DoFoT9
Aug 14, 11:44 PM
I have enough skill to win the faster races, i just have more fun with a "real" car instead of something with neck-snapping acceleration and tires that stick to the road if you take a hair-pin at 200mph.
I have a lot more fun driving cars that anyone can afford.
are you rich then? :p
i only hope that GT5 is more realistic then simulated this time..
I have a lot more fun driving cars that anyone can afford.
are you rich then? :p
i only hope that GT5 is more realistic then simulated this time..
leekohler
Mar 4, 04:40 PM
you and you partner will beget how exactly, oral and anal sex don't produce a child nor does mutual masturbation, so how exactly will you and your partner produce a child?
Science. Artificial insemination. That's procreation without sex. It's fairly simple.
And all I said was that the human race would not die out if heterosexuals stop having sex. I never said that I and my partner would produce one all on our own. It's obviously easy to procreate without sex.
Science. Artificial insemination. That's procreation without sex. It's fairly simple.
And all I said was that the human race would not die out if heterosexuals stop having sex. I never said that I and my partner would produce one all on our own. It's obviously easy to procreate without sex.
Multimedia
Aug 17, 03:51 PM
Some people do things called graphic design and video editing for a living. Sometimes, when you want to make money and put food on the table, you want top of the line equipment.:rolleyes:Yes. I agree totally. If you are making your living with your Mac doing graphics and video work, every minute saved is another minute you can take on another client or meet a perviously impossible deadline. So in that case the extra $850 is made up in a matter of a few weeks or months at worst. Totally understandable when time is money for the Mac professional. :)
tumblebird
Nov 28, 11:30 PM
That Doug Morris is a slimeball. Who's to say I even own any Universal music. I listen to Indie, primarily. I buy all my music, most of it on CD which I digitize, or via the iTunes Music Store. Who is Universal to demand my dollar? Or three for that matter, one for each iPod I have purchased. There are a lot of labels out there. They can't all get a portion. Apple owes them NOTHING. Did they get music from Sony for the Walkman? How many of us listened to mix tapes from friends on those? I know that most of my tapes were mixes from records and CDs. Universal is off base and greedy. Don't let this happen, Mr. Steve Jobs! You're in the right.
ten-oak-druid
Mar 22, 04:19 PM
Competition is good.
Make a case for your argument.
Make a case for your argument.
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.
shawnce
Aug 18, 10:14 PM
So You are saying 10 seconds from OFF to the Grey Apple then 5 more seconds to the desktop? With 3 GB of New Egg + 2GB RAM? That's still very fast. Quad G5 is almost as fast as that though.
A little random trivia I learned at WWDC 06...
- When you see the Apple symbol on an Intel Mac that means EFI boot loader is active.
- When you see the spinning progress indicator that means the kernel has taken over from EFI boot loader.
- When you see the the switch to blue with progress dialog then the logininwindow is active (launchd has been loading required boot time services by this point).
If you hold down option while booting and get into the traditional boot disk selection screen on a Intel based Mac you can add and remove storage devices and they will appear/disappear automatically (EFI allows for much faster scanning and dynamic add/remove of devices). Additionally they will use the volume icon if one is found and for fun you can use your IR remote to make your boot selection.
A little random trivia I learned at WWDC 06...
- When you see the Apple symbol on an Intel Mac that means EFI boot loader is active.
- When you see the spinning progress indicator that means the kernel has taken over from EFI boot loader.
- When you see the the switch to blue with progress dialog then the logininwindow is active (launchd has been loading required boot time services by this point).
If you hold down option while booting and get into the traditional boot disk selection screen on a Intel based Mac you can add and remove storage devices and they will appear/disappear automatically (EFI allows for much faster scanning and dynamic add/remove of devices). Additionally they will use the volume icon if one is found and for fun you can use your IR remote to make your boot selection.
GregAndonian
Apr 10, 08:52 PM
In fact the very first version of FCP was announced at Supermeet.
