MikeD23nu
Apr 6, 06:26 PM
I just got my low end 13" MacBook Air with 4GB of RAM today too. Should I keep it?
Me too! It's killing me...don't know what to do.
Me too! It's killing me...don't know what to do.
milo
Aug 17, 09:21 AM
You're right. I'm extremely unimpressed that the fastest xeon only days old is actually slower mhz for mhz than a G5 that is pushing 4 year old technology. Really sad.
But overall it's not. Whenever you change chips, you'll probably always find a benchmark that favors the old one. Just because one app isn't faster doesn't mean the new chip is slower.
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
What are you talking about? The xeon is faster in every native benchmark, the only exception is one render where the slower xeon tied the G5. If you do indeed look at the average specs, the xeons blow away the G5.
Looks like the Xeons got killed by the G5 in Word in their tests.
Because it's running under rosetta, ram has nothing to do with it.
It's odd, seeing as Mac's are still the choice for many musicians that some kind of specs are never given that would be of interest to musicians. The released figures don't do much for me. I'd like to know the polyphony improvements say for Kontakt under both systems in Digital Performer 5.
There have been Logic benchmarks elsewhere, and they're pretty impressive. 1.4-1.5x improvements, pretty nice considering how fast the quad is already for audio plugins.
But overall it's not. Whenever you change chips, you'll probably always find a benchmark that favors the old one. Just because one app isn't faster doesn't mean the new chip is slower.
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
What are you talking about? The xeon is faster in every native benchmark, the only exception is one render where the slower xeon tied the G5. If you do indeed look at the average specs, the xeons blow away the G5.
Looks like the Xeons got killed by the G5 in Word in their tests.
Because it's running under rosetta, ram has nothing to do with it.
It's odd, seeing as Mac's are still the choice for many musicians that some kind of specs are never given that would be of interest to musicians. The released figures don't do much for me. I'd like to know the polyphony improvements say for Kontakt under both systems in Digital Performer 5.
There have been Logic benchmarks elsewhere, and they're pretty impressive. 1.4-1.5x improvements, pretty nice considering how fast the quad is already for audio plugins.
Michaelgtrusa
Apr 25, 03:56 PM
Not surprised.
dernhelm
Nov 29, 07:24 AM
Perhaps that lost money isn't due to pirating like the execs want you to think.
Sure it is. Its just that the everyday Joe isn't the pirate, the music distribution executives are. And there's only room for one pirate ship in this industry.
Sure it is. Its just that the everyday Joe isn't the pirate, the music distribution executives are. And there's only room for one pirate ship in this industry.
the vj
Apr 25, 02:55 PM
Jobs.... you better say sorry dude. :rolleyes:
happyduck42
Apr 19, 02:08 PM
Alright, I was originally going to take Apple's side on this, since I could clearly see it looks a lot like iOS, but having looked at Samsung's F700, I don' think Apple has any right to sue..
Although the Samsung F700 has very simple icons, Apple clearly has the same placement of icons, even looking at the bottom you find the four dock like icons..
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9559/samsungf700cellular.jpg
I'd say that Apple copied Samsung :P.. Honestly I'm not one to take sides just because I like Apple Products, I just think its wrong to sue since Samsung clearly had this type of UI first.. Apple has no right to sue..
That phone was announced Feb Just after the iPhone. http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_f700-1849.php
"Announced 2007, February. Released December"
Although the Samsung F700 has very simple icons, Apple clearly has the same placement of icons, even looking at the bottom you find the four dock like icons..
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9559/samsungf700cellular.jpg
I'd say that Apple copied Samsung :P.. Honestly I'm not one to take sides just because I like Apple Products, I just think its wrong to sue since Samsung clearly had this type of UI first.. Apple has no right to sue..
That phone was announced Feb Just after the iPhone. http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_f700-1849.php
"Announced 2007, February. Released December"
dethmaShine
Mar 31, 02:41 PM
Google is going to define 'open' in a way it benefits them and their advertising crusade.
I remember those days of the G1 on vodafone (in the UK, I guess?) such horrible, sluggish phones; google shipping out an incomplete product were at the mercy of Carriers and Manufacturers and now they don't give a ****.
Another less in the light: Never partner with Google. They have always been like this.
