kugino
Aug 7, 11:45 PM
Well I for one was kind of disappointed. Leopard is sort of Apple's chance to prove they can out-Vista Vista, and I'm not really sure what we saw today does it. I've been following Vista somewhat closely, and it really does catch Windows up to OS X in terms of features and prettiness.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
The other thing that has me a little concerned is the huge amount of Vista-bashing that went on. I feel like if Leopard at this point were truly better than Vista, they'd be silent about Vista entirely and let the new system speak for itself. That would be really slick. That's not what happened however, and instead there was a lot of "look what Vista copied from us" and "check out how much better Leopard is." What I saw today, though, makes the former statement sound whiney and the latter sound foolish, since in my eyes, in terms of features, they're about on-par with each other.
I really hope Apple pulls it together. They've got to do this right, because come next year, most of the myriad reasons for switching to a Mac will be nullified by Vista.
BTW: whoever this "Platform Experience" guy is, get him off the stage and go back to Steve.
hmmm, most of the features are already in windows? what version of windows do you have? are you from the future? and, ummm, who knows what's going to be in vista because it keeps changing...even what you see now may not make the final cut. to say that the two OSs are the same because they both have the same features is akin to saying that a yugo and a mercedes are both the same because they both have four wheels and an engine. look, there are things that vista will have that osx will lack...there are things in osx that vista will lack. neither os will be perfect. still, os x is great because of its underlying architecture and not only b/c of this feature or that feature.
and most people will not be making their buying decision on which os is better...the greater selling point on the mac is boot camp and booting windows on the mac. most people aren't going to care what os is better.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
The other thing that has me a little concerned is the huge amount of Vista-bashing that went on. I feel like if Leopard at this point were truly better than Vista, they'd be silent about Vista entirely and let the new system speak for itself. That would be really slick. That's not what happened however, and instead there was a lot of "look what Vista copied from us" and "check out how much better Leopard is." What I saw today, though, makes the former statement sound whiney and the latter sound foolish, since in my eyes, in terms of features, they're about on-par with each other.
I really hope Apple pulls it together. They've got to do this right, because come next year, most of the myriad reasons for switching to a Mac will be nullified by Vista.
BTW: whoever this "Platform Experience" guy is, get him off the stage and go back to Steve.
hmmm, most of the features are already in windows? what version of windows do you have? are you from the future? and, ummm, who knows what's going to be in vista because it keeps changing...even what you see now may not make the final cut. to say that the two OSs are the same because they both have the same features is akin to saying that a yugo and a mercedes are both the same because they both have four wheels and an engine. look, there are things that vista will have that osx will lack...there are things in osx that vista will lack. neither os will be perfect. still, os x is great because of its underlying architecture and not only b/c of this feature or that feature.
and most people will not be making their buying decision on which os is better...the greater selling point on the mac is boot camp and booting windows on the mac. most people aren't going to care what os is better.
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 08:07 AM
heavy
It looks like 2006 won't be like 1984
It looks like 2006 won't be like 1984
al2o3cr
Apr 25, 01:43 PM
Hope nobody tells these lawyers that anybody who can access the location data can also get at the address book and text messages - OMG PRIVACY VIOLATION!
yac_moda
Jul 20, 08:26 PM
I'm betting on Mac Pro OctaCore 2 :D
Should that "a" be an "o" ?
Its Mac raised to the power of INFINITY :eek:
The loga will just be a mobius loop !!!
Should that "a" be an "o" ?
Its Mac raised to the power of INFINITY :eek:
The loga will just be a mobius loop !!!
rezenclowd3
Nov 24, 09:36 PM
Oh I forgot. Still no qualifying/race weekends. LAME.
Why the F%^$ don't race games include the race weekend experience, especially if it's a sim? F1 2010 at least does, but that game, even post-patch is horrendous.
From racing RC cars, and AutoXing, qualifying/practice is so much of the experience. I hate always starting halfway or last in the field like I am forced to be a noob. It seems instead they force one to use a better car than the rest of the field to win, or severely inhibit the AIs ability.
Why the F%^$ don't race games include the race weekend experience, especially if it's a sim? F1 2010 at least does, but that game, even post-patch is horrendous.
From racing RC cars, and AutoXing, qualifying/practice is so much of the experience. I hate always starting halfway or last in the field like I am forced to be a noob. It seems instead they force one to use a better car than the rest of the field to win, or severely inhibit the AIs ability.
Magrathea
Apr 6, 11:15 PM
Youre aware the newest mbp (high end) 15, and 17 haveva 1gb graphics memory, right?
Yes but not Nvidia so I don't think they can use the CUDA think. correct my if I'm wrong where PP gurus.