Was the supermeet focused on something else at one point? Because otherwise that sounds a little hard to believe that a usergroup would exist for a product that wasn't out yet...
"Hey Bill, we should go to the Final Cut Pro Supermeet this year. I hear they're going to talk about a new editing program called Final Cut Pro- sounds pretty neat."
Was the supermeet focused on something else at one point? Because otherwise that sounds a little hard to believe that a usergroup would exist for a product that wasn't out yet...
"Hey Bill, we should go to the Final Cut Pro Supermeet this year. I hear they're going to talk about a new editing program called Final Cut Pro- sounds pretty neat."
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 12:14 PM
Sorry I don't see that happening... Apple has basically always given developers a few months (to several months) lead time with the next major version of Mac OS X. That has taken place yet... so I don't see it being released at WWDC 2006.
I thought we were talking MWSF here, in January, so that's on par with expectations
I thought we were talking MWSF here, in January, so that's on par with expectations
dukeblue91
Apr 6, 01:30 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Motorola doesn't "get" tablets yet, but the G1 didn't sell well either. Let's look at the market again in two years, I bet it'll look a lot different.
Not if you take any one model against whatever current iPad model.
The same goes for the iPhone vs anyone else.
Motorola doesn't "get" tablets yet, but the G1 didn't sell well either. Let's look at the market again in two years, I bet it'll look a lot different.
Not if you take any one model against whatever current iPad model.
The same goes for the iPhone vs anyone else.
Stridder44
Aug 7, 05:10 PM
I'm not comparing it to system restore but to Volume Shadow Copy from Windows Server 2003. File-by-file snapshot by MS 3 years ago!
I think Time Machine looks and probably is good, but after having seen all the pictures of the banners at WWDC mocking Vista, I expected someting REALLY NEW, not just warmed up. If they can't show the super super secret new stuff yet, then they shouldn't have used those banners. I find that arrogant...
APPLE!? Arrogant??? Naaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh.
And how do you know you guys are going to hate it? You never even used it yet. My God some of you people are such complainers. Put some dirt on it, make a hill, and get over it.
I think Time Machine looks and probably is good, but after having seen all the pictures of the banners at WWDC mocking Vista, I expected someting REALLY NEW, not just warmed up. If they can't show the super super secret new stuff yet, then they shouldn't have used those banners. I find that arrogant...
APPLE!? Arrogant??? Naaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh.
And how do you know you guys are going to hate it? You never even used it yet. My God some of you people are such complainers. Put some dirt on it, make a hill, and get over it.
milo
Sep 13, 07:05 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet.
Not true, according to the article. They said it wasn't easy, but they were able to max out all 8 cores. You can see the Activity Monitor graph all filled up.
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.
That's how it is now, at least with multiple apps. I bet it's possible to program for an unspecified number of multiple cores, and there may be apps doing it already.
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
Read the article again, they WERE able to max them out, just not easily. Based on that, OSX seems to be able to scale already. Developers just need to start writing apps that are more MP friendly.
Not true, according to the article. They said it wasn't easy, but they were able to max out all 8 cores. You can see the Activity Monitor graph all filled up.
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.
That's how it is now, at least with multiple apps. I bet it's possible to program for an unspecified number of multiple cores, and there may be apps doing it already.
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
Read the article again, they WERE able to max them out, just not easily. Based on that, OSX seems to be able to scale already. Developers just need to start writing apps that are more MP friendly.
Silentwave
Aug 18, 10:21 AM
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/mac%20pro_081406100848/12798.png
I think this speaks for itself.
When I'm working on one project, that's all my attention to it. When I'd like to encode it, I'd like my however many cores to be at full blast. Sadly, that's not happening at the moment and will remain so until they rewrite h264 encoding.
Like I said, unless people are doing what you do (sending multiple files to be encoded at the same time all the time) they won't benefit from 4, 8, 100 cores.
Now if anyone can show benchmarks that show FCP being 40-50% faster on a quad than on a dual when working on a project, I'll shut up :)
Or maybe they have?
