noire anqa
Mar 26, 07:35 AM
Thank you for your constructive reply but I have a feeling it will all fall on deaf ears given that most have never actually gone on Google and researched what has been added/changed/enhanced to Mac OS X Lion. For example SAMBA has been removed and completely replaced with a ground up clean room implementation of SMB2 which will translate into better support for Windows Vista and 7 clients as well as the latest versions of Windows. Why hasn't that been mentioned by the nay sayers here?
OpenGL 3.2 has been added and funny enough not a single thing has been said about the fact that it lays the foundation for future updates that will be more prompt.
Then there is Webkit2 based web browser whose knock on effects go well beyond Safari and into applications wishing to utilise web based technologies with framework that provides said functionality but handles all the mundane security/process isolation/etc behind the scenes.
The merging of AV Foundation that serves as the foundation for future development for media products that will span iOS and Mac OS X; that you can have the same media core on iOS and Mac OS X then build upon it to differentiate between the desktop and tablet version by having a different interface, more features on the desktop version etc.
Sandboxing is being enhanced further and more system components are being put into it as to reduce the security exposure when a bug is found.
I'm sure others can note even more enhancements but it is frustrating when I hear the same nauseating ignorance over and over again from the cheap seats screaming there are no new features and yet they've done zero in the way of researching and reading on the matter.
You can't hear me .. but i'm cheering for you.
OpenGL 3.2 has been added and funny enough not a single thing has been said about the fact that it lays the foundation for future updates that will be more prompt.
Then there is Webkit2 based web browser whose knock on effects go well beyond Safari and into applications wishing to utilise web based technologies with framework that provides said functionality but handles all the mundane security/process isolation/etc behind the scenes.
The merging of AV Foundation that serves as the foundation for future development for media products that will span iOS and Mac OS X; that you can have the same media core on iOS and Mac OS X then build upon it to differentiate between the desktop and tablet version by having a different interface, more features on the desktop version etc.
Sandboxing is being enhanced further and more system components are being put into it as to reduce the security exposure when a bug is found.
I'm sure others can note even more enhancements but it is frustrating when I hear the same nauseating ignorance over and over again from the cheap seats screaming there are no new features and yet they've done zero in the way of researching and reading on the matter.
You can't hear me .. but i'm cheering for you.
Aztechian
Jul 27, 09:52 AM
Yes. I believe people who have gotten their hands on Core 2 Duo beta chips have put them in their mini's with no difference (except a massive speed boost)
Weren't the notebook CPU's soldered to the boards though?
^^^beat me to it ;-)
Weren't the notebook CPU's soldered to the boards though?
^^^beat me to it ;-)
Warbrain
Aug 25, 02:54 PM
I suspect a large amount of the issues are stemming from the problems with the Intel Macs and people are probably calling more about these problems. I could be wrong.
But yesterday did suck. That site went down in an instant. But then again, the Apple recall got a whole lot more news coverage than the Dell recall.
But yesterday did suck. That site went down in an instant. But then again, the Apple recall got a whole lot more news coverage than the Dell recall.
ugp
Jun 15, 12:49 PM
My RS store would not let me leave information.
They are waiting till 1pm EST.
Meanwhile, people are twittering their stores
are issuing pin numbers to them.
What gives?
Man of man, was Radio Shack the worst outfit
to do this through. Don't totally blame them for
being handed this crap.
Stores were told any ticket generated before 12CST would be voided.
They are waiting till 1pm EST.
Meanwhile, people are twittering their stores
are issuing pin numbers to them.
What gives?
Man of man, was Radio Shack the worst outfit
to do this through. Don't totally blame them for
being handed this crap.
Stores were told any ticket generated before 12CST would be voided.
thejadedmonkey
Mar 25, 11:09 PM
Wouldn't surprise me if Lion and iOS 5 are one and the same... if that's the case, and since Apple really needs to get iOS in the 21st century, I can believe this...
