canyonblue737
Apr 27, 07:58 AM
That's good enough for me.
Apple's only screw up here was keeping the infinite database forever on your phone and backed up to your Mac. Their was no reason to back it up to the computer and no reason to keep the data on the phone after it was passed to Apple (encrypted, de-identified etc.) but I suspect the reason was simply "we weren't doing anything bad with it so we never even considered we should delete it later."
Good job Apple. Now let's move on to someone else, like freakin' Sony and their Playstation network.
Apple's only screw up here was keeping the infinite database forever on your phone and backed up to your Mac. Their was no reason to back it up to the computer and no reason to keep the data on the phone after it was passed to Apple (encrypted, de-identified etc.) but I suspect the reason was simply "we weren't doing anything bad with it so we never even considered we should delete it later."
Good job Apple. Now let's move on to someone else, like freakin' Sony and their Playstation network.
dialectician
Aug 7, 05:35 PM
Ok, so I take the point, made ad nauseam, that these features are not entirely new or innovative, since there are third party apps out there that do the same. And perhaps Apple is copying Vista, which doesn't really bother me either.
Bottom line: time machine will make a huge difference for most users in terms of preventing or remedying data loss!
Bottom line: time machine will make a huge difference for most users in terms of preventing or remedying data loss!
CaoCao
Feb 28, 06:54 PM
In what case is inclusionism not a good policy? Being consistent in our thinking and morality is a sign of a logical and sound mind.
I can not think of a single case where making arbitrary exceptions is a good practice.
I have no problem being exclusionist to bad ideas like rape and paedophilia
I can not think of a single case where making arbitrary exceptions is a good practice.
I have no problem being exclusionist to bad ideas like rape and paedophilia
DPazdanISU
Aug 7, 03:49 PM
http://events.apple.com.edgesuite.net/aug_2006/event/index.html
LightSpeed1
Mar 31, 02:40 PM
I knew it would happen eventually.
donlphi
Nov 28, 10:46 PM
Reuters reports that North American Beef Congress (http://www.northamericanbeefcongress.com/) Chief Executive said on Tuesday that they may seek a royalty from Best Ceramic Houseware Co., Ltd. (http://bestceramic.en.alibaba.com/) Ceramic Plate sales:
"It would be a nice idea. We have a negotiation coming up not too far. I don't see why we wouldn't do that... but maybe not in the same way,"
NABC made this decision earlier this month when it was reported that Microsoft had agreed to pay Universal Music a fee for every new Zune Music Player sold. Cattle farmers, of course, currently get a cut from every head of beef sold, but do not get any percentage of plate or silverware sales (which of course is necessary to eat beef).
:mad:
"It would be a nice idea. We have a negotiation coming up not too far. I don't see why we wouldn't do that... but maybe not in the same way,"
NABC made this decision earlier this month when it was reported that Microsoft had agreed to pay Universal Music a fee for every new Zune Music Player sold. Cattle farmers, of course, currently get a cut from every head of beef sold, but do not get any percentage of plate or silverware sales (which of course is necessary to eat beef).
:mad:
amin
Aug 18, 10:28 PM
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac.
It may be obvious, but based on your earlier statement that a Conroe iMac would be "able to crunch through" apps faster than a Mac Pro, the obvious seemed worth identifying.
But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
*snip*
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
*snip*
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
It may be obvious, but based on your earlier statement that a Conroe iMac would be "able to crunch through" apps faster than a Mac Pro, the obvious seemed worth identifying.
But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
*snip*
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
*snip*
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
Stella
Apr 5, 05:24 PM
Hoping they'll be a Final Cut Pro Express derived from this version.. the current Express is getting a bit long in the tooth. The UI is hideous by today's standards.
sierra oscar
Sep 19, 08:53 AM
It's not quite 0700 Cupertino time - so maybe? :)
typecase
Sep 19, 12:33 AM
All I have to say is:
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
Amen! :)
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
Amen! :)
VanNess
Aug 6, 05:46 PM
So to post my top bets for WWDC...