Didn't FCP just get updated to optimize it for the Mac Pro?
I think they need the latest version over there and should rerun the test.
I think this speaks for itself.
When I'm working on one project, that's all my attention to it. When I'd like to encode it, I'd like my however many cores to be at full blast. Sadly, that's not happening at the moment and will remain so until they rewrite h264 encoding.
Like I said, unless people are doing what you do (sending multiple files to be encoded at the same time all the time) they won't benefit from 4, 8, 100 cores.
Now if anyone can show benchmarks that show FCP being 40-50% faster on a quad than on a dual when working on a project, I'll shut up :)
Or maybe they have?
Didn't FCP just get updated to optimize it for the Mac Pro?
I think they need the latest version over there and should rerun the test.
Consultant
Mar 22, 01:46 PM
It won�t sell because the iPad lines will block the view in store.
Exactly. And that the overpriced 7" RIM playbook basically tried to emulate the Samsung tab.
Exactly. And that the overpriced 7" RIM playbook basically tried to emulate the Samsung tab.
lars steenhoff
Apr 6, 05:01 PM
For the time being, the new ati macbook pro's won't work as fast with premiere pro, as they could have when premiere would use openCL, instead of Cuda.
Probably in the next version I guess, as openCL was not quite there yet when premiere CS5 was developed
Probably in the next version I guess, as openCL was not quite there yet when premiere CS5 was developed
Vulpinemac
Apr 6, 03:22 PM
No matter what Apple does lately or how much they sell or how good the forecasts are for sales Apple Stock continues it quick downward slide. What the HELL!! I just do not understand it ... Specially while Google stock continues to climb at an incredible pace week, after week, after week.. :confused::confused::mad:
I have to wonder where you get your information. Apple's stock is near the top of a two-year climb of almost $250, showing only a $15 drop in the last three days while Google is almost $100 below its peak only 2 months ago and barely above its high of only a year ago. In fact, even if you only count this week, Google is $20 below its high just three days ago. Yes, Google may have a higher peak overall in the last two years, but Google has also proven to be more volatile, swinging higher--and lower than Apple over the same time period.
I have to wonder where you get your information. Apple's stock is near the top of a two-year climb of almost $250, showing only a $15 drop in the last three days while Google is almost $100 below its peak only 2 months ago and barely above its high of only a year ago. In fact, even if you only count this week, Google is $20 below its high just three days ago. Yes, Google may have a higher peak overall in the last two years, but Google has also proven to be more volatile, swinging higher--and lower than Apple over the same time period.
Piggie
Apr 8, 07:13 AM
I don't know if anyone has explained Best Buy's actions at all and why they would hold back on selling stock the have yet.
I run a branch for a construction supply company and am judged based on daily and monthly goals.
It doesn't matter if I do three times my monthly goal this month if I don't hit goal at all next month. It doesn't make sense but it is the way business works. I have held orders that come in at the end of the month for the beginning of the next if I have already hit this month's goal so that I get a head start on next month's.
For the manager at Best Buy he probably felt that it served him better to the corporate big wigs if he hit his goal every day rather than pass his goal one day and not reach it the next.
Is it best for the COMPANY or for the CONSUMER? No... But in this world of sales and numbers managers tend to do what will make their bosses happy, which is to make sure that when they check the numbers on the spreadsheet every day they hit their numbers and don't get yelled at.
100% agree with you and people need to realise how stupid people high up the ladder are, and out of touch with reality with these things, which then cause the behaviour you have explained to happen.
Actually by selling more than your expected quota this month may even end up with your expected quota being increased for future months.
Effectively shooting yourself in the foot.
To put it in it's simplest form, say someone paid you $5 to walk to the shops and buy them a pizza, and give you 15 mins for the journey. You go the task, get your $5 dollars and everyone is happy.
Now, once you decide to jog a little and arrive back in 10 mins, wow that's great, so much quicker. but from now on, will will only allow you 11 mins to get the pizza for the $5 payment.
