G4DP
Mar 26, 01:35 AM
So what we saw in the pre-view was basically it?
I hope not. because they'll have a hard time to justify the �100 upgrade charge if it is.
I hope not. because they'll have a hard time to justify the �100 upgrade charge if it is.
SuperCachetes
Mar 4, 12:02 AM
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions.
And yet I doubt Macaroony sees opposite-sex attractions as immoral or placing oneself in grave danger. I know what your religious beliefs tell you, and it is your right to follow those as explicitly as you are legally able. But why does that have to impact the rest of the world when you know many of them share different beliefs and have different experiences?
Personally, I think people who believe in gods are weak-minded fools. But I would never support a law that mandated atheism or banned religious gatherings. Because these religious things, while they are not in line with my worldview, do not impact my way of life directly, and allow people to live how they think they need to, not how I think they need to.
Invalid because it endorses something that could cause the collapse of society
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that you don't have a non-biased fact source for a retarded statement like that. :rolleyes:
And yet I doubt Macaroony sees opposite-sex attractions as immoral or placing oneself in grave danger. I know what your religious beliefs tell you, and it is your right to follow those as explicitly as you are legally able. But why does that have to impact the rest of the world when you know many of them share different beliefs and have different experiences?
Personally, I think people who believe in gods are weak-minded fools. But I would never support a law that mandated atheism or banned religious gatherings. Because these religious things, while they are not in line with my worldview, do not impact my way of life directly, and allow people to live how they think they need to, not how I think they need to.
Invalid because it endorses something that could cause the collapse of society
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that you don't have a non-biased fact source for a retarded statement like that. :rolleyes:
Iconoclysm
Apr 19, 08:24 PM
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
Actually, you're WRONG!!!! to say he's wrong. You're trying to say that every GUI element was created at Xerox? EVERY one of them? Sorry, but your argument here is akin to something Fox News would air.
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
Actually, you're WRONG!!!! to say he's wrong. You're trying to say that every GUI element was created at Xerox? EVERY one of them? Sorry, but your argument here is akin to something Fox News would air.
0815
Mar 31, 05:28 PM
The problem that has always existed, not just with Android, is that the carriers customize the OS, release it with a phone, and you can forget about getting any updates for it. Maybe one update for the lifetime of the device, if you are lucky. My HTC TouchPro 2 has only seen in almost 2 years just one update to WM 6.5, and it was not even close to the most current revision at that time.
This just shows that carriers and manufacturers don't want to keep maintaining their phones. They want to sell and forget, and push a new model out the door.
Sad, but true... :(
Correct - and that is what Apple realized and didn't allow and got bashed for.
This just shows that carriers and manufacturers don't want to keep maintaining their phones. They want to sell and forget, and push a new model out the door.
Sad, but true... :(
Correct - and that is what Apple realized and didn't allow and got bashed for.
mcrain
Mar 23, 01:48 PM
Again, Fivepoint, you forget that the President was selling the Iraq war with suspicious and weak information that the many questioned. It turns out they were right. Pre-war, the big issue was whether the war was justified based on the evidence being pushed by the President. The criticism President Bush faced thereafter had a lot to do with the fact that he lied to the American people in order to start a poorly planned war. They bungled every aspect of a war they lied to get us into. There were plenty of reasons to be critical.
Even so, in the FIRST DAYS of the war, even the lefties supported the troops and the American military, they merely questioned whether we should be going to war.
This Libya conflict is similar in that there are people on the left today questioning whether we should be "going to war" with this no-fly zone, but there are also people who support the reason behind it, but also question why we haven't gone into other countries where there are similar humanitarian issues.
Out of curiousity, what do you expect? I expect conservative congressmen and women to support a conservative president, but to think for themselves, and do what they independently think is right. I don't respect blind support like what they did under GWB. Similarly, I expect liberal congressmen and women to support a liberal president, but to also think for themselves, and do what they independently think is right. Some are speaking out, and some are not blindly supporting President Obama. Can you acknowledge that the liberals are doing a better job with consistency than the GOP? If not, how do you explain GOP opposition to the Libya action?
Even so, in the FIRST DAYS of the war, even the lefties supported the troops and the American military, they merely questioned whether we should be going to war.
This Libya conflict is similar in that there are people on the left today questioning whether we should be "going to war" with this no-fly zone, but there are also people who support the reason behind it, but also question why we haven't gone into other countries where there are similar humanitarian issues.