Yes but not Nvidia so I don't think they can use the CUDA think. correct my if I'm wrong where PP gurus.
Ja Di ksw
Aug 25, 05:15 PM
I would just like to say that every time I have dealth with Apple's help (blue line on screen, crack on trackpad, melted power brick cord, ordering, etc), they have been superb. Very professional, very helpful, and very quick. Does this add much to the discussion? No, but too often we only hear the bad, so I wanted to put in some good as well.
SiliconAddict
Aug 7, 07:50 PM
Not very innovative so-far. The Intel change took the OS's soul and the inspiration.
Give me a fracking break. Intel has NOTHING to do with this. NOTHING. I wish PPC fanbois would just give it up. Soon they will be claiming that ozone depletion is due too Intel chips.
does upgrading to leopard cost money for tiger users?
Yes.
Give me a fracking break. Intel has NOTHING to do with this. NOTHING. I wish PPC fanbois would just give it up. Soon they will be claiming that ozone depletion is due too Intel chips.
does upgrading to leopard cost money for tiger users?
Yes.
cmaier
Apr 20, 11:58 AM
According to the analysis, it is in the suit, as part of the trade dress claims.
Not as a separate thing. It's the grid IN COMBINATION with the other things that constitutes the trade dress.
Not as a separate thing. It's the grid IN COMBINATION with the other things that constitutes the trade dress.
mytdave
Apr 6, 02:48 PM
It's nice for Apple to have high iPad2 sales, and I think that's great. It's too bad the Xoom isn't selling more, although 100k isn't too terrible right out of the gate.
I've seen and hefted a Xoom, and you know what? It's a pretty decent piece of gear. Good job Moto! From a hardware perspective I liked it every bit as much as the iPad2. In my opinion, its only downfall is Android. For me, Android is not intuitive at all. I can deal with that when it comes to traditional computers, but I don't have time to waste with that sort of nonsense on an appliance - I want it to just work, and that's what Apple provides.
I've seen and hefted a Xoom, and you know what? It's a pretty decent piece of gear. Good job Moto! From a hardware perspective I liked it every bit as much as the iPad2. In my opinion, its only downfall is Android. For me, Android is not intuitive at all. I can deal with that when it comes to traditional computers, but I don't have time to waste with that sort of nonsense on an appliance - I want it to just work, and that's what Apple provides.
Lesser Evets
Apr 6, 03:45 PM
Should be called XOOSH: the sound of a toilet flushing.
janstett
Oct 23, 11:44 AM
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
Macaroony
Mar 1, 05:06 PM
CaoCao, where do you think civilization came from? A religious tribe in the desert? Most political and social structures come from the ancient Greek and Roman civilizations. All the Catholic Church contributed to society was bigotry and discrimination. Now tell me who's retrograde. :confused:
Now about your argument about a gay man being able to marry a woman -well of course he can do so but he'd much rather prefer to marry a man, which in many states and countries is still illegal, hence he'd want to get the right to do so.
Seriously, do I have to spell it out for you?
Marriage is a contract and has nothing to do with the blessed love between two people. It's a legally binding agreement between two people and the state that allow for merging assets and facilitation of taxes, insurance, etc. Back in the day, marriage was only used to merge two families for financial, social and stately gain. Most of the time, the marriage was arranged and the two people involved hardly knew or even loved each other through most of their marriage.
We can get all legal about the laws of marriage, but then again it is simply a law and - if most countries support the separation of church and state - not to be bound to religious doctrine.
This is where civil rights come in, a topic that seems to fly by your head due to your clinging to said religious doctrine. If it weren't for civil rights, women wouldn't be able to vote, if it weren't for civil rights, black people would still be slaves, and if it weren't for civil rights, gays would be killed without anyone batting an eye.
This is is what equality is all about.
Now about your argument about a gay man being able to marry a woman -well of course he can do so but he'd much rather prefer to marry a man, which in many states and countries is still illegal, hence he'd want to get the right to do so.
Seriously, do I have to spell it out for you?
Marriage is a contract and has nothing to do with the blessed love between two people. It's a legally binding agreement between two people and the state that allow for merging assets and facilitation of taxes, insurance, etc. Back in the day, marriage was only used to merge two families for financial, social and stately gain. Most of the time, the marriage was arranged and the two people involved hardly knew or even loved each other through most of their marriage.
We can get all legal about the laws of marriage, but then again it is simply a law and - if most countries support the separation of church and state - not to be bound to religious doctrine.
This is where civil rights come in, a topic that seems to fly by your head due to your clinging to said religious doctrine. If it weren't for civil rights, women wouldn't be able to vote, if it weren't for civil rights, black people would still be slaves, and if it weren't for civil rights, gays would be killed without anyone batting an eye.
