Popeye206
Apr 19, 02:10 PM
Is that your vetted legal opinion?
We have a lot of couch lawyers in this group. :rolleyes:
We have a lot of couch lawyers in this group. :rolleyes:
boncellis
Jul 20, 10:22 AM
As far as the name goes, how about the "Mac Quattro Pro." ;) Then maybe Apple could acquire the rights to the software and include it in the iWork suite...
michaelflynn
Apr 6, 02:53 PM
Constant crashes on a Windows machine, eh? I don't see that from feedback I've been hearing. I'm wondering about the specs of those Windows machines you are speaking of (unsupported video card, or not enough RAM perhaps?). Drop by our forum with your issues. Let's see if we can help you troubleshoot your issues: http://forums.adobe.com/community/premiere/premierepro_current
Yes, many of the crashes I've experienced have to do with Matrox cards, but not all of them. My boss is on the Abode and Matrox beta teams, so I will let him deal with the feedback. I think the machines are primarily i7's with 8+GB RAM on Windows 7 64-bit...I don't know for sure though, I'm not well versed in Windows based machines.
Yes, many of the crashes I've experienced have to do with Matrox cards, but not all of them. My boss is on the Abode and Matrox beta teams, so I will let him deal with the feedback. I think the machines are primarily i7's with 8+GB RAM on Windows 7 64-bit...I don't know for sure though, I'm not well versed in Windows based machines.
FF_productions
Aug 15, 01:18 PM
I think I'll stick to the 2.66Ghz and standard graphics card, as FCP and compressor are more CPU intensive I believe.
Premiere Pro, for an example, is starting to use GPU-accelerated effects, I think it's a trend that will soon be coming over to FCP.
I'd get the 2.6 ghz, then add another graphics card in the future if the current one doesn't suffice.
Premiere Pro, for an example, is starting to use GPU-accelerated effects, I think it's a trend that will soon be coming over to FCP.
I'd get the 2.6 ghz, then add another graphics card in the future if the current one doesn't suffice.
mdriftmeyer
Aug 26, 12:37 PM
California, it's replies like this that pisses switchers off, even seasones mac users get upset with these replies. What the hell is Rev A?. What idiot argument is this?. That's it ok for apple to make a ****ed-up product cause it's the first version?. What?.. apple just started making computers that they don't know how to make quality products until they already made the first version?. Apple should be horrified at your suggestion. Imagine if no one bought Rev A (whatever the **** that means) machines from Apple. APPLE WOULD GO BROKE!!. There's always Rev A machines when it comes to computers dude. The next mac pro upgrade will use a new processor, faster, new video, more ram, newer harddrive and becomes rev A cause THEY ARE THE FIRST APPLE PRODUCTS TO USE THE NEW UPGRADED PROCESSOR, NEW HARDDIVE, ETC. Really, stop with this nonsense. You are like the 10th idiotic apple fan I have read using this dumb argument.
Let's make it clear. The first revision of any highly integrated system is produced with an acceptable failure rate. With results coming in, failures recorded and internal testing continuous between the life of the first and second revision you will see a drop in failures in the next revision.
Every item that is in the next revision will have been tested, more flaws removed, etc. No piece of hardware is released with zero defects. [human interference aside such as dropping the product, overheating it, intentionally forcing failure]
If for every 1000 systems shipped approximately 20 fail, after a minimum predicted total hours, this 2% attrition rate is highly desirable. If you can't accept it you can stop using technology, now.
For every ten people bitching on this board about failures there is over 1,000 that don't.
Let's make it clear. The first revision of any highly integrated system is produced with an acceptable failure rate. With results coming in, failures recorded and internal testing continuous between the life of the first and second revision you will see a drop in failures in the next revision.
Every item that is in the next revision will have been tested, more flaws removed, etc. No piece of hardware is released with zero defects. [human interference aside such as dropping the product, overheating it, intentionally forcing failure]
If for every 1000 systems shipped approximately 20 fail, after a minimum predicted total hours, this 2% attrition rate is highly desirable. If you can't accept it you can stop using technology, now.