Out of curiousity, what do you expect? I expect conservative congressmen and women to support a conservative president, but to think for themselves, and do what they independently think is right. I don't respect blind support like what they did under GWB. Similarly, I expect liberal congressmen and women to support a liberal president, but to also think for themselves, and do what they independently think is right. Some are speaking out, and some are not blindly supporting President Obama. Can you acknowledge that the liberals are doing a better job with consistency than the GOP? If not, how do you explain GOP opposition to the Libya action?
Blue Velvet
Apr 27, 02:43 PM
Are you calling me a liar? I literally went to WhiteHouse.gov, opened the file in Illustrator, and moved the text around myself. :rolleyes:
You said you opened the file in Indesign which is what sparked my interest, because that's something you can't technically do. We've already established long ago that you're untrustworthy, so it's fair to be suspicious.
Some things never change. Laughably bias.
You're so cute when you're whining. :)
are there any graphic designers here who can help?
Sure there are. Been designing since before you were born. This file does not have layers. It has objects within one group. A document created in 1961 will have been scanned, possible inadvertently split into sections as it's not even a linked group or even a compound path. MattSepata is correct to some extent, but I doubt it's been OCRed. Just a crappily-made PDF... which hasn't even been security-locked.
Nice try, but no cookie, Sherlock.
You said you opened the file in Indesign which is what sparked my interest, because that's something you can't technically do. We've already established long ago that you're untrustworthy, so it's fair to be suspicious.
Some things never change. Laughably bias.
You're so cute when you're whining. :)
are there any graphic designers here who can help?
Sure there are. Been designing since before you were born. This file does not have layers. It has objects within one group. A document created in 1961 will have been scanned, possible inadvertently split into sections as it's not even a linked group or even a compound path. MattSepata is correct to some extent, but I doubt it's been OCRed. Just a crappily-made PDF... which hasn't even been security-locked.
Nice try, but no cookie, Sherlock.
TripHop
Jun 9, 12:38 AM
This is a huge story. I don't understand why it wasn't posted on page 1 especially since learning of the Radio Shack Trade-In program. I think the Doctor should reconsider not putting this on Page 1. :confused:
daneoni
Aug 22, 10:18 PM
Yeah im not surprised. I went to my local store today and saw one in all its glory attached to a 30" ACD. It was VERY fast, system prefs launched in micro seconds, a meaty FCP project opened in less than 5 seconds same for Aperture & Logic, 1080p HD trailers were chewed and spit out using less than 10% of processing power. Totally amazing and best part...its very quiet. I played with a Quad G5 once and it sounded like a jet engine taking off.
I defo want one but it'll cost me an arm and leg. Sigh...
I defo want one but it'll cost me an arm and leg. Sigh...
AwakenedLands
Apr 25, 02:38 PM
Thinking it's only stored on the device and not used by Apple is naive. What's the point of logging your every location if it's not going to be used in some way.
I'm going to assume if you wipe your phone, your location data isn't lost... it will still be in Apple's possession. What else is iOS storing and sending to Apple that we don't know about? Slippery slope if you ask me.
I'm going to assume if you wipe your phone, your location data isn't lost... it will still be in Apple's possession. What else is iOS storing and sending to Apple that we don't know about? Slippery slope if you ask me.
NickPill
Aug 7, 10:55 PM
Hi, this is just a question to the developers. Did you already get 10.5? I have the ADC Select membership but can�t find 10.5 in the download section. Please send me an email where I can find it. Thank you!
rscharf
Apr 25, 02:36 PM
Obviously these know-nothings have not tried to "easily access" their supposed private tracking information on the iPhone.
FIRST, you cannot access it directly on the iPhone, you have to have access to the OSX (Mac) computer that the iPhone was synced with.
SECOND, you have to log onto said computer, download a specific application which may or may not work.
THIRD, if the app does not work, you have to find the specific subdirectory where the data is located, load a specific file into a text editor, identify the device, run a Python script to convert random strings, start terminal and cd into the subdirectory, run a command, then pipe it through grep, and finally run the results through some type of SQL database reader to get the CellLocation table.
I am sure that virtually all users can accomplish these tasks with ease, thus allowing the entire world access to this data.
What a crock of crap!
FIRST, you cannot access it directly on the iPhone, you have to have access to the OSX (Mac) computer that the iPhone was synced with.
SECOND, you have to log onto said computer, download a specific application which may or may not work.
THIRD, if the app does not work, you have to find the specific subdirectory where the data is located, load a specific file into a text editor, identify the device, run a Python script to convert random strings, start terminal and cd into the subdirectory, run a command, then pipe it through grep, and finally run the results through some type of SQL database reader to get the CellLocation table.
