McGiord
Mar 31, 10:57 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)
All the traditional phone manufacturers were used to release a new hardware every year and get the carriers financing the hardware coat over the 2 year contract, even allowing the loyal customers a free or small fee upgrade when the right one comes for them. So google fragmented model might be in sync with the traditional way of delivering new ozone hardware/with updated software for the typical mobile phone user.
Having more control for the benefit of the end user is a must for any of these players. Apple model has been highly successful, as well as google's model. How they will continue, is just a matter of time.
All the traditional phone manufacturers were used to release a new hardware every year and get the carriers financing the hardware coat over the 2 year contract, even allowing the loyal customers a free or small fee upgrade when the right one comes for them. So google fragmented model might be in sync with the traditional way of delivering new ozone hardware/with updated software for the typical mobile phone user.
Having more control for the benefit of the end user is a must for any of these players. Apple model has been highly successful, as well as google's model. How they will continue, is just a matter of time.
Kristenn
Mar 31, 10:33 PM
Good. I hope they take one of the last strengths of the iPad ecosystem away from it.
Wow, your username might be Full of Win (lol...) But this post is Full of Fail!
Care to explain? I mean, I don't get it. It seems like only the iHaters would understand this post or just pretend to so they can shout I AGREE!
I'm serious. Explain, please?
Wow, your username might be Full of Win (lol...) But this post is Full of Fail!
Care to explain? I mean, I don't get it. It seems like only the iHaters would understand this post or just pretend to so they can shout I AGREE!
I'm serious. Explain, please?
fatfish
Aug 7, 09:06 PM
When I first saw this feature I thought great. I do regular back ups, but some of my AW docs keep corrupting (probably something to do with keep duplicating the same old document and modifying rather than starting anew). Time Machine will help me no end. I was also thrilled that windows had nothing like this........ until I read through these posts.
Then it seemed very similar to what was coming in Vista and I felt a bit dissapointed that Apple had made such a point about M$ copying them, but seemed to do the same themselves with Time Machine.
However on closer examination this is not the case and my confidence in Apple's innovative skills is restored.
Firstly, there has always been back up and restore apps, so if you want to take this copying thing to a ridiculous level, of course you can do. Copying in my book is when an app does and looks the same (just like the screenshots in the presentation, safari RSS/IE7 RSS, ical/M$ calender etc). It appears to me Time Machine does much more than anything before it and has it's own unique UI to boot.
Secondly, I would imagine work on Time machine started long before a beta of Vista was released, even if the two utilities were more or less identical it would be coincidence not copying.
Thirdly, it seems quite clear that Vista's restore (whatever it's called) will not do what Time machine will do. Ultimately you may well be able to restore any deleted or modified file in Vista, but it doesn't appear to occur with the same ease or functionality.
If I create a file, modify it and move it several times, rename it, convert it, modify it some more, move it several times and finally delete it, I rather suspect it would be an absolute nightmare to recover in Vista, whereas it seems that Time Machine would have little problem.
I don't see how it is possible in Vista to perform the recovery with either the same simplicity or pizzaz as Time Machine. Perhaps if M$ had not abandoned their intended file system for Vista it might have been possible, but as it is I doubt it.
Finally it does not appear that Vista has the option to restore within a database application (i.e. iphoto, mail, address book), no doubt if you understand how a particular database works, the possibility exists to restore a particular photo, but let's not pretend it will be easy or anywhere near the experience of time machine.
And finally, finally, although I agree the UI may appear a little childish, this is exactly the sort of thing that makes it so easy to use.
Then it seemed very similar to what was coming in Vista and I felt a bit dissapointed that Apple had made such a point about M$ copying them, but seemed to do the same themselves with Time Machine.
However on closer examination this is not the case and my confidence in Apple's innovative skills is restored.
Firstly, there has always been back up and restore apps, so if you want to take this copying thing to a ridiculous level, of course you can do. Copying in my book is when an app does and looks the same (just like the screenshots in the presentation, safari RSS/IE7 RSS, ical/M$ calender etc). It appears to me Time Machine does much more than anything before it and has it's own unique UI to boot.
Secondly, I would imagine work on Time machine started long before a beta of Vista was released, even if the two utilities were more or less identical it would be coincidence not copying.
Thirdly, it seems quite clear that Vista's restore (whatever it's called) will not do what Time machine will do. Ultimately you may well be able to restore any deleted or modified file in Vista, but it doesn't appear to occur with the same ease or functionality.
If I create a file, modify it and move it several times, rename it, convert it, modify it some more, move it several times and finally delete it, I rather suspect it would be an absolute nightmare to recover in Vista, whereas it seems that Time Machine would have little problem.
