FF_productions
Jul 15, 01:30 AM
Is it possible that the lower end models (rumored to be single processor) will be upgradeable by BTO or later on by the user by putting in another processor?
Depends on how it is built, I'm sure you will be able to though. I know just as much as you.
Depends on how it is built, I'm sure you will be able to though. I know just as much as you.
Slumpey
Apr 8, 06:53 AM
To avoid any hastle buy the ipad 2 from target. Was able to buy two on different days using their inventory tracker found on the web.. They don't hastle you with service plans, unnecessary accessories, etc which best buy does.
Sent from my HTC Incredible using Tapatalk
Sent from my HTC Incredible using Tapatalk
Derekasaurus
Jul 20, 05:18 PM
If you want wild speculation, here goes.... Apple might use the Conroe and ConroeXE in the first Mac Pros and then add in support for Kentsfield (quad) when it becomes available. This could well be the reason why Intel has brought forward the release of Kentsfield.
Apple is playing with the big boys now. Intel moved up Kentsfield in response to AMD's 4x4, not anything Apple might do. Intel sells hundreds of millions of CPUs per year; Apple's demand is barely above the noise.
Apple is playing with the big boys now. Intel moved up Kentsfield in response to AMD's 4x4, not anything Apple might do. Intel sells hundreds of millions of CPUs per year; Apple's demand is barely above the noise.
yoak
Apr 11, 08:28 AM
Then that just begs the question, "why haven't these people left already?" FCP has been fairly stagnant for years. There are plenty of other alternatives, so doesn't that kinda make them fanboyish too for sticking it out when up to this point Apple has given zero hints about when or how it will take FCP to the next level?
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
It's costly to change. It takes time to learn new software, time that could be spent working instead. Then it's all the money already invested in the platform.
At least here, premiere is not really an option if you work in broadcast or film since everyone either use final cut or avid
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
It's costly to change. It takes time to learn new software, time that could be spent working instead. Then it's all the money already invested in the platform.
At least here, premiere is not really an option if you work in broadcast or film since everyone either use final cut or avid
balamw
Apr 6, 03:59 PM
Apple's iPhone debacle
debacle? The debacle that's sucking 51% of the profit in the entire smartphone industry? http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/01/31/apple-is-still-sucking-most-of-the-profit-out-of-the-mobile-phone-business/
Market share isn't everything.
B
debacle? The debacle that's sucking 51% of the profit in the entire smartphone industry? http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/01/31/apple-is-still-sucking-most-of-the-profit-out-of-the-mobile-phone-business/
Market share isn't everything.
B
Mr-Stabby
Mar 26, 10:08 PM
Speaking of the server part, a lot of people have mentioned SMB. On a related note, i noticed in some of the screenshots i've seen that in 'Server Admin' AFP has disappeared as a service too. Does anybody know if the AFP Server still exists in Lion? There is a File Sharing option in the new server manager, but as far as i can see (i haven't got a copy, just seen pics) it's a bit lacking in features.
FFTT
Aug 6, 02:47 AM
I think we'll see at least some attention given to Pro Apps beings
that this is a developers conference.
It's high time for a new MacPro Workstation along with applications that take full advantage of the hardware's improved capabilities.
If wishes were horses, I'd hope for a new more user friendly
Logic Pro 8 with greater attention to ease of use for live recording. Hopefully Apple will release a UB version so us PPC
users can enjoy all the same improvements to some degree.
I'm not sure what to expect on the video side Final Cut Extreme?
Shake, Motion, Soundtrack?
Anyway, I think the focus of this event will be for the Pro's
that this is a developers conference.
It's high time for a new MacPro Workstation along with applications that take full advantage of the hardware's improved capabilities.
If wishes were horses, I'd hope for a new more user friendly
Logic Pro 8 with greater attention to ease of use for live recording. Hopefully Apple will release a UB version so us PPC
users can enjoy all the same improvements to some degree.
I'm not sure what to expect on the video side Final Cut Extreme?
Shake, Motion, Soundtrack?
