chimerical
Nov 28, 07:42 PM
(Did the music companies ask for money for every CD player or Tape Recorder sold? Nope)
Actually, yes. I believe that CD-R/CD-RW blank discs and recorders have had some type of royalties fee added to the price, which gets passed down to us consumers. It's frustrating.
Actually, yes. I believe that CD-R/CD-RW blank discs and recorders have had some type of royalties fee added to the price, which gets passed down to us consumers. It's frustrating.
ingenious
Aug 11, 10:16 AM
I really hope Apple comes out with a phone that's an awesome phone, music player, and smart phone... Is that asking too much?
Oh, and it needs to cost US$200 or less (preferably less). :D :rolleyes:
edit: after reading article, it looks pretty promising! :)
Oh, and it needs to cost US$200 or less (preferably less). :D :rolleyes:
edit: after reading article, it looks pretty promising! :)
Eidorian
Mar 26, 10:25 AM
I will wait to see what Spotlight is like.
Leoff
Sep 19, 08:25 AM
You may be right to a certain extent, but l i assumed that most people who want a Macbook Pro are going to be using it for intensive stuff - I was under the impressions that Macs are the platform of choice for a lot of graphics professionals etc so the high end line would have a lot of those kind of ppl buying. Granted the difference in speed will probably be fairly minimal, but when you are spending a load of cash on a top-of-the line notebook, why shouldnt you expect to have the latest and greatest technology available? It also seems quite likely they might either make them cheaper, or offer more RAM on the base model etc. so buying now unless you really have to seems foolish.
Im also not sure about your point on the resale value, i would imagine pro users probably would be concerned about which processor it had in it.
Note that I, and the previous commenter who I quoted, have been talking about MacBooks, not MacBook Pros.
Im also not sure about your point on the resale value, i would imagine pro users probably would be concerned about which processor it had in it.
Note that I, and the previous commenter who I quoted, have been talking about MacBooks, not MacBook Pros.
pocketrockets
Aug 26, 11:33 AM
Does anyone know what happens when you dial Applecare (1800 275 2273) and hit 9? I accidentally did that...
And also, I registered my Applecare and when I go to apple.com/support to see how many days left on the warranty, it says 90 from when the last service was. How come it doesnt say the hundreds of days I should have left.
And also, I registered my Applecare and when I go to apple.com/support to see how many days left on the warranty, it says 90 from when the last service was. How come it doesnt say the hundreds of days I should have left.
Stella
Nov 29, 09:31 AM
Are you spending as much on music as you did years ago?
Definitely not! Because a lot of music is pure crap. Simple. I'm not spending $1 on music I don't like.
Dump the manufactured bands and the quality may rise again.
Universal already get payments from blank CDs et al - there is no need for them to start getting payments per iPod sold. Pure utter greed.
Apple could argue by having the iPod on sale, it is Apple who are in fact driving music sales. However, I would NOT like Apple to start having a cut of music company profits. That would be wrong too.
Definitely not! Because a lot of music is pure crap. Simple. I'm not spending $1 on music I don't like.
Dump the manufactured bands and the quality may rise again.
Universal already get payments from blank CDs et al - there is no need for them to start getting payments per iPod sold. Pure utter greed.
Apple could argue by having the iPod on sale, it is Apple who are in fact driving music sales. However, I would NOT like Apple to start having a cut of music company profits. That would be wrong too.
Gasu E.
Jul 14, 02:43 PM
Did you see my above post? Great minds think a like... ;)
Logically speaking, weak minds would also think "a like".
Logically speaking, weak minds would also think "a like".
radiohead14
Mar 22, 02:59 PM
We are still missing an 8" Galaxy Tab to complete the 7", 9", and 10" line of tablets.
7", 8.9", 10" :)
i'm looking forward to reviews of that 10" samsung galaxy tab. the hardware seems sleeker than the original design they previously introduced. i hope it still has dual stereo speakers on both sides. i'm guessing that they reduced down from 8mp to 3mp camera due to the price matching and not because it's thinner, since phones can easily fit 8mp cams in their slim forms. i also hope that they don't mess it up with that touchwiz interface, as far as updating the os. at this stage of honeycomb, you'd figure that google will be rolling quite a few updates to it. although, engadget reported that there will be versions that will come vanilla.
