Danksi
Aug 15, 01:16 PM
Video cards won't make a difference in FCP as of now if that's what you are asking performance wise. If you are using Motion/Games, anything that really feeds off the video card, then I'd go for the higher end video card.
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
I've not really used Motion yet, just the other apps within FC-Studio.
Just been comparing their iMac 1.9 G5 results with those of the 2.66Ghz Mac Pro numbers... I don't think I'll be disappointed in the performance boost! :D
I guess my main concern is whether or not Apple integrates the individual Final Cut Studio applications more closely, so all of a sudden you'd need a better graphics card to comfortably run the 'editor', rather than just Motion as is the case at the moment.
I think I'll stick to the 2.66Ghz and standard graphics card, as FCP and compressor are more CPU intensive I believe.
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
I've not really used Motion yet, just the other apps within FC-Studio.
Just been comparing their iMac 1.9 G5 results with those of the 2.66Ghz Mac Pro numbers... I don't think I'll be disappointed in the performance boost! :D
I guess my main concern is whether or not Apple integrates the individual Final Cut Studio applications more closely, so all of a sudden you'd need a better graphics card to comfortably run the 'editor', rather than just Motion as is the case at the moment.
I think I'll stick to the 2.66Ghz and standard graphics card, as FCP and compressor are more CPU intensive I believe.
PhantomPumpkin
Apr 27, 10:23 AM
Maybe that's what you heard.
I heard that the database couldn't be user purged (easily)
The the database kept data from Day one
and that Location services being turned off didn't change the recording of the data.
Apple fans were "more correct". Wow. Ok - if you say so.... and if it helps you sleep at night
I'm still confused how you think the "hype" was correct then.
Your points don't even support it.
As was said before, this was way overblown.
I heard that the database couldn't be user purged (easily)
The the database kept data from Day one
and that Location services being turned off didn't change the recording of the data.
Apple fans were "more correct". Wow. Ok - if you say so.... and if it helps you sleep at night
I'm still confused how you think the "hype" was correct then.
Your points don't even support it.
As was said before, this was way overblown.
Multimedia
Jul 20, 06:58 PM
Merom Already Shipping
According to Daily Tech Merom is already shipping! Intel announced it during Intel's Q2'06 earnings report. Is an upgraded MBP going to make an appearance at the WWDC?
"...Otellini confirmed that quad-core isn't the only processor series moved up. The CEO confirmed Merom has been moved up and is already shipping to revenue, as was reported by HKEPC (English) several days ago. Intel's Tulsa processors for Xeon MP are also already shipping to revenue according to Otellini, but the availability of these processors has largely been overshadowed by yesterday's launch of Itanium 2 Montecito and the recent launch of Xeon DP Woodcrest.
Typically there is a two to three week lag between revenue shipments and retail availability, so expect to see many of these new "shipping to revenue" processors before the end of the month." (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3421)Wow, if true and Apple is ready with the new body, we might see the all new Mobile Pro Core 2 Duo Mac sooner than any of us expected. That would be great. :) Only 18 days until we find out. :D
According to Daily Tech Merom is already shipping! Intel announced it during Intel's Q2'06 earnings report. Is an upgraded MBP going to make an appearance at the WWDC?
"...Otellini confirmed that quad-core isn't the only processor series moved up. The CEO confirmed Merom has been moved up and is already shipping to revenue, as was reported by HKEPC (English) several days ago. Intel's Tulsa processors for Xeon MP are also already shipping to revenue according to Otellini, but the availability of these processors has largely been overshadowed by yesterday's launch of Itanium 2 Montecito and the recent launch of Xeon DP Woodcrest.
Typically there is a two to three week lag between revenue shipments and retail availability, so expect to see many of these new "shipping to revenue" processors before the end of the month." (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3421)Wow, if true and Apple is ready with the new body, we might see the all new Mobile Pro Core 2 Duo Mac sooner than any of us expected. That would be great. :) Only 18 days until we find out. :D
jonnysods
Mar 31, 02:43 PM
Suckaz. What a mess.
aafuss1
Aug 6, 05:31 PM
Why sell a new keyboard for front row, if you can sell a new Mac to the same person? Including the sensor in the Cinema Displays would enable Apple to sell more of their display, on which they probably have a very good profit margin (when you compare to other manufacturers).
They could also just put it into the tower. Even if that is under the desk, it might not be that much of a problem. In my experience the sensor responds very nicely to the remote even if the line of sight between them is somewhat obstructed.
However the best solution I think, was suggested by someone on these forums. I don't know, whether it has been quoted here already, because I did not go through all the messages. This poster suggested to combine the sensor with an external iSight. That could be connected to any monitor and would probably have a good IR reception because of beeing on top of the monitor and thus very exposed.