Anyway, I think the focus of this event will be for the Pro's
Cameront9
Aug 7, 05:48 PM
Also a very good point, so I need a bigger main HD for my MacBookPro (the new Seagate 160GB becomes interesting) for Time Machine, but i still need to back the hole thing up to an external HD in case of a HD crash (I had 2 in the last 8 months!). So Tine Machine doesn't make Backups obsolete, I didn't even think of that up to now. Hmmm..
They way I understand it, Time Machine is SUPPOSED to be used with an external...the page on the Leopard site even has an icon of an iMac connected to an External. I'm sure you can use your Internal drive if you want, but I don't see the point of that.
They way I understand it, Time Machine is SUPPOSED to be used with an external...the page on the Leopard site even has an icon of an iMac connected to an External. I'm sure you can use your Internal drive if you want, but I don't see the point of that.
epitaphic
Sep 13, 07:59 AM
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.
probably due to latency involved in distributing the load across the two processors. that's the same problem a single Clovertown would have. Only true quads wouldn't suffer from these problems (earliest seems to be Harpertown in don't know if there are any non-MCM Xeons scheduled before then)
probably due to latency involved in distributing the load across the two processors. that's the same problem a single Clovertown would have. Only true quads wouldn't suffer from these problems (earliest seems to be Harpertown in don't know if there are any non-MCM Xeons scheduled before then)
BlizzardBomb
Aug 27, 05:37 AM
For a desktop machine those iMac specs are utterly pathetic. A X1600 in 2007? Heck, it was a mediocre card 6 months ago, let alone in 6 months time. A crappy 2Mb cache C2D and both slow as hell compared to what every other desktop manufacturer will be offering?
Crappy 2MB? LOL! So that automatically makes the current iMacs crap. And an X1650 Pro is a brand new card? 600 MHz core/ 700 MHz memory clocks (Apple will probably underclock it though :p) and 12 pixel pipes and great bang-for-buck makes the X1650 Pro the card of choice.
The iMac is a desktop computer and Apple's only desktop computer. It should offer desktop performance, end of. What use is a crippled desktop, with all the problems of a mobile form factor but none of the advantages, to anyone? You might as well buy a Macbook.
You mean only all-in-one. And how is it crippled? You want the GMA 950 from a MacBook? :p
What would be competitive:
MB: 1.83 and 2.0Ghz Merom, Integrated graphics
MBP: 2-2.33Ghz Merom, X1800
iMac 2.4-2.66Ghz Conroe, X1800 and LCD res upgrade
Mac Mini: 1.83Ghz Allendale (going to be much cheaper than Merom, so if they can they will put one in) Integrated graphics
Mac Pro: Dual 2.0-3.0Ghz Xeons
MB: What I said
MBP: What I said
iMac: You'll be pushing up prices as well as getting into Mac Pro's territory. A low-end X1800 is a possibilty but considering Apple's track record for graphics cards, unlikely.
Mac Mini: If you like liquid Mac Minis then sure :) I have even suggested that an Allendale Core 2 Duo along with a 3.5" HD should be put in the Mini but it would require a case redesign.
Mac Pro: It's already like that.
P.S. And you obviously didn't read what I said about cost of going from a 1.83 GHz Yonah to a 2.4 Ghz Conroe.
Crappy 2MB? LOL! So that automatically makes the current iMacs crap. And an X1650 Pro is a brand new card? 600 MHz core/ 700 MHz memory clocks (Apple will probably underclock it though :p) and 12 pixel pipes and great bang-for-buck makes the X1650 Pro the card of choice.
The iMac is a desktop computer and Apple's only desktop computer. It should offer desktop performance, end of. What use is a crippled desktop, with all the problems of a mobile form factor but none of the advantages, to anyone? You might as well buy a Macbook.