I don't see how it is possible in Vista to perform the recovery with either the same simplicity or pizzaz as Time Machine. Perhaps if M$ had not abandoned their intended file system for Vista it might have been possible, but as it is I doubt it.
Finally it does not appear that Vista has the option to restore within a database application (i.e. iphoto, mail, address book), no doubt if you understand how a particular database works, the possibility exists to restore a particular photo, but let's not pretend it will be easy or anywhere near the experience of time machine.
And finally, finally, although I agree the UI may appear a little childish, this is exactly the sort of thing that makes it so easy to use.
daver969
Sep 13, 11:05 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
Chundles
Jul 20, 08:14 AM
I wonder what they're going to call them, Quad sounds cool but "Octa or Octo" just sounds a bit silly.
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
Unspeaked
Sep 19, 11:24 AM
I ordered my 15" MBP yesterday and they are telling me it will ship next Tuesday. I sure hope that when the package arrives the MBP will have no stinking Merom, no more than 512 MB RAM, no better than an 80 Gb/5400 rpm HDD, and -- please God -- no magnetic latch! Oh - and one more thing: Apple better not send me a refund if they lower the price before the package hits my doorstep. :mad:
I don't think you've got anything to worry about there...
I don't think you've got anything to worry about there...
bousozoku
Aug 7, 11:25 PM
Hi, this is just a question to the developers. Did you already get 10.5? I have the ADC Select membership but can�t find 10.5 in the download section. Please send me an email where I can find it. Thank you!
It seems as though I received previous distributions 3-4 weeks after WWDC but they weren't downloadable to Select members, only available in a physical package.
It seems as though I received previous distributions 3-4 weeks after WWDC but they weren't downloadable to Select members, only available in a physical package.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 05:46 PM
ok, to say something good about this preview: ichat looks great! Really looking forward to that! :)
~Shard~
Jul 15, 12:58 AM
It would be ridiculous if it came with just 512 mb's of ram...
Steve Jobs-"The New Octa-Core Mac Pro with 512 mb's of ram" It just doesn't fit...
I agree, it wouldn't make sense. Might as well sell a new Lamborghini with a 1.8L 4-banger... ;)
Steve Jobs-"The New Octa-Core Mac Pro with 512 mb's of ram" It just doesn't fit...
I agree, it wouldn't make sense. Might as well sell a new Lamborghini with a 1.8L 4-banger... ;)
JackSYi
Aug 17, 01:18 AM
CompUSA just got the Mac Pros in and we downloaded Quake 4 and ran it at the highest settings on the 30" ACD. Runs beautifully.
CplBadboy
Apr 5, 04:44 PM
Hopefully there will be new iMacs to go with it. Refresh please!
newtonrj
Mar 31, 03:55 PM
It has been said here before but is worth repeating - How does Moto, HTC and all the others differentiate? Obviously, they can't or if they can, it will cost them and the change will be slight.
If you are a carrier, what do you think of your portfolio now? Why so many Androids - Aren't they all the same now?
Who wins - Android wins because of uniformed updates and backward compatibility with screens, memory and installs of apps.
Who loses - Any of say 2 massive cell-phone countries that have +1B potential handset users. Andy Rubin knows this and is putting the brakes on in order to control the OS.
If you are a carrier, what do you think of your portfolio now? Why so many Androids - Aren't they all the same now?
Who wins - Android wins because of uniformed updates and backward compatibility with screens, memory and installs of apps.
Who loses - Any of say 2 massive cell-phone countries that have +1B potential handset users. Andy Rubin knows this and is putting the brakes on in order to control the OS.
ro2nie
Aug 27, 08:43 PM
I think im gonna wait and buy in 2007 with leopard and iLife 07 :rolleyes:
gregor.hoch
Apr 6, 11:32 AM
13" MBP uses SV chips, i.e. standard voltage (35W). Before it used MV (medium voltage, 25W) chips but Sandy Bridge does not offer CPUs like that. LV (25W) and ULV (17W) chips have not been released yet but will be released shortly like the article says.
If the clock speed and other specs are the same, then the performance is the same. ULV and LV chips are only separated by the TDP which causes the ULV to have lower clock speed. Otherwise they are the same chips.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
If the clock speed and other specs are the same, then the performance is the same. ULV and LV chips are only separated by the TDP which causes the ULV to have lower clock speed. Otherwise they are the same chips.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
BlizzardBomb
Aug 27, 09:49 AM
Well for one thing, Apple doesn't pay street prices. iMacs will only have 2 cores until Kentsfield. So I think it's fair to expct aggressive Conroe speed in the iMac due to the 2 core limitation. iMacs need to be about the same speed as Mac Pros because they only have 2 cores.
