, only old NT4 style domains that don't work for modern Windows clients."
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Apple-removes-Samba-from-Mac-OS-X-10-7-Server-1215179.html
Gist of it :
- less features than Samba
- no more Active Directory Services
- Just file sharing now.
Samba developers have also noted that the true motive behind this move might not be the GPLv3 per say, but a more global move away from the GPL. Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Anyway, Samba v4 could have given them all the "features" they implemented and much more. Their own in-house version won't necessarily be better just because it's written by Apple. The Samba team does a great job with what Microsoft puts out as documentation (if you can even call it that).
Note that from the article, this change only impacts OS X Server. The client was already an in-house solution.
Ick. None of that is good news. Although their current implementation of Samba is old anyway. Things aren't going to get worse... they're just not going to get any better. That's a bummer.
Looks like I'll continue using Linux for my domain controllers then. (Not that I take issue with this.)
Personally, I think it's GPL3. Apple isn't the only company reacting negatively to it. Who knows though? I certainly don't.
On the upside that means Apple won't advertise that their server will work as a domain controller anymore which they do now despite the fact that nowhere do they say, "Hey, only old NT4 style domains that don't work for modern Windows clients."
Full of Win
Mar 31, 07:19 PM
Exactly. What we need are more objective, balanced and rational sounding opinions like yours.
What he said was spot on. Gruber is the archetypical Apple sycophant, second only to Andy Ifatso from MacBreak Weekly.
What he said was spot on. Gruber is the archetypical Apple sycophant, second only to Andy Ifatso from MacBreak Weekly.
BryanBensing
Apr 6, 03:11 PM
Rotfl
apple also sold about 100k ipad's - yesterday.
apple also sold about 100k ipad's - yesterday.
Astro7x
Apr 7, 02:54 PM
It's easy. The average person isn't watching blu-rays on a 27 inch or less screen. They get them for their big 50-60 inch TVs. And the sales of Macs are rising despite the lack. True professionals do what is needed to get the job done. Including buying a stand alone drive and 3rd party software if the simple menus in DVD Studio Pro are not enough
I disagree. I would argue that the reason people are not watching Blurays on their computers is because they CAN'T watch them on a computer. Blowing up a regular DVD to full screen on an Apple 27 inch cinema display looks horrible, and the alternative is a highly compressed H264 that looks amazing in comparison. I guarantee that if every Mac shipped with a Bluray drive, I'd have more clients requesting Bluray discs. Clients seem to love DVDs because they are dummy proof. Bluray? The smart ones will have to wait to watch it until they get home where they can put it on their PS3 or something. The others will stick it in their MacBook and then send me an E-mail saying that the DVD they received doesn't work.
Apple has to see financial benefits in not including Bluray in their computers. The professionals will add a drive to their MacPros so they can burn them. But consumers? Apple would no doubt take somewhat of a hit in profit for every Bluray drive that goes into a Mac. They'd also rather sell the HD media through the iTunes Store and make a profit there too. I'll admit it, one of the reasons I haven't switched completely over to buying Bluray Discs is because I can't watch them on my Laptop.
I disagree. I would argue that the reason people are not watching Blurays on their computers is because they CAN'T watch them on a computer. Blowing up a regular DVD to full screen on an Apple 27 inch cinema display looks horrible, and the alternative is a highly compressed H264 that looks amazing in comparison. I guarantee that if every Mac shipped with a Bluray drive, I'd have more clients requesting Bluray discs. Clients seem to love DVDs because they are dummy proof. Bluray? The smart ones will have to wait to watch it until they get home where they can put it on their PS3 or something. The others will stick it in their MacBook and then send me an E-mail saying that the DVD they received doesn't work.
Apple has to see financial benefits in not including Bluray in their computers. The professionals will add a drive to their MacPros so they can burn them. But consumers? Apple would no doubt take somewhat of a hit in profit for every Bluray drive that goes into a Mac. They'd also rather sell the HD media through the iTunes Store and make a profit there too. I'll admit it, one of the reasons I haven't switched completely over to buying Bluray Discs is because I can't watch them on my Laptop.
aswitcher
Aug 5, 09:24 PM
WWDC = World Wide Developer Conference.
= Not Consumer Stuff.
It's been mentioned before... :rolleyes:
Umm, iSight came out at a WWDC - given free to all attendees...
= Not Consumer Stuff.
It's been mentioned before... :rolleyes:
Umm, iSight came out at a WWDC - given free to all attendees...
lazyrighteye
Aug 11, 10:33 AM
*woot*
Please let it be good so I can trash my Treo.
My Treo is best smart phone I have used. That said, it's nowhere NEAR where I expect an Apple offering to be - when/if discussing integration.
Depending on what Apple unveils, I am very ready to cut my contract w/ VZW if it means a better user experience than what I am getting now.
Please let it be good so I can trash my Treo.
My Treo is best smart phone I have used. That said, it's nowhere NEAR where I expect an Apple offering to be - when/if discussing integration.
Depending on what Apple unveils, I am very ready to cut my contract w/ VZW if it means a better user experience than what I am getting now.
No comments:
Post a Comment