You mean only all-in-one. And how is it crippled? You want the GMA 950 from a MacBook? :p
What would be competitive:
MB: 1.83 and 2.0Ghz Merom, Integrated graphics
MBP: 2-2.33Ghz Merom, X1800
iMac 2.4-2.66Ghz Conroe, X1800 and LCD res upgrade
Mac Mini: 1.83Ghz Allendale (going to be much cheaper than Merom, so if they can they will put one in) Integrated graphics
Mac Pro: Dual 2.0-3.0Ghz Xeons
MB: What I said
MBP: What I said
iMac: You'll be pushing up prices as well as getting into Mac Pro's territory. A low-end X1800 is a possibilty but considering Apple's track record for graphics cards, unlikely.
Mac Mini: If you like liquid Mac Minis then sure :) I have even suggested that an Allendale Core 2 Duo along with a 3.5" HD should be put in the Mini but it would require a case redesign.
Mac Pro: It's already like that.
P.S. And you obviously didn't read what I said about cost of going from a 1.83 GHz Yonah to a 2.4 Ghz Conroe.
err404
Apr 25, 04:07 PM
With that and other simple info I can find out where you work, where you bank, where you live, what time you usually get home...
Have you looked at the actual data? I doubt it could be used to determine any of those things.
First it logs tower locations, not your location. This means that the data points can be off by miles.
Next the towers are not logged every you are in range. In fact weeks or months can go by between data point refreshes. This makes the data useless for observing user movement trends.
Lastly the data contains a lot of anomalies that further cloud the results. I have data on my phone from nearby cities that I have never visited, and some even hundreds of miles away.
Have you looked at the actual data? I doubt it could be used to determine any of those things.
First it logs tower locations, not your location. This means that the data points can be off by miles.
Next the towers are not logged every you are in range. In fact weeks or months can go by between data point refreshes. This makes the data useless for observing user movement trends.
Lastly the data contains a lot of anomalies that further cloud the results. I have data on my phone from nearby cities that I have never visited, and some even hundreds of miles away.
mlmathews
Apr 11, 11:25 AM
My 3Gs contract ends in June and Apple will be pushing it's luck for me to go half a year without me being tempted to jump platforms instead of waiting for the iPhone 5.
waldobushman
Mar 26, 04:40 PM
It's this mentality that makes me smile.
Without knowing any of the details as to what the final shipping version will be, mezmerized (hypnotized ?) by Apple, enthusiasts are ready to pay whatever Apple demands for the product.
I get to sit back without any effort, and watch with delight as they pour the money into Apples coffers. In turn, my vast amount of Apple stock climbs higher & higher as they brag about Apples Billions.
Their blind trust pays me well. Thanks Apple !
Of course one should upgrade to the next OS X release. Apple makes substantial changes in each major release; if not functionally, then in refactoring code for future enhancements. I'll wait until it is known to be stable, and know that the software I use will run under the new version.
Apple is not MS. I stayed with Windows XP until Windows 7 was reasonably stable. The only reason to not move to the new OS would be lack of support for current hardware. Not likely to happen with Lion.
Without knowing any of the details as to what the final shipping version will be, mezmerized (hypnotized ?) by Apple, enthusiasts are ready to pay whatever Apple demands for the product.
I get to sit back without any effort, and watch with delight as they pour the money into Apples coffers. In turn, my vast amount of Apple stock climbs higher & higher as they brag about Apples Billions.
Their blind trust pays me well. Thanks Apple !
Of course one should upgrade to the next OS X release. Apple makes substantial changes in each major release; if not functionally, then in refactoring code for future enhancements. I'll wait until it is known to be stable, and know that the software I use will run under the new version.
Apple is not MS. I stayed with Windows XP until Windows 7 was reasonably stable. The only reason to not move to the new OS would be lack of support for current hardware. Not likely to happen with Lion.
Leoff
Sep 19, 07:28 AM
Sorry but I've heard this so many times it gets pretty annoying. Dont assume to know what ppl want to use their Macbooks for. I want to use it for music production which can be very intensive on the processor, other people for graphics etc where a few seconds shaved off processing times when added up many times can make quite a difference to productivity.
