jhedges3
Aug 11, 02:40 PM
OK. let us just cut to the chase. The keyword here is hand-over. CDMA2000 doesnt support it from GSM. GSM has 81%. Hence cdma is and will always be a small local network that can be used in small pockets on this planet. Furthermore, I seriously doubt ITU/FOMA will change anything in the standard to allow any compability for CDMA2000 since it is not in their interest.
The faster cdam/CDMA2000 moves to oblivion the better.
We would all benefit from one standard, cheaper phones, worldwide access, lower minute rates (from higher competition) Just look at how Vz bills you.
Having multiple standard on cellphones is just as clever as having two incompatible internet.
I couldn't care less about whether my phone works well in the EU. What is your data on the percentage of consumers that travel the world to such an extent that they purchase their phones with inter-country usability as their primary consideration?
What maters to me more, not most, is that the phone works well were I make the majority of calls, New York. The majority of people I know do the same. Some people are willing to sacrifice network for phone and a few extra dollars a month, they pref TM and similar carriers. Others want to have better network and get VW and pay for that accordingly.
It seems to me that there is some level of implicit, or not so implicit, EU v US on both sides here. To the person in the EU they should have it first cause, LEST WE NOT FORGET, most of them are using a standard with 81% of the world.
But does anyone really believe that App would bring a phone to market without making it widely available to US consumers, regardless of whether we�re in the 19% minority? Is there any history of this? Have they ever, for example, released new gen iPods late here? Have they ever, for example, released new gen iPods in Sweden first and had the rest of us in the US buying them on eBay from the lucky ones in Stockholm? It simply wouldn�t make sense.
But it�s not even worth fighting over. The availability of any App phone will be sufficient to include nearly all of us; which is to say that if they release such a product all dedicated App consumers will be able to get one on some carrier at some cost.
The faster cdam/CDMA2000 moves to oblivion the better.
We would all benefit from one standard, cheaper phones, worldwide access, lower minute rates (from higher competition) Just look at how Vz bills you.
Having multiple standard on cellphones is just as clever as having two incompatible internet.
I couldn't care less about whether my phone works well in the EU. What is your data on the percentage of consumers that travel the world to such an extent that they purchase their phones with inter-country usability as their primary consideration?
What maters to me more, not most, is that the phone works well were I make the majority of calls, New York. The majority of people I know do the same. Some people are willing to sacrifice network for phone and a few extra dollars a month, they pref TM and similar carriers. Others want to have better network and get VW and pay for that accordingly.
It seems to me that there is some level of implicit, or not so implicit, EU v US on both sides here. To the person in the EU they should have it first cause, LEST WE NOT FORGET, most of them are using a standard with 81% of the world.
But does anyone really believe that App would bring a phone to market without making it widely available to US consumers, regardless of whether we�re in the 19% minority? Is there any history of this? Have they ever, for example, released new gen iPods late here? Have they ever, for example, released new gen iPods in Sweden first and had the rest of us in the US buying them on eBay from the lucky ones in Stockholm? It simply wouldn�t make sense.
But it�s not even worth fighting over. The availability of any App phone will be sufficient to include nearly all of us; which is to say that if they release such a product all dedicated App consumers will be able to get one on some carrier at some cost.
Durendal
Apr 5, 07:10 PM
About time. FCP is aging poorly. The engine is still Carbon and based around the old QT, which means that a lot of functions only use two cores at the most. I think we'll finally see Apple seriously leveraging GCD, OpenCL, etc here, although don't expect video compression to use OpenCL if the lousy quality of CUDA encodes is any indicator. Maybe Apple will add support for QuickSync on Sandy Bridge.
Also, Compressor is a damned joke. When your "Pro" software encoder gives you less options and lower quality with longer render times than free alternatives, you really need to go back to the drawing board. Yes, a lot of folks use hardware encoders, but really, if you're going to include a software encoder, at least make it as good as free software...