7", 8.9", 10" :)
i'm looking forward to reviews of that 10" samsung galaxy tab. the hardware seems sleeker than the original design they previously introduced. i hope it still has dual stereo speakers on both sides. i'm guessing that they reduced down from 8mp to 3mp camera due to the price matching and not because it's thinner, since phones can easily fit 8mp cams in their slim forms. i also hope that they don't mess it up with that touchwiz interface, as far as updating the os. at this stage of honeycomb, you'd figure that google will be rolling quite a few updates to it. although, engadget reported that there will be versions that will come vanilla.
john123
Sep 19, 09:50 AM
but I want to engage with ppl here in a friendly and warm atmosphere.
The tone has not been warm to this point. Read the first few pages of the posts. There was a lot of Apple-blasting on pretty silly grounds. It's not like it's months and months later (a pattern we used to have with Apple all the time). It's a matter of a couple weeks -- MAX. Like I said, you and others can wait if you want. Heck, I have a MB and a MBP and am probably going to sell the MBP soon and wait for a revision myself. But the implication that many posts had, such as that the world was coming to an end, was pretty darn ridiculous.
The tone has not been warm to this point. Read the first few pages of the posts. There was a lot of Apple-blasting on pretty silly grounds. It's not like it's months and months later (a pattern we used to have with Apple all the time). It's a matter of a couple weeks -- MAX. Like I said, you and others can wait if you want. Heck, I have a MB and a MBP and am probably going to sell the MBP soon and wait for a revision myself. But the implication that many posts had, such as that the world was coming to an end, was pretty darn ridiculous.
Multimedia
Jul 27, 11:48 PM
Duplicate.
radiohead14
Apr 6, 10:47 AM
i would love a refreshed SB 11" MBA with thunderbolt, backlit keyboard, at least 7 hours of battery, and lion. apple: you could take my money right away if you come through with this!
talkingfuture
Apr 6, 10:09 AM
Sounds good, might be a bit nearer to buying one by then too!
cyberdogl2
Aug 27, 04:59 PM
hmmm... the funny part is that it's been done to death.* that's the bit.* i guess you don't see it as funny.* ever heard of a reoccuring joke with a little aphormism mixed in?
Nuvi
Apr 5, 10:36 PM
Nobody's using Blu-Ray, in my experience. It's just another way of sucking money out of home consumers. Everything's done online in terms of delivery...'
Wake up and smell the coffee... BR is the main distribution method for paid HD content in the world. Also the quality is far better then with any download service.
Wake up and smell the coffee... BR is the main distribution method for paid HD content in the world. Also the quality is far better then with any download service.
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 6, 10:27 AM
This is what I've been waiting for. Apple is about to get a chunk of my bank account lol. Upgrading from an early 2008 MBP
drsmithy
Sep 13, 08:41 PM
Mac OS X distributes threads and processes across cores/CPUs to optimize performance already. (Subject to some limitations, as noted already.)
[...]
(Note: I keep specifying 'Mac' here. There is a reason. Windows isn't as good at multithreading/processing yet...)
Uh, no. Windows NT is better at multithreading - and particularly multiprocessor scheduling - largely because it's been doing it for a lot longer and on a lot more powerful hardware. NT was running on quad-processor machines a decade ago.
Prior to 10.4, OS X had roughly the same level of SMP support Windows NT had back around the 1993 - 95 timeframe, with Windows NT 3.x.
The improvements in 10.4 start to put it in the ballpark of NT 4.0, ca. 1996.
10.5 will probably put it on par with Windows 2000, maybe XP.
[...]
(Note: I keep specifying 'Mac' here. There is a reason. Windows isn't as good at multithreading/processing yet...)
Uh, no. Windows NT is better at multithreading - and particularly multiprocessor scheduling - largely because it's been doing it for a lot longer and on a lot more powerful hardware. NT was running on quad-processor machines a decade ago.
Prior to 10.4, OS X had roughly the same level of SMP support Windows NT had back around the 1993 - 95 timeframe, with Windows NT 3.x.