This is is what equality is all about.
LagunaSol
Apr 6, 04:31 PM
Don't hate. I have money and I can spend it however. Maybe I'll buy an ipad and leave it in the bathroom for people to use as they're taking care of business.
Yeah, I also remember you always talking about how your mom had an iMac (or something like that) but how you thought Apple stuff was overpriced crap. Of course now you own a MBP and "love" Apple stuff, except for the iPad of course, cuz your XOOM has 2 native apps and runs widgets. (I also remember you bragging about how much money you made. So it is you.)
As for tablets-for-toilets, you have far more chance of seeing those pallets of XOOMs at Costco (as balamw mentioned) being firesold for high-tech bumwipes.
Yeah, I also remember you always talking about how your mom had an iMac (or something like that) but how you thought Apple stuff was overpriced crap. Of course now you own a MBP and "love" Apple stuff, except for the iPad of course, cuz your XOOM has 2 native apps and runs widgets. (I also remember you bragging about how much money you made. So it is you.)
As for tablets-for-toilets, you have far more chance of seeing those pallets of XOOMs at Costco (as balamw mentioned) being firesold for high-tech bumwipes.
cmaier
Apr 20, 12:10 PM
Then it sure doesn't apply to all models then if the trade dress claim is an AND'd combination. If the trade dress claim only applicable to certain models in the ones listed in the complaint ?
The trade dress claims do not list specific models.
Specific models ARE shown for illustration purposes in the background portion of the document, however.
The trade dress claims do not list specific models.
Specific models ARE shown for illustration purposes in the background portion of the document, however.
MattSepeta
Mar 23, 02:09 PM
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.
With that being said, the UN has many flaws and I am not satisfied with the way things are done. But I do feel that intervention is sometimes necessary, if imperfect.
That is totally reasonable and understandable, although I do disagree. I can't with good heart support sending my neighbors son/daughter overseas to fight for another people.
I just find it pretty disgusting when we have the VP going on the record talking out his arse about "Unless we are attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked", then a couple years later nary a peep when we start bombing a foreign country that is not even close to a threat to us. Did Biden qualify it with a " we 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." NOPE!
Now THAT is a classic "When my guy does it it is ok."
With that being said, the UN has many flaws and I am not satisfied with the way things are done. But I do feel that intervention is sometimes necessary, if imperfect.
That is totally reasonable and understandable, although I do disagree. I can't with good heart support sending my neighbors son/daughter overseas to fight for another people.
I just find it pretty disgusting when we have the VP going on the record talking out his arse about "Unless we are attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked", then a couple years later nary a peep when we start bombing a foreign country that is not even close to a threat to us. Did Biden qualify it with a " we 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." NOPE!
Now THAT is a classic "When my guy does it it is ok."
azentropy
Apr 6, 01:30 PM
Apple also sold about 100K iPad's - yesterday.
MovieCutter
Aug 15, 11:52 AM
Amazing.
However the FCP benchmark is disapointing, but I suppose that it may rise when the x1900 is installed and tested. Still, that photoshop test? I don't think ANYONE expected results that good from a non-UB program. At least I didn't...
I did...:D
DIE POWER PC...DIE!!!
However the FCP benchmark is disapointing, but I suppose that it may rise when the x1900 is installed and tested. Still, that photoshop test? I don't think ANYONE expected results that good from a non-UB program. At least I didn't...
I did...:D
DIE POWER PC...DIE!!!
bilbo--baggins
Aug 25, 05:04 PM
The PowerMac G5 I bought last year had a fan that constantly 'clicked'. It took several calls to AppleCare to get it sorted. Before you got anywhere you had to speak to someone that could barely speak English, who you had to humour by following their instructions to reboot the computer, reset PRAM etc. Then they wanted to have a company collect my Mac and take it away for repair. Only if you're really stubborn do you actually get them to send you the part to fit yourself. Even then they couldn't agree on whether the old fan needed to be returned. They took my credit card details in case I didn't return the old fan, then the info with the new fan told me I didn't need to return the old fan. Then I phoned them to clarify this, and they told me I must return the old fan or I would be charged. Totally baffled, I rang yet again and this time was assured that I didn't need to return it. Complete shambles.
It's irritating from a personal point of view. But what really disappoints me is that this is the kind of service new customers are getting. So much for the halo effect - apple are tarnishing it themselves. I'm a long time Apple fan and a few buffoons (who have probably only worked for Apple for a few months) won't begin to damage my loyalty. But can the same be said for first time iPod or Mac users?