Also, Compressor is a damned joke. When your "Pro" software encoder gives you less options and lower quality with longer render times than free alternatives, you really need to go back to the drawing board. Yes, a lot of folks use hardware encoders, but really, if you're going to include a software encoder, at least make it as good as free software...
wmmk
Aug 16, 10:42 PM
Was there any doubt it wouldn't be a lot faster? I mean, I know it was already plenty fast, but come on...
Well, not all gigahertz are created equally, and not apps are universal.
Well, not all gigahertz are created equally, and not apps are universal.
PeterQVenkman
Apr 6, 09:10 AM
Youre aware the newest mbp (high end) 15, and 17 haveva 1gb graphics memory, right?
CUDA is an nVidia technology. The MBP's and Mac Pro's all have ATI/AMD cards. I don't believe the mercury engine works on anything but nVidia cards
Real-time effects with GPU acceleration
Adobe Premiere Pro CS5 requires a 64-bit operating system and works hand-in-hand with NVIDIA� CUDA� technology. The Mercury Playback Engine uses NVIDIA GPU cards to provide a GPU-accelerated 32-bit color pipeline, and most popular effects have been rewritten to run on it � for example, effects like color correction, the Ultra keyer, and motion control all run in real time..
Of course, Apple could finally implement Open CL. I've seen some great particle fluid demos in Blender that are based off of OpenCL and ran on AMD cards.
CUDA is an nVidia technology. The MBP's and Mac Pro's all have ATI/AMD cards. I don't believe the mercury engine works on anything but nVidia cards
Real-time effects with GPU acceleration
Adobe Premiere Pro CS5 requires a 64-bit operating system and works hand-in-hand with NVIDIA� CUDA� technology. The Mercury Playback Engine uses NVIDIA GPU cards to provide a GPU-accelerated 32-bit color pipeline, and most popular effects have been rewritten to run on it � for example, effects like color correction, the Ultra keyer, and motion control all run in real time..
Of course, Apple could finally implement Open CL. I've seen some great particle fluid demos in Blender that are based off of OpenCL and ran on AMD cards.
ahuman7341
Aug 5, 05:57 PM
BitTorrent seems very NO!
The main reson I don't like the idea of it is the security issues. I Also think Apple will be aware of the security issues so I doubt that software update will use BitTorrent. Although Apple may have a client that comes with leopard or in iTunes.
The main reson I don't like the idea of it is the security issues. I Also think Apple will be aware of the security issues so I doubt that software update will use BitTorrent. Although Apple may have a client that comes with leopard or in iTunes.
TrollToddington
Apr 7, 01:17 AM
If you don't need the power of a MacBook Pro, then a white MacBook is the best bang for the buck. Period.Well, since you say so. I don't agree with you. Period.
pattern, the wedding dress
wedding dress, pattern,
wedding gowns conveying
Couture wedding dress patterns
wedding dress patterns for
wedding dress patterns for men
Flower patterned wedding dress
Q wedding dress patterns
wedding dress patterns
wedding dress patterns.
vintage wedding dress pattern
wedding dress pattern
Designer wedding dress pattern
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.
k995
Apr 20, 06:08 AM
Samsung didn't stole it from Apple since they were first with the design, end of story.
No they werent, what apple describes was already shows and build BEFORE iphone. If any apple basicly admits they copied it themselves and should get sued.
No they werent, what apple describes was already shows and build BEFORE iphone. If any apple basicly admits they copied it themselves and should get sued.
savar
Sep 13, 02:35 PM
NOT TRUE....The Quad core G5 people are in an uproar because Logic Pro only uses 2 cores on the G5....they updated Logic Pro so it uses 4 cores, but the G5 Quad still only uses 2 cores....there are also photoshop actions that are NOT multi core aware so will only run on one core.....Hopefully 10.5 will make all this irrelevant.
You totally missed my point. Even if an application uses only one thread at all times, that application is still a separate process from all of the other processes you have running. At any given time you'll have at least 30 something processes, even when no user-land applications are running. OS X will spread out those processes to try to utilize all the cores as much as possible.