Also, when the new chips come out it will instantly knock a chunk off the resell value - yes this is always the way with technology but buying when an update is coming soon seems silly.
It gets annoying. Why? Because it's true and most people don't want to admit it.
In a few cases here and there, the extra processor power/speed is going to help. But for a majority of people buying a MacBook, they're not going to be burning home-made DVD's, doing intense Music compositions, or using it for hard-core gaming. They're going to SURF and WRITE.
As for the "resale" value, again, most people who are buying a used MacBook are NOT going to ask "is it a Merom?" They're going to ask how nice the case is, how much use it's gotten, and how much it is, and that's it.
Everybody likes to play "ooo, I'm the hard-core computing whiz and I need the BEST out there", but I bet you if you took an honest poll out there of everyone who's answered this thread, you'd find at least 75% these Apple fans have no need for for the extra speed, they just want it because it's "cool" and "fast" and it's the latest thing out there.
Also, when the new chips come out it will instantly knock a chunk off the resell value - yes this is always the way with technology but buying when an update is coming soon seems silly.
It gets annoying. Why? Because it's true and most people don't want to admit it.
In a few cases here and there, the extra processor power/speed is going to help. But for a majority of people buying a MacBook, they're not going to be burning home-made DVD's, doing intense Music compositions, or using it for hard-core gaming. They're going to SURF and WRITE.
As for the "resale" value, again, most people who are buying a used MacBook are NOT going to ask "is it a Merom?" They're going to ask how nice the case is, how much use it's gotten, and how much it is, and that's it.
Everybody likes to play "ooo, I'm the hard-core computing whiz and I need the BEST out there", but I bet you if you took an honest poll out there of everyone who's answered this thread, you'd find at least 75% these Apple fans have no need for for the extra speed, they just want it because it's "cool" and "fast" and it's the latest thing out there.
takao
Dec 7, 05:04 PM
Keep that Lotus, you can use it for the British Lightweight race.
ah the british lightweight .. i remembered it much much harder from gt4 .. since this time around lightweight just means being under 1200 kg and british ;) so my 300 kW TVR was qualified which of course smoked the competition
that said i find it stil ldissapointing that opposed to gt4 you can't difference between imperial and metric measurements more seperate
which means either mp/h and HP or km/h and kW
which is unfortunate since nobody really uses kW except for taxes ;)
ah the british lightweight .. i remembered it much much harder from gt4 .. since this time around lightweight just means being under 1200 kg and british ;) so my 300 kW TVR was qualified which of course smoked the competition
that said i find it stil ldissapointing that opposed to gt4 you can't difference between imperial and metric measurements more seperate
which means either mp/h and HP or km/h and kW
which is unfortunate since nobody really uses kW except for taxes ;)
takao
Dec 1, 12:46 PM
the difficulty of the special stages/licenses tests is varying a lot .. on some of the 'b'-license tests i had to try 10 times to even get a silver medal edging out those 0.010 of a second and on the 'a' license tests i managed to get 4 gold ratings on the first try and once beating the needed time by more than half a second
as for the second top gear challenge... for me it's next to impossible ... your lotus seem to have tires which seem to slide around corners much more and the AI somehow manages to break much, much, MUCH harder than you can:
i was driving along around 40 meters behind one and went on full brakes when i saw their braking lights and still got disqualified for slamming into their back like a madman ... what gives
i found the first n�rburgring specials much easier than the first top gear challenge
after trying out the nascar challenges: :confused:... honestly they should have rather spent their money on getting more recent street cars ... thanks for having 10+ premium nascar cars :rolleyes:
as for the second top gear challenge... for me it's next to impossible ... your lotus seem to have tires which seem to slide around corners much more and the AI somehow manages to break much, much, MUCH harder than you can:
i was driving along around 40 meters behind one and went on full brakes when i saw their braking lights and still got disqualified for slamming into their back like a madman ... what gives
i found the first n�rburgring specials much easier than the first top gear challenge
after trying out the nascar challenges: :confused:... honestly they should have rather spent their money on getting more recent street cars ... thanks for having 10+ premium nascar cars :rolleyes:
ugp
Jun 23, 05:13 PM
I confirmed today that my store will not have any for release day tomorrow, i got the district managers phone number and left a message about wanting my 184 dollar gift card put on my debit card instead due to false advertising that they would be doing Pre-orders instead of reservations which led me to believe that i would get a phone on release day, as a result i am forced to go camp out at the apple store overnight in 91 degree heat in a few hours with my fingers crossed that i get one. All of this could have been avoided if they didn't post on their twitter on June 9th that they were taking part in release day.