1) A much clearer roadmap for 64 bit support in Mac OS X. I believe they will outline full 64 bit support across all non-10.4 deprecated frameworks (I believe in the initial release of 10.5). Of course it will also fully support 32 bit applications run side by side with 64 bit applications.
Check
2) Resolution Independent UI will be ready for main stream use with display products possible with in the next year or two (would love to be surprised with 150-200 DPI or so display of course).
Check. They've had a lot of time to work this one out.
3) Quartz 2D Extreme will be ready for main stream use along with some good news on the OpenGL front.
Check
4) Full roll out of the unified user interface look and fell across all frameworks and Apple applications (at least most).
Check, but I'm not one of the bozo militant unified interface nazis that apply the uno concept without exception across the board. In my mind, an OS should be an OS, not a unique application in and of itself. (Yeah, you Microsoft) The main thing an OS should do as far as the user is concerned should be relatively simple: assist you in finding and organizing your stuff in the easiest, most efficient manner possible. Other than that it should stay out of the way. All apps (regardless of whether they are Apple apps provided with the OS or any others) should honor the basic global UI elements of the OS, i.e., the three buttons at the top left of a window and general menu commands for opening, saving, etc.), but the appearance the application window should be left open to the application's author should it add some sort of benefit in using the application.
In other words, I like how Garageband has the faux studio mixing board wood paneling as part of it's window. It's not a matter of life and death, but it's pleasant and makes Garageband stand out from other apps for what it's intended purpose is. The unified interface nazis may disagree with this approach, but most of the GUI guidelines they cite about this stuff where valid back in the day of the original Mac OS, the original GUI. Times have changed and those guidelines never foresaw today's modern graphic abilities to approach the GUI in new innovative ways such as Expose, or Dashboard, or other uses of 3d as a an effective way of presenting a GUI to the user. So the uno concept is ok provided that it doesn't reverse course and head backward instead of forward.
5) Improved Quartz API to allow for more advanced window styles and effects.
Check, and see above.
6) PowerMac replacement with Quad core model... a true workstation class system (likely similar enclosure to what we have now in the PMG5).
Check. Sure, why not?
1) A much clearer roadmap for 64 bit support in Mac OS X. I believe they will outline full 64 bit support across all non-10.4 deprecated frameworks (I believe in the initial release of 10.5). Of course it will also fully support 32 bit applications run side by side with 64 bit applications.
Check
2) Resolution Independent UI will be ready for main stream use with display products possible with in the next year or two (would love to be surprised with 150-200 DPI or so display of course).
Check. They've had a lot of time to work this one out.
3) Quartz 2D Extreme will be ready for main stream use along with some good news on the OpenGL front.
Check
4) Full roll out of the unified user interface look and fell across all frameworks and Apple applications (at least most).
Check, but I'm not one of the bozo militant unified interface nazis that apply the uno concept without exception across the board. In my mind, an OS should be an OS, not a unique application in and of itself. (Yeah, you Microsoft) The main thing an OS should do as far as the user is concerned should be relatively simple: assist you in finding and organizing your stuff in the easiest, most efficient manner possible. Other than that it should stay out of the way. All apps (regardless of whether they are Apple apps provided with the OS or any others) should honor the basic global UI elements of the OS, i.e., the three buttons at the top left of a window and general menu commands for opening, saving, etc.), but the appearance the application window should be left open to the application's author should it add some sort of benefit in using the application.
In other words, I like how Garageband has the faux studio mixing board wood paneling as part of it's window. It's not a matter of life and death, but it's pleasant and makes Garageband stand out from other apps for what it's intended purpose is. The unified interface nazis may disagree with this approach, but most of the GUI guidelines they cite about this stuff where valid back in the day of the original Mac OS, the original GUI. Times have changed and those guidelines never foresaw today's modern graphic abilities to approach the GUI in new innovative ways such as Expose, or Dashboard, or other uses of 3d as a an effective way of presenting a GUI to the user. So the uno concept is ok provided that it doesn't reverse course and head backward instead of forward.