I am sure that virtually all users can accomplish these tasks with ease, thus allowing the entire world access to this data.
What a crock of crap!
^squirrel^
Jul 15, 02:21 PM
Good: Dual-Core 2GHz Intel Xeon, 512MB DDR 667, ATI Radeon X1600 Pro, 250GB Hard Drive,$1799
Better: Dual-Core 2.33GHz Intel Xeon, 1GB DDR2 667, ATI Radeon X1800 Pro, 320GB Hard Drive, $2499
Best: Two Dual-Core 2.66 Intel Xeon, 1GB DDR2 667, ATI Radeon X1800 Pro, 320GB Hard Drive, $3299
I wonder if i'll be able to upgrade to the X1900?
Better: Dual-Core 2.33GHz Intel Xeon, 1GB DDR2 667, ATI Radeon X1800 Pro, 320GB Hard Drive, $2499
Best: Two Dual-Core 2.66 Intel Xeon, 1GB DDR2 667, ATI Radeon X1800 Pro, 320GB Hard Drive, $3299
I wonder if i'll be able to upgrade to the X1900?
mc68k
Dec 6, 01:20 PM
I have only done one. But I didn't feel as if I could start the race, leave, come back and have won. The race I did, I watched. My guy was in 1st the up until the last lap, and the person in 2nd over took him. I am sure if I was not there to instruct him to "over take" he would not have done it and I would have gotten 2nd.
Maybe I just need to level up?yeah your bspec driver will really suck until he's leveled up a bit. still havent figured out why you would want more than one bspec driver, prob for the later enduro races? got my bspec up to 12, he's racing and overtaking much better now. the amount the bspec driver levels up every time is small, so it's very grind-y but at least you don't have to watch it, and you get some diff gift cars than the same race in a-spec
Maybe I just need to level up?yeah your bspec driver will really suck until he's leveled up a bit. still havent figured out why you would want more than one bspec driver, prob for the later enduro races? got my bspec up to 12, he's racing and overtaking much better now. the amount the bspec driver levels up every time is small, so it's very grind-y but at least you don't have to watch it, and you get some diff gift cars than the same race in a-spec
rezenclowd3
Nov 24, 05:09 PM
I'm utterly disappointed in the single player...but alas it really has not changed since ALL the other versions. Online is where I will be spending my time.
On another note, so very dissapointed with video game reviews the last 3 or so years. They are more an overview of what the game is, not a review of the game, along with its pro's and con's. IGNs review for GT5 is somewhat decent..but just barely.
On another note, so very dissapointed with video game reviews the last 3 or so years. They are more an overview of what the game is, not a review of the game, along with its pro's and con's. IGNs review for GT5 is somewhat decent..but just barely.
ghostlyorb
Mar 26, 07:48 AM
I can't wait to get my hands on Lion! It looks pretty cool!
jonnysods
Apr 6, 02:24 PM
Man alive, if that's the nearest competitor investors must be feeling pretty good with Apple right now.
I certainly love my iPad.
I certainly love my iPad.
damnyooneek
Apr 6, 10:25 AM
"But I JUST bought this..."
"3D, 3D, 3D."
"Wait... 4D?"
"You bought the wrong one dummy..."
"3D, 3D, 3D."
"Wait... 4D?"
"You bought the wrong one dummy..."
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.
Dark K
Jun 15, 04:03 PM
Same situation here, only guy that was pre ordering on my local RS, they couldn't enter the reservation, I talked to them and finally decided to come the 24th very early to get my phone without reserving it, I have to say that RS is a mess with reservation, I can't imagine if there were more people reserving today.
I am happy though, the town where I live, when it comes to apple stuff, it is ghost town, so I kinda bet that it will be me plus a maximum of 4 people atleast on launch day.
I am happy though, the town where I live, when it comes to apple stuff, it is ghost town, so I kinda bet that it will be me plus a maximum of 4 people atleast on launch day.
sierra oscar
Sep 19, 09:39 AM
I don't know how many times we have to go round and round with this here. I've been on MacRumors since '01 and it's always the same-old, same-old. It's not legitimate. It's "I-wantism." You have no basis to believe that a Rev B would be more "stabled and refined." That's a hope, backed by nothing -- and nothing Apple ever comments on, either. The bottom line is that you can hope if you want, and you can wait if you want, but to bash Apple for being slow on the trigger, and to make the argument that Meroms are amazing and Yonahs are crap is, frankly, horse manure. Like I said, 64 bit is pretty irrelevant for most users, and the speed and battery differences are quite negligible. And the argument that Apple is losing tons of sales to PC manufactuers is, frankly, laughable too.