It's irritating from a personal point of view. But what really disappoints me is that this is the kind of service new customers are getting. So much for the halo effect - apple are tarnishing it themselves. I'm a long time Apple fan and a few buffoons (who have probably only worked for Apple for a few months) won't begin to damage my loyalty. But can the same be said for first time iPod or Mac users?
Cobrien
Aug 5, 03:26 PM
I heard a rumour somewhere of an all metallic ipod nano, can anyone else tell me if they have heard anything similar.
heyjp
Nov 28, 11:06 PM
I think having Apple (which of course gets passed on to us users) paying a royalty per iPod is a no-brainer, let's do it!!! The logic is that people are playing illegal copies of Universal Studios songs, therefore, Apple should pay a royalty for every iPod to cover.
So, Apple, pay the royalty, which should logically imply that there is no need to EVER buy music from Universal since the royalty is now covered.
HEY UNIVERSAL... can't have your cake and eat it too.
jp
So, Apple, pay the royalty, which should logically imply that there is no need to EVER buy music from Universal since the royalty is now covered.
HEY UNIVERSAL... can't have your cake and eat it too.
jp
Patch^
Sep 13, 06:52 AM
cool!! They should hopefully increase speed :)
I like the fact that you can upgrade the processors now, but Xeons are pretty expensive.
I like the fact that you can upgrade the processors now, but Xeons are pretty expensive.
littleman23408
Nov 30, 09:54 PM
Its tough, but i did it. Unless you are going to hit someone you really dont need to slow down for many turns. The buses dont go fast enough for it to be a problem. You can get to 11th at the first turn but cutting in very close to the cone (dont hit it!) and downshifting to slide a little. Sneak into 11th and start drafting the bus in front of you. Theres an easy left where you can pass on the inside and take one more place, then get as close to the tires on the right as possible and you'll be able to grab a few more spots before you hit the 2nd straight.
The next turn is a hard left into an easy 180� right. Be careful on the left as its easy to hit a cone, then cut close to the inside of the right. When you get out of that turn you should be directly behind the blue and teal buses. You wont be able to pass them for a while so draft as best as you can until you get to the hard left at the complete other end of the track. Take that turn really wide and stay to the inside as you exit. You should be able to stay at speed and sneak right by if you are careful enough to not bump into them. If you are too close just back off a little, as long as you pass the blue buses at this turn you are doing great. Just be careful.
The next is a hard left that takes you back to the starting line. If you got ahead of the blue and teal bus there will be a bit of congestion there. Stay close to the inside but be careful you dont hit the grass too much. You should be able to get 5th or 6th before the 2nd lap starts. Follow the same lines as before and watch your corners for a chance to pass on the inside. I got to 1st at the last long straight, but the dark green bus in front is a little violent, so screw the line and do whatever it takes to stay away from him. Take both last lefts carefully and you'll grab first.
Its tough, but possible when you learn the track. I havent tried the Lotus challenge yet because i've been working on licenses, but i assume its roughly the same process just much faster.
Cool thanks. I will give this a try. Anything to get this bus done. I hate the tasks where whatever it is you are driving is real slow!
The next turn is a hard left into an easy 180� right. Be careful on the left as its easy to hit a cone, then cut close to the inside of the right. When you get out of that turn you should be directly behind the blue and teal buses. You wont be able to pass them for a while so draft as best as you can until you get to the hard left at the complete other end of the track. Take that turn really wide and stay to the inside as you exit. You should be able to stay at speed and sneak right by if you are careful enough to not bump into them. If you are too close just back off a little, as long as you pass the blue buses at this turn you are doing great. Just be careful.
The next is a hard left that takes you back to the starting line. If you got ahead of the blue and teal bus there will be a bit of congestion there. Stay close to the inside but be careful you dont hit the grass too much. You should be able to get 5th or 6th before the 2nd lap starts. Follow the same lines as before and watch your corners for a chance to pass on the inside. I got to 1st at the last long straight, but the dark green bus in front is a little violent, so screw the line and do whatever it takes to stay away from him. Take both last lefts carefully and you'll grab first.
Its tough, but possible when you learn the track. I havent tried the Lotus challenge yet because i've been working on licenses, but i assume its roughly the same process just much faster.
Cool thanks. I will give this a try. Anything to get this bus done. I hate the tasks where whatever it is you are driving is real slow!
mBox
Apr 6, 08:17 AM
Problem is, its still Final Cut and will still suck at managing media.I work in all three worlds with NLE (Avid, Apple & Adobe). If your know what your doing, then Media Management should be as easy as pie. Now do you have something specific that irks you about FCP? For starters I instruct at a local college in the evenings. I first burn it in my students heads that they need to use an separate drive for this app.
Im just throwing in the obvious of course ;)
Im just throwing in the obvious of course ;)