Marx55
Jul 14, 04:33 PM
Dual optical drive is fantastic. Actually, even cheap PC-Windows boxes have had them for ages as a standard feature in basically of models.
On the other hand, a quiet Mac would be great. If possible, with no fans. Quiet. As the cube was.
On the other hand, a quiet Mac would be great. If possible, with no fans. Quiet. As the cube was.
jackc
Aug 8, 05:16 AM
I hope there's been a significant overhaul in Spotlight, beyond what Steve hinted at already. There was no video demo on the website, so hopefully that's the case. It was a really underdeveloped feature in Tiger.
xStep
Apr 11, 04:23 PM
Yes, its crap. The first version followed the basic principles of NLE but the new version is pathetic.
However, Randy came up with FCP for Macromedia so he has what it takes if Jobs and other consumer oriented guys can keep their ***** away from the mix.
LOL! OK, so the new generation of iMovie isn't compatible with you. I like the new iMovie. Sure it has it's quirks and a different take on the editing process, but I'm compatible with it and FCP.
Randy's experiment that turned into the new iMovie was a tool to allow him to quickly skim through his personal content for use in Final Cut. Apparently, other powers that be, when seeing it, thought it a good base for a new consumer video editor. I don't recall it being publicly shared how much influence came from others for the new iMovie. Other's influence has been assumed, except for idiots who want to personally attack Randy.
However, Randy came up with FCP for Macromedia so he has what it takes if Jobs and other consumer oriented guys can keep their ***** away from the mix.
LOL! OK, so the new generation of iMovie isn't compatible with you. I like the new iMovie. Sure it has it's quirks and a different take on the editing process, but I'm compatible with it and FCP.
Randy's experiment that turned into the new iMovie was a tool to allow him to quickly skim through his personal content for use in Final Cut. Apparently, other powers that be, when seeing it, thought it a good base for a new consumer video editor. I don't recall it being publicly shared how much influence came from others for the new iMovie. Other's influence has been assumed, except for idiots who want to personally attack Randy.
AppleScruff1
Apr 20, 12:32 PM
No, only an irrational person defends them at all cost. A die hard is one who puts up with occasional mistakes in the products.
Did threads just get merged again? Because the last dozen posts are complete rehashes of earlier posts.
Then we have a lot of irrational people here. A lot of people put up with an occasional mistake here and there.
Did threads just get merged again? Because the last dozen posts are complete rehashes of earlier posts.
Then we have a lot of irrational people here. A lot of people put up with an occasional mistake here and there.
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...
Dagless
Aug 22, 10:55 AM
It wasn't the controls that made it suck. It was the lack of campaign, lack of fine tuning and the 4 car limit. Heck take a hit in the graphics department to free up more disc space and have more cars per race!
Multimedia
Jul 28, 05:07 PM
Okay, I did some tinkering myself, just for kicks, and here's what I came up with. I thought that we were talking about a computer that was somewhere between a Mac Mini and a Mac Pro (Power Mac), so I thought, maybe the style should be a combination of the two. Let me know what you think.
It's not a Mac Plus... It's a Mac++!
http://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++1.PNGhttp://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++2.PNGThat looks stunningly beautiful. wish there were 3 or 4 card slots though.
It's not a Mac Plus... It's a Mac++!
http://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++1.PNGhttp://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++2.PNGThat looks stunningly beautiful. wish there were 3 or 4 card slots though.
Taustin Powers
Aug 18, 05:21 AM
That blue PS3 looks pretty awesome!
Too bad I already have a PS3....AND have no interest in GT5. :rolleyes:
Too bad I already have a PS3....AND have no interest in GT5. :rolleyes:
KnightWRX
Mar 26, 07:58 AM
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
erockerboy
Aug 17, 01:07 PM
Great post - you said it all.