Good luck with that one as that is not going to happen. They did not advertise Pre-Orders. They said reserves only. They told no money from you nor did they hold credit card information on file like Apple does.
Good luck with that one as that is not going to happen. They did not advertise Pre-Orders. They said reserves only. They told no money from you nor did they hold credit card information on file like Apple does.
Bradley W
Aug 7, 10:24 PM
_
RedTomato
Sep 13, 12:36 PM
I read the link above about the ZFS filesystem.
Hmm this could remove a lot of the pain I currently have juggling disks on the cheap.
(I hold a lot of footage of deaf people signing for a project, and don't really have any budget to pay for disk storage. I currently have about 200 GB left on a 1 TB RAID5 system inside a Powermac G3)
It seems the concept of individual volumes will vanish, and instead ZFS creates a common pool of filespace and looks after the checksums etc itself. New drives can just be thrown into the array and ZFS will look after optimising the array I/O.
Mixing 15k rpm speed demon drives with 5400rpm storage hog drives mmmm...
I look forwards to being able to buy a cheap chassis with just a power unit and space for 10 drives, and being able to put that next to my G3, and having ZFS sort out what to do with the 8-9 drives in there.
Something like that hooked up to a Cloverton should give significant HD speedup. Not as much as a ramdisk tho :)
One thing, the article says ZFS can cope with drives being removed from the pool. I'd like to see more detail on that. It surely copes with 1 out of 4 drives failing - what about 3 out of 4? What if 3 x 20GB 15k rpm drives fail and the 1x750GB 5400rpm drive is still up?
Hmm this could remove a lot of the pain I currently have juggling disks on the cheap.
(I hold a lot of footage of deaf people signing for a project, and don't really have any budget to pay for disk storage. I currently have about 200 GB left on a 1 TB RAID5 system inside a Powermac G3)
It seems the concept of individual volumes will vanish, and instead ZFS creates a common pool of filespace and looks after the checksums etc itself. New drives can just be thrown into the array and ZFS will look after optimising the array I/O.
Mixing 15k rpm speed demon drives with 5400rpm storage hog drives mmmm...
I look forwards to being able to buy a cheap chassis with just a power unit and space for 10 drives, and being able to put that next to my G3, and having ZFS sort out what to do with the 8-9 drives in there.
Something like that hooked up to a Cloverton should give significant HD speedup. Not as much as a ramdisk tho :)
One thing, the article says ZFS can cope with drives being removed from the pool. I'd like to see more detail on that. It surely copes with 1 out of 4 drives failing - what about 3 out of 4? What if 3 x 20GB 15k rpm drives fail and the 1x750GB 5400rpm drive is still up?
Nuck81
Dec 10, 11:57 AM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcupwb0ytfTcduqpzH7nMI1kB-aby3BO67dBTXRgFAy9sHBF57G5qGnZpsIMXrtVmp3n97FsujLU6ujJ2dL6wQebhK_2uktRmXdKzflalt-h5qbO8q5EMnCrX-Fh2Fbi6gKhpxcQH8Jj0/s400/Haters_Gonna_Hate_20.jpg
guzhogi
Jul 15, 11:20 AM
Something I liked about the power supply in my beige G3 was that not only did it have a power in socket, but allso a power out one too to a monitor or something.
ssamani
Sep 13, 07:15 PM
DAMN :eek:
so 2-3 years from now are people going to be asking "do I need a quad core or an 8 core macbook? oh yeah I'll mostly be surfing the web and maybe editing a photo once and a while" :rolleyes:
I'll be mostly surfing the web to simultaneously stream multiple TV channels, download HD movies and video chat with friends with a live video substitution background and maybe editing a 16 Megapixel camera phone photo and the odd HD camcorder movie once in a while.