5) Improved Quartz API to allow for more advanced window styles and effects.
Check, and see above.
6) PowerMac replacement with Quad core model... a true workstation class system (likely similar enclosure to what we have now in the PMG5).
Check. Sure, why not?
11thIndian
Apr 6, 09:04 PM
Never said it was an industry-wide trent (sic). I said "a lot of professionals" have made the switch.
Thanks.
When what you meant to say was, "A lot of professionals I know.".
Your welcome.
Thanks.
When what you meant to say was, "A lot of professionals I know.".
Your welcome.
Iconoclysm
Apr 20, 04:14 PM
Copying is copying. If someone else came out with an iProduct you can bet that Apple would slap a lawsuit on them. The Apple record logo was around for several years before Apple computer. I'm sure Jobs knew of the Beatles, he was a long haired hippie back in the 70's. So the logo could have been influenced by the Beatles.
Copying is not copying when you don't even know about what was done before...and we know the story about what influenced Apple, the alphabet. And the logo isn't even the same - it's the name that the suit was over, not the logo. Knowing about the record label wasn't on the front page of the newspaper, this was the 1970's...there was no internet, it's more than just a little possible that Jobs did not know this. And you're assuming that logo was everywhere, and you're wrong.
Copying is not copying when you don't even know about what was done before...and we know the story about what influenced Apple, the alphabet. And the logo isn't even the same - it's the name that the suit was over, not the logo. Knowing about the record label wasn't on the front page of the newspaper, this was the 1970's...there was no internet, it's more than just a little possible that Jobs did not know this. And you're assuming that logo was everywhere, and you're wrong.
KnightWRX
Apr 6, 11:01 AM
So are the current MacBook airs using a dedicated gpu? Or is it integrated? I'm confused. :-)
They use an IGP (Integrated Graphics Processor) manufactured by nVidia and incorporated to the "chipset" (south bridge) that is the 320m.
SB ships an IGP integrated on the CPU die itself, manufactured by Intel.
The nVidia solution is better for graphics performance.
They use an IGP (Integrated Graphics Processor) manufactured by nVidia and incorporated to the "chipset" (south bridge) that is the 320m.
SB ships an IGP integrated on the CPU die itself, manufactured by Intel.
The nVidia solution is better for graphics performance.
11thIndian
Apr 6, 07:25 AM
.. I never use it, but I use Motion and Soundtrack a lot and I need true 3D in Motion, even simply 3D. I need no crashing Motion. I need optimised and 64-bit Motion. I want it now, please!
What do you mean true 3D? Motion 3 integrated 3D reflection, shadows, depth of field, etc.. It was around that time I stopped using After Effects. There are still things that AE can do that Motion can't, but that's mostly due to 3rd party plugins.
What do you mean true 3D? Motion 3 integrated 3D reflection, shadows, depth of field, etc.. It was around that time I stopped using After Effects. There are still things that AE can do that Motion can't, but that's mostly due to 3rd party plugins.
brianus
Sep 20, 04:07 PM
So - are you inferring that Windows 2000 or Windows XP never blue screen? Because (if you are) that's a load of crap. I've seen blue screens in both OS's. Granted it's usually tied to hardware only, but it still happens. I've had an external USB drive blue screen in XP every time I turned it on, tried on 3 XP computers. Hardware fault, no doubt. Lately my HP Laptop dvd drive has been causing XP Pro to blue screen every other time I insert a dvd-r. Again - hardware fault.
Otherwise are both OS's stable? Damn straight. But problems do occur and I hope you're not suggesting otherwise. No OS is without its flaws.
Huh? When did I say they never, ever experience any crashes whatsoever? Good god, I have never seen such a collection of mind-bendingly literal-minded people in one thread. Yikes. No idiot would ever say they never ever crash. As was painfully obvious, I was comparing Mac users' perceptions of older Windows OS's to the more recent ones and saying their impressions were inaccurate. I've been dealing with OS X kernel panics and CarbonLib issues all day, but I would never suggest things are as bad as in the OS 8 days when you'd get that little "bomb" at the system would shut down.