For every ten people bitching on this board about failures there is over 1,000 that don't.
jessica.
Jun 8, 07:13 PM
That's me!
Nearest Apple Store is 90 minutes away. Nearest Authorized AT&T store that would carry the iPhone is like 60. Radio shack is just 10 minutes.
I'm wondering though, what would be the advantages/disadvantages to buying it at Radio Shack vs AT&T vs The Apple Store? Once I have the item purchased, will I notice any sort of difference what-so-ever?
Cheers.
No advantages. I mean what does it matter? If it's the white Apple bag you want I can send you one. Eventually they become useless.
Nearest Apple Store is 90 minutes away. Nearest Authorized AT&T store that would carry the iPhone is like 60. Radio shack is just 10 minutes.
I'm wondering though, what would be the advantages/disadvantages to buying it at Radio Shack vs AT&T vs The Apple Store? Once I have the item purchased, will I notice any sort of difference what-so-ever?
Cheers.
No advantages. I mean what does it matter? If it's the white Apple bag you want I can send you one. Eventually they become useless.
ugp
Jun 9, 03:03 PM
Went down to Radio Shack today. They are doing a trade in but you're never gonna get the max price they offer unless it's out of the box new. My 3gs has normal wear over the year so they will only give 230 for it.
And I have a feeling trading in prices will drop when the iPhone 4 drops.
Yeah it sucks because we have no way of knowing if the trade in values will drop on launch day or should we trade in the day before. So far employees have no word on them doing so but Radio Shack is notorious for not keeping them in the loop when it comes to important information like this.
And I have a feeling trading in prices will drop when the iPhone 4 drops.
Yeah it sucks because we have no way of knowing if the trade in values will drop on launch day or should we trade in the day before. So far employees have no word on them doing so but Radio Shack is notorious for not keeping them in the loop when it comes to important information like this.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 12:50 AM
I initially supported the Iraq invasion. I believed the Bush Administration's case for WMD's - in particular I was swayed by Colin Powell's presentation to the UN. I believed then, as I do now, that Saddam Hussein's government was arbitrary, cruel, corrupt.
Looking back, it should have been obvious to me that there were a huge number of potential pitfalls - lack of support from Iraqis (and to a lesser extent the international community through the UN) being the most critical. While the initial invasion was predictably successful, the entire issue of post-Saddam Iraq had been poorly thought out - to the extent that it was thought out at all. The result is a tragic disaster of truly epic proportions.
Still, even with this tragedy fresh in our minds (and indeed ongoing along with the war in Afghanistan), I find it impossible to look at the Libyan situation and say "we should not intervene". There is much I do not like about how the my country behaves on the international stage, but in this affair I feel that non-intervention is unconscionable.
Looking back, it should have been obvious to me that there were a huge number of potential pitfalls - lack of support from Iraqis (and to a lesser extent the international community through the UN) being the most critical. While the initial invasion was predictably successful, the entire issue of post-Saddam Iraq had been poorly thought out - to the extent that it was thought out at all. The result is a tragic disaster of truly epic proportions.
Still, even with this tragedy fresh in our minds (and indeed ongoing along with the war in Afghanistan), I find it impossible to look at the Libyan situation and say "we should not intervene". There is much I do not like about how the my country behaves on the international stage, but in this affair I feel that non-intervention is unconscionable.
NJRonbo
Jun 22, 09:05 AM
ugp,
Were there any PINS given in your store?
Please keep us updated. We look forward to it.
Thanks
Were there any PINS given in your store?
Please keep us updated. We look forward to it.
Thanks
AngryCorgi
Apr 6, 04:16 PM
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
wpotere
Apr 27, 01:26 PM
No it's not. It's basically what Mitt Romney put in place in Massachusetts. And he's a (gasp!) Republican!