In reality, there are probably not too many non-Apple applications which routinely use 8 threads or more. In the near future I expect all applications to use at least 2-3 threads, even the most simple ones.
You totally missed my point. Even if an application uses only one thread at all times, that application is still a separate process from all of the other processes you have running. At any given time you'll have at least 30 something processes, even when no user-land applications are running. OS X will spread out those processes to try to utilize all the cores as much as possible.
In reality, there are probably not too many non-Apple applications which routinely use 8 threads or more. In the near future I expect all applications to use at least 2-3 threads, even the most simple ones.
swingerofbirch
Aug 26, 09:22 PM
May have been said, but ship dates on iMacs are 7-10 days.
Where do you see this? When I look at the Apple store it says ships in 1-2 days.
Where do you see this? When I look at the Apple store it says ships in 1-2 days.
Kingsly
Aug 11, 12:40 PM
:eek: :)
I hope it is released sooner than later. My Z500 only has about a month of life left in it....
I hope it is released sooner than later. My Z500 only has about a month of life left in it....
NY Guitarist
Apr 5, 08:50 PM
I agree I for see FCP needing Mac OS X Lion
I'm just guessing but it's possible that Apple will announce the new FCS and ship it when Lion ships, perhaps around the June WWDC.
I'm just guessing but it's possible that Apple will announce the new FCS and ship it when Lion ships, perhaps around the June WWDC.
QCassidy352
Jul 27, 10:50 AM
nice. :) I'm predicting no MBPs at WWDC, just mac pros, leopard preview, and maybe new displays. MBPs will be quietly updated with Merom a week or two later and start shipping soon after that.
unless there's a new case design (which I doubt) - if there is, Steve would have something impressive to show up on stage.
unless there's a new case design (which I doubt) - if there is, Steve would have something impressive to show up on stage.
barkomatic
Mar 31, 03:58 PM
At a glance your statement sounds fine. But that logic can be used for following logics:
1. I don't care what US does to rest of world as long as I as an american can live nice, prosperous life.
but i digress...
You're comparing a phone or a tablet to U.S. foreign policy? I'm sorry, I don't think gadgets are as important as that but apparently you do. I think you need a check on your perspective.
1. I don't care what US does to rest of world as long as I as an american can live nice, prosperous life.
but i digress...
You're comparing a phone or a tablet to U.S. foreign policy? I'm sorry, I don't think gadgets are as important as that but apparently you do. I think you need a check on your perspective.
Spanky Deluxe
Nov 28, 06:30 PM
They can **** right off, the greedy *******s!! :mad: :mad: :mad:
Surreal
Aug 27, 02:11 PM
jeez, i thought the thread might cool off in a day or so, but there is no sign of that happening, is there?
well, i have wondered for some time, how many people have had problems with the 17" mavbook pros?
i have one...it's fine. i heard a few small scale problems about it, but nothing on the scale of the 15"
well, i have wondered for some time, how many people have had problems with the 17" mavbook pros?
i have one...it's fine. i heard a few small scale problems about it, but nothing on the scale of the 15"
absynth
Apr 11, 01:34 PM
who cares about iphone 5, where's my white iphone4 dammit! :mad:
MacPhilosopher
Apr 10, 02:18 AM
Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic...
I thought the same thing. Looks pretty cheap.
I thought the same thing. Looks pretty cheap.
RedTomato
Sep 13, 12:36 PM
I read the link above about the ZFS filesystem.
Hmm this could remove a lot of the pain I currently have juggling disks on the cheap.
(I hold a lot of footage of deaf people signing for a project, and don't really have any budget to pay for disk storage. I currently have about 200 GB left on a 1 TB RAID5 system inside a Powermac G3)
It seems the concept of individual volumes will vanish, and instead ZFS creates a common pool of filespace and looks after the checksums etc itself. New drives can just be thrown into the array and ZFS will look after optimising the array I/O.
Mixing 15k rpm speed demon drives with 5400rpm storage hog drives mmmm...