I think everyone has to remember that Apple took a HUGE PR risk by switching to intel and that it would be foolish to think that they didn't have a VERY GOOD REASON for doing it. As much as RISC is loved here, there really is no compelling reason to think that the G5 architecture stands much of a chance in this comparison. Furthermore, it is foolish to assume that a "up-to-date" G5 would fare any better, firstly because IBM has never stopped developing the G5 (its primary usage was IBM blade servers after all) and secondly because the Core 2 architecture as it stands now isn't being pushed to perform at its maximum levels. In the end, arrogance and pride has never helped anyone, its time to let go.
I think everyone has to remember that Apple took a HUGE PR risk by switching to intel and that it would be foolish to think that they didn't have a VERY GOOD REASON for doing it. As much as RISC is loved here, there really is no compelling reason to think that the G5 architecture stands much of a chance in this comparison. Furthermore, it is foolish to assume that a "up-to-date" G5 would fare any better, firstly because IBM has never stopped developing the G5 (its primary usage was IBM blade servers after all) and secondly because the Core 2 architecture as it stands now isn't being pushed to perform at its maximum levels. In the end, arrogance and pride has never helped anyone, its time to let go.
ergle2
Aug 27, 07:41 PM
HI!
Anyone knows if jointly with this rumor is the rumor of the upgrade of graphic cards on MacBook (not Pro) to Intel GMA 965 (I think is this the reference...)?
Thanks!
From the benchmarks I've seen, the 3000/X3000 stuff (the 965 integrated graphics) is *slower* than the 945 integrated graphics. The only advantage it offers is SM 3.0 (pixel shaders), which are required for Vista compliance -- and that nice little sticker that all new PC systems will want for this holiday season. I wouldn't consider it an upgrade.
Anyone knows if jointly with this rumor is the rumor of the upgrade of graphic cards on MacBook (not Pro) to Intel GMA 965 (I think is this the reference...)?
Thanks!
From the benchmarks I've seen, the 3000/X3000 stuff (the 965 integrated graphics) is *slower* than the 945 integrated graphics. The only advantage it offers is SM 3.0 (pixel shaders), which are required for Vista compliance -- and that nice little sticker that all new PC systems will want for this holiday season. I wouldn't consider it an upgrade.
shawnce
Jul 20, 11:56 AM
yes, its known as reverse hyper threading. AMD are working on it
http://www.dvhardware.net/article10901.html
Reverse hyperthreading? Um, no. (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060713-7263.html)
(also note that the article you link even notes that it was a "hoax")
http://www.dvhardware.net/article10901.html
Reverse hyperthreading? Um, no. (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060713-7263.html)
(also note that the article you link even notes that it was a "hoax")
grum
Sep 19, 09:26 AM
All you people who keep whining about "But I want 64 bit!!!" need to step back and think about what possible benefit a 64-bit system will give you. Those of you who need to address more than 4 gigs of RAM are excused. The rest of you, tell me WHY you need 64-bit computing.
When they go Merom I want the MBP's and MB's to have useful, practical features. More ports, user-removable hard drive, better battery life, better video card, stuff like that. I'm waiting just as impatiently as everyone else, but the hype needs to be toned way down.
why does anyone need to justify to you why they want 64-bit computing?
When they go Merom I want the MBP's and MB's to have useful, practical features. More ports, user-removable hard drive, better battery life, better video card, stuff like that. I'm waiting just as impatiently as everyone else, but the hype needs to be toned way down.
why does anyone need to justify to you why they want 64-bit computing?
boringName
Nov 29, 08:06 AM
Appologies if this has already been brought up, but there were too many posts to read...
I believe that this is/was the deal in Canada for every hard drive and blank CD purchased (along with other recordable media). read more (http://www.lctjournal.washington.edu/Vol2/a016Fkiaras.html)
I question any law/contract of this type on several grounds:
1 - How are the eligable rightsholders identified/compensated?
2 - How are they compensated equitably? Do you compensate Jay-Z and a classical artist the same? Which ever you prefer, Jay-Z sells more.