And.... Having used German healthcare which can be supplemented with private insurance, I'll take it. My needed emergency room visit lasted a whopping 45 min because people could afford to go to a doctor in the morning and everyone was covered.
And.... Having used German healthcare which can be supplemented with private insurance, I'll take it. My needed emergency room visit lasted a whopping 45 min because people could afford to go to a doctor in the morning and everyone was covered.
freeny
Jul 20, 08:10 AM
WOW! Octo cores:eek:
Im due a new computer and every time I hear about whats in the pipeline I bump my purchase date ahead another 4 months:o
Im due a new computer and every time I hear about whats in the pipeline I bump my purchase date ahead another 4 months:o
Grokgod
Jul 28, 06:52 PM
Well we all know how Apple works with when things are due.
Look at the G5 laptop.
Tweak or no tweak, the return will cost money and getting a refurbished is not getting a new one.
CounterPoint: If he is just going to take it back to buy a refurbished one, why take it back.
He allready has it! Thats a roundabout way to work, isnt it?
If you take it back, you wait for the new one, why spend the money for restocking and not get the new one?
The question remains, what are you going to get with a new iMac that you dont have now?
If you were going to get a MacPro, then I would say, my god, return that iMac and get a new MacPro, if not then keep what you got and use it for the next 2 months and enjoy it,, cheers!
Look at the G5 laptop.
Tweak or no tweak, the return will cost money and getting a refurbished is not getting a new one.
CounterPoint: If he is just going to take it back to buy a refurbished one, why take it back.
He allready has it! Thats a roundabout way to work, isnt it?
If you take it back, you wait for the new one, why spend the money for restocking and not get the new one?
The question remains, what are you going to get with a new iMac that you dont have now?
If you were going to get a MacPro, then I would say, my god, return that iMac and get a new MacPro, if not then keep what you got and use it for the next 2 months and enjoy it,, cheers!
wordoflife
Mar 26, 01:52 AM
I won't be updating soon if it will cost $129. Lion wouldn't be worth it to me for that price.
PODshady
Nov 28, 10:24 PM
I think they'll be a long way off getting money from every iPod sold. For a start its such an illogical thing to ask for (Did the music companies ask for money for every CD player or Tape Recorder sold? Nope), plus I suspect the main reason that Microsoft agreed to pay money in the first place is that they needed to get the music labels on board to boost the Zune Music Store, Microsoft was in the weaker position here and I believe the labels exploited that weakness.
If the labels were to go to Apple and demand a royalty on every iPod and threatening to pull their catalogue if they didn't get it, they would actually come off worse than Apple in terms of lost revenue and it's because of this I reckon they haven't a chance...
I agree
If the labels were to go to Apple and demand a royalty on every iPod and threatening to pull their catalogue if they didn't get it, they would actually come off worse than Apple in terms of lost revenue and it's because of this I reckon they haven't a chance...
I agree
hulugu
Mar 18, 10:57 PM
What pacifist ever has a realistic chance of becoming the next "commander-in-chief"?
That's why 5P's contention is so ridiculous.
Candidates must paint themselves as "strong" and capable of leading our military, otherwise there'd be little chance they'd be elected as president.
Foreign adventurism is as American as apple pie, but post-World War II it's become a structural constant that no single president is going to change. Paul talks, but when it came down to actually withdrawing US troops from foreign bases, I seriously doubt that it would go as smoothly as fivepoint and Paul suggest.
It's a worthwhile consideration of Obama that he seems more hawk than dove these days, but I don't see another viable candidate from 2008 that would have done any better because these are difficult and complex problems.
That's why 5P's contention is so ridiculous.
Candidates must paint themselves as "strong" and capable of leading our military, otherwise there'd be little chance they'd be elected as president.
Foreign adventurism is as American as apple pie, but post-World War II it's become a structural constant that no single president is going to change. Paul talks, but when it came down to actually withdrawing US troops from foreign bases, I seriously doubt that it would go as smoothly as fivepoint and Paul suggest.