The improvements in 10.4 start to put it in the ballpark of NT 4.0, ca. 1996.
10.5 will probably put it on par with Windows 2000, maybe XP.
Stridder44
Jul 27, 11:03 AM
For Great Justice!!
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 3, 02:56 PM
I'm think i'm a 15 A-spec, and i just started B-spec to save up money for the Ferrari and Lambo races in the Pro series. I've only done a few spec events, but i've got all gold in B and A licenses as well as 9/10 gold (one silver) in I-C license.
I find the license tests to be more fun now that they arent mandatory. They seem easier too. In GT4 it was work just to pass some of them, but in GT5 i find that i always get silver or bronze on my first attempt. Gold is a bit of work sometimes though.
I find the license tests to be more fun now that they arent mandatory. They seem easier too. In GT4 it was work just to pass some of them, but in GT5 i find that i always get silver or bronze on my first attempt. Gold is a bit of work sometimes though.
Kevin Monahan
Apr 6, 02:20 PM
Unless you have an extreme PC...Adobe makes no sense (unless you are using the Quadro nVidia cards in a Mac Pro). Sure, the Merc engine increases performance for a few transitions and filters....but rendering is still necessary in MOST cases!
Premiere Pro makes sense in a lot of cases for Mac users. It makes the most sense for After Effects artists, like yourself, as you can dynamic link directly to After Effects from the Premiere Pro timeline. As you pointed out, Macs work great with Premiere Pro and the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 card. More and more cards are being supported as time moves forward. Want a certain card to add Mercury Playback engine hardware acceleration? Make a request here: http://www.adobe.com/go/wish
Not sure what you mean by "unless you have an extreme PC, Adobe makes no sense?" Yes, you need more RAM and a decent NVIDIA card to make Premiere Pro really fly on a PC-it's a 64 bit application-but even modest PCs do just fine with Premiere Pro. If Apple puts out a 64 bit application, you can bet that you should be looking at upgrading your Mac with a lot more RAM, more cores on the GPU, etc., as well. Need more info on tuning your system with Premiere Pro? Watch this: http://tv.adobe.com/watch/learn-premiere-pro-cs5/optimize-a-computer-for-mercury-playback-engine/
You wrote that rendering is still necessary in most cases. Really? What kind of system are you on? I've never had to render, even on my '09 MacBook Pro with no NVIDIA card and the Mercury Playback Engine in software mode.
You say that CUDA accelerates only a "few" video filters and transitions? There are a lot more than that! Upgrade to Premiere Pro 5.0.3 and you'll see the following GPU accelerated effects:
- Alpha Adjust
- Basic 3D
- Black & White
- Brightness & Contrast
- Color Balance (RGB)
- Color Pass
- Color Replace
- Crop
- Drop Shadow
- Extract
- Fast Color Corrector
- Feather Edges
- Gamma Correction
- Garbage Matte (4, 8, 16)
- Gaussian Blur
- Horizontal Flip
- Levels
- Luma Corrector
- Luma Curve
- Noise
- Proc Amp
- RGB Curves
- RGB Color Corrector
- Sharpen
- Three-way Color Corrector
- Timecode
- Tint
- Track Matte
- Ultra Keyer
- Video Limiter
- Vertical Flip
Premiere Pro makes sense in a lot of cases for Mac users. It makes the most sense for After Effects artists, like yourself, as you can dynamic link directly to After Effects from the Premiere Pro timeline. As you pointed out, Macs work great with Premiere Pro and the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 card. More and more cards are being supported as time moves forward. Want a certain card to add Mercury Playback engine hardware acceleration? Make a request here: http://www.adobe.com/go/wish
Not sure what you mean by "unless you have an extreme PC, Adobe makes no sense?" Yes, you need more RAM and a decent NVIDIA card to make Premiere Pro really fly on a PC-it's a 64 bit application-but even modest PCs do just fine with Premiere Pro. If Apple puts out a 64 bit application, you can bet that you should be looking at upgrading your Mac with a lot more RAM, more cores on the GPU, etc., as well. Need more info on tuning your system with Premiere Pro? Watch this: http://tv.adobe.com/watch/learn-premiere-pro-cs5/optimize-a-computer-for-mercury-playback-engine/
You wrote that rendering is still necessary in most cases. Really? What kind of system are you on? I've never had to render, even on my '09 MacBook Pro with no NVIDIA card and the Mercury Playback Engine in software mode.