Apple would make the IR and iSight work on XP-first under Boot Camp and on PC's
They could also just put it into the tower. Even if that is under the desk, it might not be that much of a problem. In my experience the sensor responds very nicely to the remote even if the line of sight between them is somewhat obstructed.
However the best solution I think, was suggested by someone on these forums. I don't know, whether it has been quoted here already, because I did not go through all the messages. This poster suggested to combine the sensor with an external iSight. That could be connected to any monitor and would probably have a good IR reception because of beeing on top of the monitor and thus very exposed.
Apple would make the IR and iSight work on XP-first under Boot Camp and on PC's
jwdsail
Apr 6, 12:08 PM
Maybe, just maybe, this would be the first Air I'd consider buying..
If, this update would bring Thunderbolt to the Air..
USB-only is still a deal-breaker for me, I'd rather walk to the internet, uphill, both ways, in the snow, than be that limited in a laptop..
An Air, with Thunderbolt... Wouldn't be my primary Mac, but would make an Air/iMac combo look better than a maxed-out 15" MBP...
Shrug..
If, this update would bring Thunderbolt to the Air..
USB-only is still a deal-breaker for me, I'd rather walk to the internet, uphill, both ways, in the snow, than be that limited in a laptop..
An Air, with Thunderbolt... Wouldn't be my primary Mac, but would make an Air/iMac combo look better than a maxed-out 15" MBP...
Shrug..
AppleScruff1
Apr 19, 10:42 PM
Even if that were true, so what? Apple Records was not a competitor of Apple Computer. Trademark law allows multiple companies to have the same trademark so long as they don't sell the same type of products in the same location. This is why you can have a 100 companies like "AAA Locksmith, AAA Laundry," etc. Or you can have "Hollywood Video" in Michigan being totally different than "Hollywood Video" everywhere else [interesting story that. I may have the state wrong.]
Only truly "famous" marks (e.g. Coke, McDonalds, etc.) which can be "diluted" by use with other types of products are protected against this sort of thing.
But App Store is like Coke, right? Of course it's ok if Apple does it. They've becoming one of the most hypocritical companies on the planet. Maybe Steve suffers from extreme paranoia?
Only truly "famous" marks (e.g. Coke, McDonalds, etc.) which can be "diluted" by use with other types of products are protected against this sort of thing.
But App Store is like Coke, right? Of course it's ok if Apple does it. They've becoming one of the most hypocritical companies on the planet. Maybe Steve suffers from extreme paranoia?
randyharris
Sep 18, 11:59 PM
It would be fantastic for the MacBook to have the Core 2 Duo, (MacBookPro is a given), the fact is, Apple needs to do this update to stay in the same ballpark as the pc notebook makers.
Now if they could just give the MacBook a real graphics card, I'd be a taker.
Randy at MacSeven.com (http://www.MacSeven.com)
Now if they could just give the MacBook a real graphics card, I'd be a taker.
Randy at MacSeven.com (http://www.MacSeven.com)
iJohnHenry
Apr 27, 04:39 PM
The difference between me and you is that I'd want an explanation in either account. ;)
Get Dr. Gilbert "Gil" Grissom, (Ph.D.), on the case.
I'm sure he could match the keystrokes to a late 50's/early 60's typewriter.
Get Dr. Gilbert "Gil" Grissom, (Ph.D.), on the case.
I'm sure he could match the keystrokes to a late 50's/early 60's typewriter.
Kilamite
Apr 12, 03:09 PM
What's the UK time?
3am.
3am.
HecubusPro
Aug 27, 09:56 AM
What makes you say Nintendo sucks so much?
-Zadillo
Because, just as there are Mac fanboys, there are also Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony fanboys. As much as we'd like to think our platform of choice is clearly the best, in all actually, each one has something unique to offer that the other may lack.
Whether we like to believe it or, the same goes for PC vs. Mac, OSX vs. Windows, ATI vs. Nvidia, etc. I've had macs off and on since I was a kid. I've also had several other types of computers other than Windows machines (mostly Commodore systems--man I loved my Amiga 500 with it's upgrade to 1 whole MB of ram :cool:.)
I was first in line to buy the original iMac. I bought it day one. I upgraded it's graphics card, which supposedly was not supposed to be upgradable, so I could play Unreal. Then I began to religiously follow the tragic saga of the Half-Life port to the Mac OS. The guy who was doing it (yes, a one man team), after months of receiving very little support from anyone, eventually threw his hands in the air and gave up. I was distraught, and, as a huge gamer (not fat, just a video game fan :p ), that's when I decided I needed to get a PC with Windows. It was a tough choice, but I knew I had to do it if I wanted to play the latest, greatest PC games. Apple has sorely lacked in porting games to their OS's.