It's a worthwhile consideration of Obama that he seems more hawk than dove these days, but I don't see another viable candidate from 2008 that would have done any better because these are difficult and complex problems.
Chupa Chupa
Apr 8, 04:59 AM
This is such a B.S. story. Apple to BB is like a minor star in the galaxy; if it goes out few will notice. Remember all those years BB didn't sell Apple products and did fine? Apple just doesn't have that kind of pull with a big box store. And every manufacturer knows that getting stores to behave as they'd like them to is like hearding cats.
Until Apple can get more of its own stores it needs BB more than BB needs it. So I doubt Apple went all hurt or p.o.'d girlfriend on them.
Until Apple can get more of its own stores it needs BB more than BB needs it. So I doubt Apple went all hurt or p.o.'d girlfriend on them.
hansolo669
Mar 31, 10:47 PM
As far as I can tell its still an open source project.
This is the first time a company has made a fully open source mobile device operating system, it's Awsome. However with google placing more control in it's hands (and the projects hands) it will motivate companys to stay current and thus level the os playing field. How many people install updates on their computer? How many on phones? The difference is 1:1000 but that's because the phone forces you too.
On a different note any complaints about button layout need not apply, it takes two seconds to learn a new layout and unless you review divides you won't have to worry about button layouts (how man of you pick up a friends android(or any os) phone WITHOUT looking at the buttons?
This is the first time a company has made a fully open source mobile device operating system, it's Awsome. However with google placing more control in it's hands (and the projects hands) it will motivate companys to stay current and thus level the os playing field. How many people install updates on their computer? How many on phones? The difference is 1:1000 but that's because the phone forces you too.
On a different note any complaints about button layout need not apply, it takes two seconds to learn a new layout and unless you review divides you won't have to worry about button layouts (how man of you pick up a friends android(or any os) phone WITHOUT looking at the buttons?
Tomaz
Aug 7, 04:34 PM
Good lord. Whatever happened to simplicity? It looked like a three ring circus up there today.
Now come on. Time machine? With a picture of outer space and stars? This looks so gimmicky. They are getting to be like Microsoft and just adding new features instead of making things easier and streamlined. Why not just improve the Backup program that comes with .Mac or include it for free? Do we really need another interface? To me it looks like form over function.
Exactly my thoughts!! Looks like a Trekie (how do you write that??) was let loose :D
Now come on. Time machine? With a picture of outer space and stars? This looks so gimmicky. They are getting to be like Microsoft and just adding new features instead of making things easier and streamlined. Why not just improve the Backup program that comes with .Mac or include it for free? Do we really need another interface? To me it looks like form over function.
Exactly my thoughts!! Looks like a Trekie (how do you write that??) was let loose :D
cloudnine
Aug 25, 04:45 PM
maybe if apple wasn't so dead set on making everything as tiny as possible so that nothing had any room to ventilate and in turn, baking inside, there wouldn't be all these problems. i'd be interested to see the performance results of say, a macbook pro with the casing type of a mac pro.
hrm...
then again, i'm no hardware designer so :P *thinking outloud*
hrm...
then again, i'm no hardware designer so :P *thinking outloud*
Peace
Aug 5, 05:15 PM
No MacRumors IRC channel?
http://www.macrumorslive.com/irc/login/
http://www.macrumorslive.com/irc/login/
JMax1
Nov 28, 06:43 PM
"It would be a nice idea."
What does that mean? I have lots of nice ideas for getting money when I didn't do anything.
By this logic, shouldn't Universal also get royalties for every CD player, Cassette player, and radio sold?
Might as well cash in on the giant cash cow that is the iPod :rolleyes:
What does that mean? I have lots of nice ideas for getting money when I didn't do anything.
By this logic, shouldn't Universal also get royalties for every CD player, Cassette player, and radio sold?
Might as well cash in on the giant cash cow that is the iPod :rolleyes:
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.
Pro31
Apr 6, 02:10 PM
If you bought 2 Xooms would you have a Mazda?
No comments:
Post a Comment