Then you are silly enough to run a little one day and come back in just 5 mins, wow, this is an improvement. Head office have now decided to allow you 6 mins to perform the task for your $5.
How stupid are you, when you could have been walking all this time and still of had your original 15mins for your $5 payment.
Perhaps you could of run in just 5 mins, but you really should of stopped and chatted to someone for 10 mins to use your allowed time up.
I run a branch for a construction supply company and am judged based on daily and monthly goals.
It doesn't matter if I do three times my monthly goal this month if I don't hit goal at all next month. It doesn't make sense but it is the way business works. I have held orders that come in at the end of the month for the beginning of the next if I have already hit this month's goal so that I get a head start on next month's.
For the manager at Best Buy he probably felt that it served him better to the corporate big wigs if he hit his goal every day rather than pass his goal one day and not reach it the next.
Is it best for the COMPANY or for the CONSUMER? No... But in this world of sales and numbers managers tend to do what will make their bosses happy, which is to make sure that when they check the numbers on the spreadsheet every day they hit their numbers and don't get yelled at.
100% agree with you and people need to realise how stupid people high up the ladder are, and out of touch with reality with these things, which then cause the behaviour you have explained to happen.
Actually by selling more than your expected quota this month may even end up with your expected quota being increased for future months.
Effectively shooting yourself in the foot.
To put it in it's simplest form, say someone paid you $5 to walk to the shops and buy them a pizza, and give you 15 mins for the journey. You go the task, get your $5 dollars and everyone is happy.
Now, once you decide to jog a little and arrive back in 10 mins, wow that's great, so much quicker. but from now on, will will only allow you 11 mins to get the pizza for the $5 payment.
Then you are silly enough to run a little one day and come back in just 5 mins, wow, this is an improvement. Head office have now decided to allow you 6 mins to perform the task for your $5.
How stupid are you, when you could have been walking all this time and still of had your original 15mins for your $5 payment.
Perhaps you could of run in just 5 mins, but you really should of stopped and chatted to someone for 10 mins to use your allowed time up.
Zimmy68
Apr 7, 11:36 PM
If there is one indisputable fact of this world...
Those on message boards that say they hate Best Buy, are the first to grab the Sunday ad and visit the store at least weekly.
Bank on it.
Those on message boards that say they hate Best Buy, are the first to grab the Sunday ad and visit the store at least weekly.
Bank on it.
Tejasfilm
Sep 19, 09:26 AM
This being my first Mac I'd like to get the best possible machine possible. It's been a few years since I used a Mac, used them in college. I've gone full circle with PC's and hate the fact that I've lost countless data over the years and am ready for a great machine. My old Prof is thrilled at my new purchase, MBP 17", so I too have the September 26th delivery date. Crossing fingers for the Merom, I know I'd use the 64 bit processing for video editing and photo editing.
bassfingers
Apr 27, 01:46 PM
I don't know about you, but I love America because it was founded on stolen native land.
Oh you're right, that is completely applicable and single-handedly discredits the foundation of the American government. Instead of government, let's all gather around and talk about our feelings.
Sarcasm ^
Oh you're right, that is completely applicable and single-handedly discredits the foundation of the American government. Instead of government, let's all gather around and talk about our feelings.
Sarcasm ^
Squire
Jul 14, 09:12 PM
Here are my guesses/wishes...
I like your line of thinking. You know, what if Apple just released 4 Mac Pro models? Or offered 2 Mac Pro models and 2 iMac Pro models. The bottom two could have Conroe chips and the top two could have 2 x Woodcrest chips. Perhaps have an ever so slight case design difference between the two (i.e. slightly smaller on the low end or charcoal black on the upper end). Because, when you think of it, "prosumers" who already own a display are faced with a difficult buying decision with the current lineup.
-Squire
I like your line of thinking. You know, what if Apple just released 4 Mac Pro models? Or offered 2 Mac Pro models and 2 iMac Pro models. The bottom two could have Conroe chips and the top two could have 2 x Woodcrest chips. Perhaps have an ever so slight case design difference between the two (i.e. slightly smaller on the low end or charcoal black on the upper end). Because, when you think of it, "prosumers" who already own a display are faced with a difficult buying decision with the current lineup.