All pricing of chips are quoted in bulks of 1000s. And does it matter whether its street pricing or not because Apple still has to fork out an extra 30% for the CPU (+ logic board redesign costs).
All pricing of chips are quoted in bulks of 1000s. And does it matter whether its street pricing or not because Apple still has to fork out an extra 30% for the CPU (+ logic board redesign costs).
AppliedVisual
Oct 15, 03:47 PM
... hmmm ... i just ordered a mac pro quad 3ghz ... 8 cores would be somehow nicer ;)
.a
The 8-core Mac Pro @ 2.33GHz should be about the same price as the quad-core 2.66GHz. Theoretically, the 8-core 2.66GHz should be about the same price as what you just ordered.
Before you seriously consider canceling, just be sure that your workflow can benefit from the various CPU cores. Very few applications can take advantage of dual-core CPUs, let alone quad-core. In most situations, you need to be running various instances or multiple apps at once that can handle 2 or more threads to benefit from these newer multi-core systems. If you do any 3D animation or heavy rendering, scientific computing, visualization, massive database management/development, etc... You may be a candidate. Depending on your requirements, a quad-core 3GHz may still be the best performing system for you.
.a
The 8-core Mac Pro @ 2.33GHz should be about the same price as the quad-core 2.66GHz. Theoretically, the 8-core 2.66GHz should be about the same price as what you just ordered.
Before you seriously consider canceling, just be sure that your workflow can benefit from the various CPU cores. Very few applications can take advantage of dual-core CPUs, let alone quad-core. In most situations, you need to be running various instances or multiple apps at once that can handle 2 or more threads to benefit from these newer multi-core systems. If you do any 3D animation or heavy rendering, scientific computing, visualization, massive database management/development, etc... You may be a candidate. Depending on your requirements, a quad-core 3GHz may still be the best performing system for you.
BryanBensing
Apr 6, 03:11 PM
Rotfl
apple also sold about 100k ipad's - yesterday.
apple also sold about 100k ipad's - yesterday.
Mistrblank
Apr 8, 07:27 AM
May be they did not want to embarrass the Xoom too much :rolleyes:
Too late.
Too late.
MacPhilosopher
Apr 10, 02:21 AM
Oh, we are totally getting an iPad app to go along with this program. I can feel it.
I would oh-so love the ability to down-rez a Final Cut project and send it to an iPad...do all my rough cutting there...and then bring it back to the Mac and re-link it to the real footage to do the detail work.
I've had a lot of fun playing with iMovie on the iPad. I am drooling for something similar that works as part of a Final Cut Pro workflow.
I'm a little confused...why was Avid presenting at a Final Cut Pro User Group's meeting anyway? Do they just come in and are like "Hey, you've all made a mistake!" or something?
I'm not so sure about the down res option, it sounds like an awful lot of time spent compressing, though I sure hope it is some type of interface, perhaps as an input device or palette.
I would oh-so love the ability to down-rez a Final Cut project and send it to an iPad...do all my rough cutting there...and then bring it back to the Mac and re-link it to the real footage to do the detail work.
I've had a lot of fun playing with iMovie on the iPad. I am drooling for something similar that works as part of a Final Cut Pro workflow.
I'm a little confused...why was Avid presenting at a Final Cut Pro User Group's meeting anyway? Do they just come in and are like "Hey, you've all made a mistake!" or something?
I'm not so sure about the down res option, it sounds like an awful lot of time spent compressing, though I sure hope it is some type of interface, perhaps as an input device or palette.
radiohead14
Mar 22, 04:04 PM
I know I haven't been on this forum for as long as some, but this topic again proves why I'm often dissuaded from posting more regularly.
The constant foot-stomping, ridiculing without even trying, 'my Dad-is-better-than-your-Dad' attitude towards other manufacturers, the list is ongoing. How can any of us write off the Playbook or the Samsung tablet without even trying them? Yes, they are second and third to the market, but then so was Apple with the first iteration of its smartphone. Now look where we are.
The iPad two does have some shortcomings, few of which are worth going to to here. However, the OS of these devices IS crucial and we are beginning to see iOS creaking slightly. In terms of looks and notifications, for me, Apple is lagging. I like how the Playbook looks and potentially, should operate. Will I make a snap judgement? No. I'll try the damn thing first before making a judgement.