While I did eventually buy a used iBook about 4 or 5 years ago (which I recently sold to help fund my new MBP), I always promised, "I will buy a mac again when I can play any games that a PC can play." Well, now I'm putting my money where my mouth is. I'm jumping head first into the mac market once more, and I thank the Intel switch for allowing it to happen.
While I know I probably won't be able to respectably play games like Crysis and Unreal Tournament 2007 on my MBP, I've become content with having console systems (Xbox 360, soon Wii, much later PS3 when price drops ;).) At this point in my life, I'm trying to simplify. I'm tired of having the huge tower system and massive monitor taking up so much room in my life, so I decide to go with the MBP. I want to be able to move from my desk to the living room, from the house to work, from state to state, etc. with ease and with all I need computer-wise.
So I'm back and I'm happy to be here. Of course, how I managed to get off on a self-rant from someone responding to a perceived Nintendo insult I have no idea. Sorry about that. :D
Did I say I can't wait to get my MBP? :o
-Zadillo
Because, just as there are Mac fanboys, there are also Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony fanboys. As much as we'd like to think our platform of choice is clearly the best, in all actually, each one has something unique to offer that the other may lack.
Whether we like to believe it or, the same goes for PC vs. Mac, OSX vs. Windows, ATI vs. Nvidia, etc. I've had macs off and on since I was a kid. I've also had several other types of computers other than Windows machines (mostly Commodore systems--man I loved my Amiga 500 with it's upgrade to 1 whole MB of ram :cool:.)
I was first in line to buy the original iMac. I bought it day one. I upgraded it's graphics card, which supposedly was not supposed to be upgradable, so I could play Unreal. Then I began to religiously follow the tragic saga of the Half-Life port to the Mac OS. The guy who was doing it (yes, a one man team), after months of receiving very little support from anyone, eventually threw his hands in the air and gave up. I was distraught, and, as a huge gamer (not fat, just a video game fan :p ), that's when I decided I needed to get a PC with Windows. It was a tough choice, but I knew I had to do it if I wanted to play the latest, greatest PC games. Apple has sorely lacked in porting games to their OS's.
While I did eventually buy a used iBook about 4 or 5 years ago (which I recently sold to help fund my new MBP), I always promised, "I will buy a mac again when I can play any games that a PC can play." Well, now I'm putting my money where my mouth is. I'm jumping head first into the mac market once more, and I thank the Intel switch for allowing it to happen.
While I know I probably won't be able to respectably play games like Crysis and Unreal Tournament 2007 on my MBP, I've become content with having console systems (Xbox 360, soon Wii, much later PS3 when price drops ;).) At this point in my life, I'm trying to simplify. I'm tired of having the huge tower system and massive monitor taking up so much room in my life, so I decide to go with the MBP. I want to be able to move from my desk to the living room, from the house to work, from state to state, etc. with ease and with all I need computer-wise.
So I'm back and I'm happy to be here. Of course, how I managed to get off on a self-rant from someone responding to a perceived Nintendo insult I have no idea. Sorry about that. :D
Did I say I can't wait to get my MBP? :o
angrynstupid
Apr 27, 08:02 AM
I actually thought looking at a history of where my phone has been on a map was kinda cool. Bummer.
Since I'm neither a criminal nor paranoid, I thought it was kind of cool/interesting too.
Since I'm neither a criminal nor paranoid, I thought it was kind of cool/interesting too.
appleguy123
Feb 28, 08:19 PM
It matters that you describe it as fornication.
What has this dubious claim to do with anything? :confused:
He's trying to equate in our minds homosexuality, rape, and pedophilia.
What has this dubious claim to do with anything? :confused:
He's trying to equate in our minds homosexuality, rape, and pedophilia.
radiohead14
Apr 6, 11:45 AM
as long as the new MBAs will have longer battery life (7+ preferably), then i'm cool with the HD 3000 in there, as the MBA's purpose is to be an ultra portable
basesloaded190
Apr 6, 11:12 AM
I still don't think this means new MacBook Airs in June. Can anyone really see Apple releasing new hardware before Lion is released?
Why not?
Why not?
Doctor Q
Apr 25, 04:26 PM
Nike+iPod must be an even more serious privacy violation. After all, it knows how fast I'm going and my calories burned. And it sends the data to nikeplus.com! :eek:
Yeah, both iPhone/iPod and Nike+iPod store the information only on my device and sync it only to my other devices, sending it elsewhere only if I want. But if I can make money by suing about it then I'll ignore those inconvenient facts!