-Squire
fivepoint
Mar 23, 02:20 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.
"Lying" implies intent. Are you accusing them of lying, or getting it wrong?
Yes, there were many reasons to be critical.
Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations?
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?
Part of what you say is true, in that I should EXPECT people to be more critical of the other side. This is true. But I also think it's important (especially in this forum) to point out hypocrisy stemming from the left so that the Macrumors Echo Chamber doesn't keep you all in denial. What I personally expect is people to stand on principles, and not on parties. What I expect is that people live their lives in a honorable way and present a consistent philosophy. This is the same reason I rip on neo-con Republicans for talking about fiscal conservatism when history has shown us that their real world actions when in power are very different from their rhetoric... even if they still aren't as bad as the Democrats... it's not good enough. Both parties are bad at it, too many people simply tow the party line and don't think for themselves.
It sure is easy to peg me isn't it? Too bad if you go back over my posts you will find more than enough denouncing involvement in Iraq / Afghanistan.
It's much easier than actually addressing your real views... it's a defense mechanism which she uses to avoid serious debate.
If you are supporting non-intervention, than I disagree. I support the notion that the UN (using member-nations' pooled military or civilian assets) should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions.
Being a 'non-interventionist' does not mean that you NEVER support war, it means that you avoid it whenever possible. It means that you are far less prone to military intervention than someone who does not care about the values of non-interventionism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-interventionism
Nonintervention or non-interventionism is a foreign policy which holds that political rulers should avoid alliances with other nations, but still retain diplomacy, and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial self-defense.
"Lying" implies intent. Are you accusing them of lying, or getting it wrong?
Yes, there were many reasons to be critical.
Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations?
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?
Part of what you say is true, in that I should EXPECT people to be more critical of the other side. This is true. But I also think it's important (especially in this forum) to point out hypocrisy stemming from the left so that the Macrumors Echo Chamber doesn't keep you all in denial. What I personally expect is people to stand on principles, and not on parties. What I expect is that people live their lives in a honorable way and present a consistent philosophy. This is the same reason I rip on neo-con Republicans for talking about fiscal conservatism when history has shown us that their real world actions when in power are very different from their rhetoric... even if they still aren't as bad as the Democrats... it's not good enough. Both parties are bad at it, too many people simply tow the party line and don't think for themselves.
It sure is easy to peg me isn't it? Too bad if you go back over my posts you will find more than enough denouncing involvement in Iraq / Afghanistan.
It's much easier than actually addressing your real views... it's a defense mechanism which she uses to avoid serious debate.
If you are supporting non-intervention, than I disagree. I support the notion that the UN (using member-nations' pooled military or civilian assets) should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions.
Being a 'non-interventionist' does not mean that you NEVER support war, it means that you avoid it whenever possible. It means that you are far less prone to military intervention than someone who does not care about the values of non-interventionism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-interventionism
Nonintervention or non-interventionism is a foreign policy which holds that political rulers should avoid alliances with other nations, but still retain diplomacy, and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial self-defense.
LagunaSol
Apr 11, 01:27 PM
given Apple's increasing tendancy to underwhelm us with new technology features (which are in fact old by the time of their introduction 1-2 years after everyone else), I doubt we get any of these three.
Yeah, like all those trailblazing Android tablets that are 1-2 years ahead of the iPad, right? :rolleyes:
Yeah, like all those trailblazing Android tablets that are 1-2 years ahead of the iPad, right? :rolleyes:
mdntcallr
Nov 28, 06:27 PM
it's ridiculous for Universal to even be thinking this. NONE of the money would get to artists or anything like that. it would just go to the company.
also. i dont pirate music.
alot of itunes people don't. we are the people actually paying for it. so screw that.
also. i dont pirate music.
alot of itunes people don't. we are the people actually paying for it. so screw that.
No comments:
Post a Comment