Do I see these tablets wiping out the iPad? Not a chance. Not in a million years. Do I see future versions of the Playbook and Samsung tabs wiping out the iPad? Perhaps, who can say. Mobile computing and tablets are here to stay now - saying and believing that the iPad will remain as dominant is pure wishful thinking from the more fanboy-minded of us.
well said. it's hard to even have a civil conversation here anymore. not sure what the majority of the age group here is now, but the discussions since i've joined here just a couple of years ago seem to be on the decline with immaturity. there are a handful of respectful and open minded people who do back up their thoughts with details and sense, but you'd have to wade through a lot of "fanboy" (i hate that term) jargon to sift the ones worth replying to.
The constant foot-stomping, ridiculing without even trying, 'my Dad-is-better-than-your-Dad' attitude towards other manufacturers, the list is ongoing. How can any of us write off the Playbook or the Samsung tablet without even trying them? Yes, they are second and third to the market, but then so was Apple with the first iteration of its smartphone. Now look where we are.
The iPad two does have some shortcomings, few of which are worth going to to here. However, the OS of these devices IS crucial and we are beginning to see iOS creaking slightly. In terms of looks and notifications, for me, Apple is lagging. I like how the Playbook looks and potentially, should operate. Will I make a snap judgement? No. I'll try the damn thing first before making a judgement.
Do I see these tablets wiping out the iPad? Not a chance. Not in a million years. Do I see future versions of the Playbook and Samsung tabs wiping out the iPad? Perhaps, who can say. Mobile computing and tablets are here to stay now - saying and believing that the iPad will remain as dominant is pure wishful thinking from the more fanboy-minded of us.
well said. it's hard to even have a civil conversation here anymore. not sure what the majority of the age group here is now, but the discussions since i've joined here just a couple of years ago seem to be on the decline with immaturity. there are a handful of respectful and open minded people who do back up their thoughts with details and sense, but you'd have to wade through a lot of "fanboy" (i hate that term) jargon to sift the ones worth replying to.
daver969
Sep 13, 11:05 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
ugp
Jun 22, 09:26 PM
Ugh! Lucky!! I think I'm going to just keep calling my local radioshacks and head to one at least an hour before they open on Thursday!
Well being Best Friends has it's advantages. And his DM is actually pretty cool. The store that received 5 of them that he is getting the 2 from, they are all idiots in that store. The Manager is literally Cross-Eyed, Employees don't even greet you when you walk in and are not very knowledgable. It's a shame too because I use to work at that store for several years. Received many trophies for sales. Including this one...
http://i48.tinypic.com/24fjhvm.jpg
What's really sad is that it's a Mall store. Use to be a Million Dollar plus store. Now it has dropped well below that. Although it was back in the day when they actually cared about their employees. They have such a high turn over rate anymore. I had quit because I got tired of the DM (Different DM then) threatening us with our jobs everyday during Golden Quarter. I left my keys on the desk and never returned along with a few others Managers at the time.
Well being Best Friends has it's advantages. And his DM is actually pretty cool. The store that received 5 of them that he is getting the 2 from, they are all idiots in that store. The Manager is literally Cross-Eyed, Employees don't even greet you when you walk in and are not very knowledgable. It's a shame too because I use to work at that store for several years. Received many trophies for sales. Including this one...
http://i48.tinypic.com/24fjhvm.jpg
What's really sad is that it's a Mall store. Use to be a Million Dollar plus store. Now it has dropped well below that. Although it was back in the day when they actually cared about their employees. They have such a high turn over rate anymore. I had quit because I got tired of the DM (Different DM then) threatening us with our jobs everyday during Golden Quarter. I left my keys on the desk and never returned along with a few others Managers at the time.
Denarius
Mar 22, 07:24 PM
No he hasn't, the stage management has been quite subtle, actually, for once.
I had considered that theory, but when Cameron first broached a no-fly zone in parliament, Clinton's reaction seemed to be very put out when she initially put the dampers on the no-fly zone suggestion. If what you suggest is the case then, frankly, it's been done beautifully.
I think there's an argument for letting one of the partaking Arab nations run the show.
I had considered that theory, but when Cameron first broached a no-fly zone in parliament, Clinton's reaction seemed to be very put out when she initially put the dampers on the no-fly zone suggestion. If what you suggest is the case then, frankly, it's been done beautifully.
I think there's an argument for letting one of the partaking Arab nations run the show.
macpross
Aug 6, 11:28 PM
Great joke, thanks very much...in the same line as Tiger Computer Dealers, right?
We already have a Mac Pro line of products, we are also the owners of AppleLocks, and MacMice. The Tiger thing was silly.
We already have a Mac Pro line of products, we are also the owners of AppleLocks, and MacMice. The Tiger thing was silly.