It's already happened, just not in as a melodramatic way as you suggest (back to 1GHz? geez). AMD took a small step back, Hz wise when they introduced dual core, though it still advanced their "+" processor ratings I suppose that few noticed the actual clock reduction. Intel took a major step back Hz wise between Netburst and Core 2. The 5000 and 5100 series Xeon CPUs demonstrate this, you can get a Dell precision 690 with 3.73GHz Netburst based chips or the same 690 with 3.0GHz Core2 based chips.
One thing I've noticed is that store ads no longer quote GHz like they used to, but rather processor model numbers. Makes sense: most people will not bother to investigate further, but if they did see the GHz numbers of Pentiums on the same sale ad as those of Core 2's, they might not be so hot on the latter. And please, everyone for the love of god, do not treat me to 5 replies in which you remonstrate me for not getting that the Core 2's are actually faster - I GET IT.
Otherwise are both OS's stable? Damn straight. But problems do occur and I hope you're not suggesting otherwise. No OS is without its flaws.
Huh? When did I say they never, ever experience any crashes whatsoever? Good god, I have never seen such a collection of mind-bendingly literal-minded people in one thread. Yikes. No idiot would ever say they never ever crash. As was painfully obvious, I was comparing Mac users' perceptions of older Windows OS's to the more recent ones and saying their impressions were inaccurate. I've been dealing with OS X kernel panics and CarbonLib issues all day, but I would never suggest things are as bad as in the OS 8 days when you'd get that little "bomb" at the system would shut down.
It's already happened, just not in as a melodramatic way as you suggest (back to 1GHz? geez). AMD took a small step back, Hz wise when they introduced dual core, though it still advanced their "+" processor ratings I suppose that few noticed the actual clock reduction. Intel took a major step back Hz wise between Netburst and Core 2. The 5000 and 5100 series Xeon CPUs demonstrate this, you can get a Dell precision 690 with 3.73GHz Netburst based chips or the same 690 with 3.0GHz Core2 based chips.
One thing I've noticed is that store ads no longer quote GHz like they used to, but rather processor model numbers. Makes sense: most people will not bother to investigate further, but if they did see the GHz numbers of Pentiums on the same sale ad as those of Core 2's, they might not be so hot on the latter. And please, everyone for the love of god, do not treat me to 5 replies in which you remonstrate me for not getting that the Core 2's are actually faster - I GET IT.
wmmk
Aug 17, 09:49 AM
I don't like Adobe anymore. :mad:
I dunno, I mean, I guess they could use core image, but really. CS3 will probably have PS, Illustrator, ID, FW, Flash, DW, CF, Contribute, Bridge and Acrobat. That's 10 apps. Would you want to develop 20 apps, just so that Mac users could have Core Image? Until competitors come along with Core Image support, don't expect Adobe to have it.
I dunno, I mean, I guess they could use core image, but really. CS3 will probably have PS, Illustrator, ID, FW, Flash, DW, CF, Contribute, Bridge and Acrobat. That's 10 apps. Would you want to develop 20 apps, just so that Mac users could have Core Image? Until competitors come along with Core Image support, don't expect Adobe to have it.
faroZ06
Apr 8, 12:56 AM
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)
Guys Apple is not to blame for this one. Well other than doing business with a sleazy business like Best Buy.
Honestly it has been like eight years since I've entered a Best Buy, everything about the place just feels undesirable and corrupt. The fact that many here are surprised at this non-sense highlights a marginal expectation for ethical behavior. No one really needs to shop at Best Buy, there are plenty of alternatives.
I don't know, I usually go into Best Buy and find stuff at good prices. However, the cables are a ripoff, but most cables are anywhere. I'd still go to Best Buy for some stuff.
Guys Apple is not to blame for this one. Well other than doing business with a sleazy business like Best Buy.