You say that CUDA accelerates only a "few" video filters and transitions? There are a lot more than that! Upgrade to Premiere Pro 5.0.3 and you'll see the following GPU accelerated effects:
- Alpha Adjust
- Basic 3D
- Black & White
- Brightness & Contrast
- Color Balance (RGB)
- Color Pass
- Color Replace
- Crop
- Drop Shadow
- Extract
- Fast Color Corrector
- Feather Edges
- Gamma Correction
- Garbage Matte (4, 8, 16)
- Gaussian Blur
- Horizontal Flip
- Levels
- Luma Corrector
- Luma Curve
- Noise
- Proc Amp
- RGB Curves
- RGB Color Corrector
- Sharpen
- Three-way Color Corrector
- Timecode
- Tint
- Track Matte
- Ultra Keyer
- Video Limiter
- Vertical Flip
Glideslope
Mar 31, 06:14 PM
I've really loved my experience with Android so far. I've had an iPhone and a iPhone 3G and I am an iPhone developer.... yet I use Android.
Android will always be "open source" and this is not inconsistent with Google applying more control to stem inoperable fragmentation. These two ideas are not at odds.
I cannot wait for Google to do what I think Amazon is currently trying to do with their new App. Store.
That said I really like the new iPad 2, but sadly my next purchase would prolly be a i7 MacBook Pro.
Fragmentation, more control, more fragmentation, more control, more......
Microsoft, Vista, more Microsoft, more Vista, more.....
Too late. What comes after Honey Comb will be the test. Honey Comb = Mobile Vista. :apple:
Android will always be "open source" and this is not inconsistent with Google applying more control to stem inoperable fragmentation. These two ideas are not at odds.
I cannot wait for Google to do what I think Amazon is currently trying to do with their new App. Store.
That said I really like the new iPad 2, but sadly my next purchase would prolly be a i7 MacBook Pro.
Fragmentation, more control, more fragmentation, more control, more......
Microsoft, Vista, more Microsoft, more Vista, more.....
Too late. What comes after Honey Comb will be the test. Honey Comb = Mobile Vista. :apple:
mwswami
Jul 21, 05:00 PM
One way to get eight cores is to get 4 Mac Minis (just wait for the lowest model to become dual core), stack them up, and put them on a KVM. You get 8 cores, and 4 optical drives for *cheap*. Just a thought.;)
Sorry, I just noticed that the $599 models doesn't have a SuperDrive. BUT going to the $799 model may still make a lot of sense for you. All the work units are independent of each other and hence easily distributable to the Minis form your existing PowerMac. Hey, you could even figure out how to use XGrid for this. I would love to hear from you if you research this further.
Sorry, I just noticed that the $599 models doesn't have a SuperDrive. BUT going to the $799 model may still make a lot of sense for you. All the work units are independent of each other and hence easily distributable to the Minis form your existing PowerMac. Hey, you could even figure out how to use XGrid for this. I would love to hear from you if you research this further.
epitaphic
Aug 18, 11:46 PM
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
QCassidy352
Jul 14, 02:32 PM
intersting that the price differences are quite large. I was also hoping for an all-quad line up and a case redesign. I've never liked the look of the G5.
Arn/powers that be - can you tell us whether or not you consider this source to be reliable? Have you ever heard from them in the past?
Arn/powers that be - can you tell us whether or not you consider this source to be reliable? Have you ever heard from them in the past?
citizenzen
Mar 22, 06:54 PM
As others have pointed out, killing a peaceful protester (or non-involved innocent civilian for that matter) is never justified.
I'm not trying to justify it.
What I'm asking is, does it justify the action that we're taking?
That, I'm not sold on.
I'm not trying to justify it.
What I'm asking is, does it justify the action that we're taking?
That, I'm not sold on.
No comments:
Post a Comment