I look forwards to being able to buy a cheap chassis with just a power unit and space for 10 drives, and being able to put that next to my G3, and having ZFS sort out what to do with the 8-9 drives in there.
Something like that hooked up to a Cloverton should give significant HD speedup. Not as much as a ramdisk tho :)
One thing, the article says ZFS can cope with drives being removed from the pool. I'd like to see more detail on that. It surely copes with 1 out of 4 drives failing - what about 3 out of 4? What if 3 x 20GB 15k rpm drives fail and the 1x750GB 5400rpm drive is still up?
Hmm this could remove a lot of the pain I currently have juggling disks on the cheap.
(I hold a lot of footage of deaf people signing for a project, and don't really have any budget to pay for disk storage. I currently have about 200 GB left on a 1 TB RAID5 system inside a Powermac G3)
It seems the concept of individual volumes will vanish, and instead ZFS creates a common pool of filespace and looks after the checksums etc itself. New drives can just be thrown into the array and ZFS will look after optimising the array I/O.
Mixing 15k rpm speed demon drives with 5400rpm storage hog drives mmmm...
I look forwards to being able to buy a cheap chassis with just a power unit and space for 10 drives, and being able to put that next to my G3, and having ZFS sort out what to do with the 8-9 drives in there.
Something like that hooked up to a Cloverton should give significant HD speedup. Not as much as a ramdisk tho :)
One thing, the article says ZFS can cope with drives being removed from the pool. I'd like to see more detail on that. It surely copes with 1 out of 4 drives failing - what about 3 out of 4? What if 3 x 20GB 15k rpm drives fail and the 1x750GB 5400rpm drive is still up?
gomakeitreal
Aug 5, 04:11 PM
I can't wait for Monday. I'll be working that day, so I am going to try to watch the keynote before reading any updates. I even have the Quicktime Events page bookmarked. :D I figured I would be more surprised by taking this route.
This is the first WWDC I'm really looking forward to, mainly because of what we're going to see... Leopard in action! :D
Edit: Peace, that's not entirely true. None of us know whether Apple will release Cinema Displays with iSights built-in. I'd say it is unlikely, but you never know until it actually happens.
what is the link for the QT page? :p
This is the first WWDC I'm really looking forward to, mainly because of what we're going to see... Leopard in action! :D
Edit: Peace, that's not entirely true. None of us know whether Apple will release Cinema Displays with iSights built-in. I'd say it is unlikely, but you never know until it actually happens.
what is the link for the QT page? :p
Nuck81
Nov 12, 02:36 PM
Gah!!
I have it preordered and will be at my moms when it is going to be delivered!!
I have it preordered and will be at my moms when it is going to be delivered!!
relimw
Aug 6, 04:02 PM
The internet didn't exist in 1988. He was probably a local business.
::blink::
<sarcasm>
I beg to differ, just because Al Gore didn't invent the internet until 1988 doesn't mean it didn't exist before then :)
</sarcasm>
But this is totally off topic, back to the rumors...
Apple wows world with intermodalnet! Now you really can take the internet with you!
::blink::
<sarcasm>
I beg to differ, just because Al Gore didn't invent the internet until 1988 doesn't mean it didn't exist before then :)
</sarcasm>
But this is totally off topic, back to the rumors...
Apple wows world with intermodalnet! Now you really can take the internet with you!
JFreak
Aug 19, 03:11 AM
this kinds of benchmarks show clearly that the world is not yet ready for Universally Better appplications. Quad G5 still rocks as a production system, but it would surely be nice to give those new Mac Pro's a test drive; however, it would be rather lame, as not nearly all audio plugins have been converted. For myself -- for that very reason -- the Intel-era begins in 2008 at the earliest. I want zero crashes when I mix.
dethmaShine
Mar 26, 09:12 AM
I use my computer as a "real computer" and I like virtually every change I've seen. I wish people wouldn't generalize so broadly and presume that because certain additions aren't something that they use that it has nothing to do with "real work."
No comments:
Post a Comment