Yeah, both iPhone/iPod and Nike+iPod store the information only on my device and sync it only to my other devices, sending it elsewhere only if I want. But if I can make money by suing about it then I'll ignore those inconvenient facts!
mcrain
Mar 17, 12:51 PM
How many times did Barack Obama attempt to draw a difference between himself and Hillary by saying "I was against the war from the beginning."? Lots. He was against the war from the beginning, and he campaigned on ending the Iraq war and escalating the Afghanistan war in an attempt to do what we went there for in the first place; and actually plan on an orderly end of the conflict. So, yes, you are correct. He was against the Iraq war from the beginning, and he said so. Bravo, 1-1 so far.
How many times did he attempt to portray himself as the polar opposite of George Bush, especially his foreign policy? Lots. In what ways has he not been the polar opposite? Do you have examples or cites? He did try to close Guantanamo, and the GOP blocked him. He actually put in place a time table for withdrawal from Iraq. He actually focused our efforts on Afghanistan; the war that started in response to 9/11 (almost 10 years ago btw).
How many times did he say that he was going to repair the view of America in the eyes of the Muslim world? Lots. Hasn't he? A dead fish would have had a better image than GWB in that part of the world.
How many times did he the right wing media say he would talk to leaders of 'terrorist nations' without preconditions? Lots. Fixed that for ya.
How many times did he attempt to portray himself as the polar opposite of George Bush, especially his foreign policy? Lots. In what ways has he not been the polar opposite? Do you have examples or cites? He did try to close Guantanamo, and the GOP blocked him. He actually put in place a time table for withdrawal from Iraq. He actually focused our efforts on Afghanistan; the war that started in response to 9/11 (almost 10 years ago btw).
How many times did he say that he was going to repair the view of America in the eyes of the Muslim world? Lots. Hasn't he? A dead fish would have had a better image than GWB in that part of the world.
How many times did he the right wing media say he would talk to leaders of 'terrorist nations' without preconditions? Lots. Fixed that for ya.
severe
Jun 21, 11:49 PM
...I may be an idiot for trusting radioshack but I want to trade in my 3GS so... I'll be waiting outside of my radioshack atleast an hour before they open on Thursday. Wish me luck!
I would sell the 3GS privately. You're almost guaranteed to get more for it. Post it somewhere tonight and I'll bet you that you get more for it than what Radio Shack will offer you.
Radio Shack's trade-in program is a decent option, but one could do much better with a little leg work.
I would sell the 3GS privately. You're almost guaranteed to get more for it. Post it somewhere tonight and I'll bet you that you get more for it than what Radio Shack will offer you.
Radio Shack's trade-in program is a decent option, but one could do much better with a little leg work.
sososowhat
Aug 7, 03:17 PM
The new HW is fine, but Leopard is exciting! I'll look forward to this as I have all the big cats. Time machine is a great idea; love the additions to iChat & spotlight.
fatfish
Aug 7, 09:49 PM
I've seen many posts calling for a unified mail, address and calender app, this is so please Apple take no notice, I want seperate apps.
Simplicity is what makes Apple software what it is. I would however wish to see tighter integration, such as exists between itunes, iphoto, iDVD, iMovie, Garageband and iWeb.
I would also like to see the address book integrated with pages. (but that's another topic)
Simplicity is what makes Apple software what it is. I would however wish to see tighter integration, such as exists between itunes, iphoto, iDVD, iMovie, Garageband and iWeb.
I would also like to see the address book integrated with pages. (but that's another topic)
troop231
Mar 22, 12:56 PM
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
Hugh Hefner of course.. :cool:
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
Hugh Hefner of course.. :cool:
srf4real
Aug 25, 10:01 PM
I hope Apple doesn't go the way of every other corporation that gets huge and loses sight of the bread and butter- customer base. In a world full of computers, I want to be helped by a human with common sense. Apple support has always been good to me, although I haven't needed a thing since buying my G4 mini last summer and signing up a dotmac account. (just to end on a positive note:)
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
lgutie20
Mar 22, 02:04 PM
The trick with Apple is to innovate in aspects that no one else is considering. Example: "we need smart covers because protecting your tablet is a must and should be easy." Thus far this is an APPLE ONLY thing and it works like a charm.
There are other things they could do.
If Apple really wants to completely stand out (even with the crippled aspect that they don't support Flash) they really need to push for Thunderbolt on iOS devices.
It would sync data faster.
It would charge devices faster.
I know there is a lot of groundwork to be done first. All Apple computers should have the Thunderbolt I/O in order for the iOS devices to even consider Thunderbolt.
Time is not a luxury Apple has right now. They need to move faster than ever.
There are other things they could do.
If Apple really wants to completely stand out (even with the crippled aspect that they don't support Flash) they really need to push for Thunderbolt on iOS devices.
It would sync data faster.
It would charge devices faster.
I know there is a lot of groundwork to be done first. All Apple computers should have the Thunderbolt I/O in order for the iOS devices to even consider Thunderbolt.
Time is not a luxury Apple has right now. They need to move faster than ever.