Hey, as Steve said, 128K is more than anyone will ever need...
so 2-3 years from now are people going to be asking "do I need a quad core or an 8 core macbook? oh yeah I'll mostly be surfing the web and maybe editing a photo once and a while" :rolleyes:
I'll be mostly surfing the web to simultaneously stream multiple TV channels, download HD movies and video chat with friends with a live video substitution background and maybe editing a 16 Megapixel camera phone photo and the odd HD camcorder movie once in a while.
Hey, as Steve said, 128K is more than anyone will ever need...
zero2dash
Sep 18, 01:44 PM
Plenty of people ran NT on their desktops.
Admission of your mistakes is a good step in becoming a better person.
Key word being DESKTOPS.
MP machines were server based long before they were included in desktops. I'd like to see where people had dual Xeon based DESKTOPS 'cause I've never seen it. It's not impossible but it's also not a good cost-based answer either. :p
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
I never said otherwise.
The hardware they run on is where it differentiates.
Most people/corporations run server-based OS on servers and workstation-based OS on desktops (or "workstations" in the business world). It's not impossible to run a server OS on a desktop or a workstation OS on a server but it is incredibly stupid.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Bad dual core support? Citations please. I think this is a case where a Mac fan is simply speaking out of ignorance of their "enemy" platform.
I erronously bundled in "dual core" with "sketchy 64-bit support". Don't know why. From what I hear, 64-bit support in XP64 is sketchy because of device driver issues (and drivers not being natively 64-bit). I don't have any true 'dual core' systems myself but my P4 3.0C HT works fine in XP Pro. I apologize for lumping in "dual core" in.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
User Account Protection is a big change. I've seen the list of "new features" and it doesn't do anything for me. UAP is nice...it's just really late. I'm sure there's changes "under the hood" like the ones implemented in XP sp2 to prevent buffer/stack overflows, etc. and I'm sure that's what you're referring to.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
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.
Admission of your mistakes is a good step in becoming a better person.
Key word being DESKTOPS.
MP machines were server based long before they were included in desktops. I'd like to see where people had dual Xeon based DESKTOPS 'cause I've never seen it. It's not impossible but it's also not a good cost-based answer either. :p
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
I never said otherwise.
The hardware they run on is where it differentiates.
Most people/corporations run server-based OS on servers and workstation-based OS on desktops (or "workstations" in the business world). It's not impossible to run a server OS on a desktop or a workstation OS on a server but it is incredibly stupid.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Bad dual core support? Citations please. I think this is a case where a Mac fan is simply speaking out of ignorance of their "enemy" platform.
I erronously bundled in "dual core" with "sketchy 64-bit support". Don't know why. From what I hear, 64-bit support in XP64 is sketchy because of device driver issues (and drivers not being natively 64-bit). I don't have any true 'dual core' systems myself but my P4 3.0C HT works fine in XP Pro. I apologize for lumping in "dual core" in.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
User Account Protection is a big change. I've seen the list of "new features" and it doesn't do anything for me. UAP is nice...it's just really late. I'm sure there's changes "under the hood" like the ones implemented in XP sp2 to prevent buffer/stack overflows, etc. and I'm sure that's what you're referring to.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
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.
rovex
Mar 22, 01:40 PM
Yeah a 50% smaller screen for the same price and less battery life is certainly going to crush the iPad2.
The screen is not 50% smaller. Nice way of making yourself look stupid.
Playbook has that elusive flash support out of the box which every apple fanboy wants to hide under the rug.
OS is more eloquent than iOS.
The screen is not 50% smaller. Nice way of making yourself look stupid.
Playbook has that elusive flash support out of the box which every apple fanboy wants to hide under the rug.
OS is more eloquent than iOS.