Honestly it has been like eight years since I've entered a Best Buy, everything about the place just feels undesirable and corrupt. The fact that many here are surprised at this non-sense highlights a marginal expectation for ethical behavior. No one really needs to shop at Best Buy, there are plenty of alternatives.
I don't know, I usually go into Best Buy and find stuff at good prices. However, the cables are a ripoff, but most cables are anywhere. I'd still go to Best Buy for some stuff.
technicolor
Sep 20, 04:12 AM
Ah, a mature, intelligent, well reasoned reply.
No, one that just ignores you and your inquiries because it was already clear where you were coming from..thus I feel no obligation to engage you in my thought process and your self important questioning. Has nothing to do with my maturity, and everything to do with my lack of caring about you or your opinion.
No, one that just ignores you and your inquiries because it was already clear where you were coming from..thus I feel no obligation to engage you in my thought process and your self important questioning. Has nothing to do with my maturity, and everything to do with my lack of caring about you or your opinion.
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:
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 03:16 PM
How can any government meet armed internal rebellion without qualifying as "slaughtering their own people"?
The UN resolution has determined that the Libyan government's response to the opposition uprising has been "aggressive", and furthermore that Libyans need to be protected from their own government's military and security forces. The implicit judgement is that Gaddafi no longer has a mandate to rule, and that by fighting to maintain power he his fighting an aggressive war against a legitimate political movement.
How would you characterize the situation? I don't want to jump to intervention when other options are available, but so far the NFZ has reduced Gaddafi's capacity to bombard population centers - though he is still doing just that.
The UN resolution has determined that the Libyan government's response to the opposition uprising has been "aggressive", and furthermore that Libyans need to be protected from their own government's military and security forces. The implicit judgement is that Gaddafi no longer has a mandate to rule, and that by fighting to maintain power he his fighting an aggressive war against a legitimate political movement.
How would you characterize the situation? I don't want to jump to intervention when other options are available, but so far the NFZ has reduced Gaddafi's capacity to bombard population centers - though he is still doing just that.
milo
Jul 27, 11:42 AM
honestly, right now i do not believe the power differential to be worth it. it would be better to wait for chips with a larger speed differential.
Based on current pricing, the only upgrade that is really appealing right now is Core Solo mini to merom.
Based on current pricing, the only upgrade that is really appealing right now is Core Solo mini to merom.
thedarkhorse
Apr 12, 06:09 PM
http://twitter.com/#!/fcpsupermeet
There's supposed to be live updates on that twitter feed.
There's supposed to be live updates on that twitter feed.
shawnce
Sep 13, 11:36 AM
Do you mean like how BeOS did things?
Yeah BeOS had this great feature called magic pixel dust. :rolleyes:
All that BeOS had was separate threads per window at the UI level. This does nothing for parallelizing compute tasks. These extra thread that BeOS had spent most of their time doing absolutely nothing.
What Mac OS X has now is several operating services that will automatically scale up to use as many cores possible (while still making sense). Many of the "Core" framework do this without any work by application authors other then then those authors deciding to use those services instead of rolling their own.
For example ColorSync color correction, audio conversion, audio mixing, etc.
...and yes Mac OS X 10.5 is expanding the OS services that will do the right thing (TM) as well as making it easier for developers to transparently and directly utilize the cores available in a system.
Yeah BeOS had this great feature called magic pixel dust. :rolleyes:
All that BeOS had was separate threads per window at the UI level. This does nothing for parallelizing compute tasks. These extra thread that BeOS had spent most of their time doing absolutely nothing.
What Mac OS X has now is several operating services that will automatically scale up to use as many cores possible (while still making sense). Many of the "Core" framework do this without any work by application authors other then then those authors deciding to use those services instead of rolling their own.
For example ColorSync color correction, audio conversion, audio mixing, etc.
...and yes Mac OS X 10.5 is expanding the OS services that will do the right thing (TM) as well as making it easier for developers to transparently and directly utilize the cores available in a system.