3 - If I've paid the royalty, don't I own rights to the music? Sure, I may need to find a copy of it, but I'm told that they're all over a thing called the "internet".
I believe that this is/was the deal in Canada for every hard drive and blank CD purchased (along with other recordable media). read more (http://www.lctjournal.washington.edu/Vol2/a016Fkiaras.html)
I question any law/contract of this type on several grounds:
1 - How are the eligable rightsholders identified/compensated?
2 - How are they compensated equitably? Do you compensate Jay-Z and a classical artist the same? Which ever you prefer, Jay-Z sells more.
3 - If I've paid the royalty, don't I own rights to the music? Sure, I may need to find a copy of it, but I'm told that they're all over a thing called the "internet".
triceretops
Apr 27, 09:13 AM
And assume you go to a place you have been a month ago, wouldn't having the database speed things up when you return to that location a month later?
(Though I agree the effect will be very minor, as soon as you land with a plane, the iPhone will start populating that database, thus having the data from a month ago will only be relevant if you need location data right away after landing.)
How else are you going to check in on Facebook?:p
My layover at some airports is only 45 minutes.
(Though I agree the effect will be very minor, as soon as you land with a plane, the iPhone will start populating that database, thus having the data from a month ago will only be relevant if you need location data right away after landing.)
How else are you going to check in on Facebook?:p
My layover at some airports is only 45 minutes.
LegendKillerUK
Apr 6, 10:54 AM
Of course we do. The integrated graphics card will perform just as poorly as every other Sandy Bridge processor because it's the same.
What do you intend to do on an Air that will require what little extra power the nvidia gfx offers over Intel. You sure as hell can't game with it.
What do you intend to do on an Air that will require what little extra power the nvidia gfx offers over Intel. You sure as hell can't game with it.
portishead
Apr 12, 12:35 PM
So wait,on the projects you're working on,is everyone using recorders to record direct to prores or do you enjoy having to waste time converting everything you get?
I almost never have to convert. All clients I work with require ProRes deliverables, and any tapeless material I get is ProRes. If I capture I use ProRes.
Then I'm guessing you do your cross fades manualy?
I just delete any transitions before. It's not that hard.
edit:and I do get your point,it works,but other competitors over the last couple years have brought improvements that I'd like to also see in FCP
I know trust me. I have a HUGE LIST of improvements, but overall FCP still works well for me for 90% of my projects.
I almost never have to convert. All clients I work with require ProRes deliverables, and any tapeless material I get is ProRes. If I capture I use ProRes.
Then I'm guessing you do your cross fades manualy?
I just delete any transitions before. It's not that hard.
edit:and I do get your point,it works,but other competitors over the last couple years have brought improvements that I'd like to also see in FCP
I know trust me. I have a HUGE LIST of improvements, but overall FCP still works well for me for 90% of my projects.
mkruck
Apr 6, 04:43 PM
You both ignored HOT DOGS! Sheesh, hot dogs rule. The only problem is kids under 6 choking on them unless you cut them right. But that will be fixed in the v3.0 hot dog, they will come pre-sliced.
Hot dogs?
Hot dogs?
Those are the Hyundai of...oh, wait, that analogy has been used already. Uhhhmmmm, Hot Dogs are the Yugo...oh, man, did it again.
OK, I've got it: Hot Dogs are the Hot Dogs of food.
Hot dogs?
Hot dogs?
Those are the Hyundai of...oh, wait, that analogy has been used already. Uhhhmmmm, Hot Dogs are the Yugo...oh, man, did it again.
OK, I've got it: Hot Dogs are the Hot Dogs of food.
jamesW135
Aug 19, 10:16 PM
Whoa! I'm amazed at how it compared to the G5 in the Photoshop Speed test. If it was this fast now. Imagine PS once it's a UB!!:eek:
No comments:
Post a Comment