Sure... I have no basis to believe a revB will be more stable and refined. But I'm participating in 'discussion' - so no real proof - but I wasn't seeking any.
I did state - I was hoping a revB would 'maximise' my chances though. Ironically just as I have no 'proof' neither do you that this won't be the case.
I find your tone very condescending and doesn't encourage open and accepting dialogue between ppl here. I don't understand why you would participate then... If you need to be the oldest forum member (you win) or 100% right (you can win that too).... but I want to engage with ppl here in a friendly and warm atmosphere.
Sure... I have no basis to believe a revB will be more stable and refined. But I'm participating in 'discussion' - so no real proof - but I wasn't seeking any.
I did state - I was hoping a revB would 'maximise' my chances though. Ironically just as I have no 'proof' neither do you that this won't be the case.
I find your tone very condescending and doesn't encourage open and accepting dialogue between ppl here. I don't understand why you would participate then... If you need to be the oldest forum member (you win) or 100% right (you can win that too).... but I want to engage with ppl here in a friendly and warm atmosphere.
relimw
Sep 12, 11:36 AM
I could do with multiple cores. I render HDV in the background, render projects in After Effects, compress videos in Compressor for DVDs, burn Toast images, download with BitTorrent, while surfing the web and watching 1080i H.264 material. Those extra cores would come in real handy. :)
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
11thIndian
Apr 6, 07:38 AM
The functions inside FCP do not need the OS support. Apple can install private frameworks, and they do it already, for their own applications. So i think they will support SL.
AV Foundation brings back QT7-features to QTX. Apple uses AV Foundation in the new QTX-player of Lion.
And AV Foundation is what allows iOS devices like the iPhone and iPad, with their significantly slower processors and reduced RAM, to view and edit h264 media.
AV Foundation sidesteps ALL the problems of QTKit. It's a fresh start.
Here's a great article from Philip Hodgett's site:
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2011/02/a-new-64-bit-final-cut-pro/
AV Foundation brings back QT7-features to QTX. Apple uses AV Foundation in the new QTX-player of Lion.
And AV Foundation is what allows iOS devices like the iPhone and iPad, with their significantly slower processors and reduced RAM, to view and edit h264 media.
AV Foundation sidesteps ALL the problems of QTKit. It's a fresh start.
Here's a great article from Philip Hodgett's site:
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2011/02/a-new-64-bit-final-cut-pro/
SevenInchScrew
Nov 24, 11:55 PM
Oh I forgot. Still no qualifying/race weekends. LAME
I don't know how far you are into the game, but I've read that qualifying is used later in the game for some of the bigger, championship races. I don't know this for sure, so don't hold me to it. But, you might get to qualify for SOME races... at some point.... maybe. :confused:
I don't know how far you are into the game, but I've read that qualifying is used later in the game for some of the bigger, championship races. I don't know this for sure, so don't hold me to it. But, you might get to qualify for SOME races... at some point.... maybe. :confused:
amin
Aug 18, 07:39 PM
... If apple releases a 2.66GHz Conroe iMac/Mac/whathaveyou it will be able to crunch through FCP/Photoshop/etc faster than a Mac Pro because it can use regular DDR2 and won't suffer from horrendous memory latency.
Where is your evidence to back up this statement? You have presented limited evidence about FCP, and none regarding "PS/etc." So far there is no "Mac/whathaveyou." Do you think a Conroe iMac will beat a Mac Pro due to lower memory latency alone? Do you have real experience or data regarding how horrendous a problem this is? Extra dual-core processor aside, the Mac Pro has a higher speed FSB, higher memory bus bandwidth, higher RAM capacity, and ability to set up internal RAID amongst other advantages over a Conroe iMac.
Where is your evidence to back up this statement? You have presented limited evidence about FCP, and none regarding "PS/etc." So far there is no "Mac/whathaveyou." Do you think a Conroe iMac will beat a Mac Pro due to lower memory latency alone? Do you have real experience or data regarding how horrendous a problem this is? Extra dual-core processor aside, the Mac Pro has a higher speed FSB, higher memory bus bandwidth, higher RAM capacity, and ability to set up internal RAID amongst other advantages over a Conroe iMac.
No comments:
Post a Comment