I remember those days of the G1 on vodafone (in the UK, I guess?) such horrible, sluggish phones; google shipping out an incomplete product were at the mercy of Carriers and Manufacturers and now they don't give a ****.
Another less in the light: Never partner with Google. They have always been like this.
AppleKrate
Sep 19, 05:29 AM
Why do you even visit this site? You are doing nothing but criticising Apple and their products. Please leave.
Ps. If I was Admin I would ban you :p
You guys crack me UP! Peace and love, they're only machines (ah, but what machines...) :)
Ps. If I was Admin I would ban you :p
You guys crack me UP! Peace and love, they're only machines (ah, but what machines...) :)
milo
Sep 13, 07:05 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet.
Not true, according to the article. They said it wasn't easy, but they were able to max out all 8 cores. You can see the Activity Monitor graph all filled up.
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
That's how it is now, at least with multiple apps. I bet it's possible to program for an unspecified number of multiple cores, and there may be apps doing it already.
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
Read the article again, they WERE able to max them out, just not easily. Based on that, OSX seems to be able to scale already. Developers just need to start writing apps that are more MP friendly.
Not true, according to the article. They said it wasn't easy, but they were able to max out all 8 cores. You can see the Activity Monitor graph all filled up.
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
That's how it is now, at least with multiple apps. I bet it's possible to program for an unspecified number of multiple cores, and there may be apps doing it already.
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
Read the article again, they WERE able to max them out, just not easily. Based on that, OSX seems to be able to scale already. Developers just need to start writing apps that are more MP friendly.
ergle2
Sep 14, 08:42 PM
I think you're a bit arse-about-face there. Someone else has already pointed out the differences between XP and Windows 2003 aren't trivial, so I won't go into that. However, if you're sufficient vintage, you should remember the "outrage" when someone demonstrated that you could turn NT 4 Workstation into NT 4 Server (including the boot and login screens) just by changing a few Registry settings (although the part that usually doesn't get said is that those Registry settings then triggered a whole range of different tuning settings for the scheduler, memory management, etc). NT 3.5 & 3.51 were the same, and IIRC, NT 3.1 didn't even have a "Server" version.
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Quite a few bits of XP Pro functionality can be enabled in XP home with some minor hex editing, too.
And of course, NT started as a reimplementation of VMS for a failed Intel RISC CPU...
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Quite a few bits of XP Pro functionality can be enabled in XP home with some minor hex editing, too.
And of course, NT started as a reimplementation of VMS for a failed Intel RISC CPU...
p0intblank
Aug 5, 03:55 PM
I can't wait for Monday. I'll be working that day, so I am going to try to watch the keynote before reading any updates. I even have the Quicktime Events page bookmarked. :D I figured I would be more surprised by taking this route.
This is the first WWDC I'm really looking forward to, mainly because of what we're going to see... Leopard in action! :D
Edit: Peace, that's not entirely true. None of us know whether Apple will release Cinema Displays with iSights built-in. I'd say it is unlikely, but you never know until it actually happens.
This is the first WWDC I'm really looking forward to, mainly because of what we're going to see... Leopard in action! :D
Edit: Peace, that's not entirely true. None of us know whether Apple will release Cinema Displays with iSights built-in. I'd say it is unlikely, but you never know until it actually happens.
OllyW
Mar 26, 10:46 AM
Will I be able to get Lion at a discount for the recent purchase or do I pay full price? I was just wondering. Thanks!
You'll only get a discount for Lion if you buy it just before (or after) the release date is announced. They only give you a couple of weeks though, if you buy it now and Lion comes out in the summer you'll be paying the full price.
You'll only get a discount for Lion if you buy it just before (or after) the release date is announced. They only give you a couple of weeks though, if you buy it now and Lion comes out in the summer you'll be paying the full price.
DeathChill
Mar 31, 10:55 PM
iPhone is sold as buy-one-get-one-free? In what country would that be?
Narnia.
Narnia.
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
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
camelsnot
Apr 8, 03:59 AM
You know that no one thinks that way right? I never understood all of these "fanboy" posts saying things that these mysterious "fanyboys" that I've never seen supposedly say.
You must not frequent Apple forums. There are quite a few people who think Apple can do no wrong and twist their own morals and thoughts to justify things that Apple does in these forums. They think they are Apple's personal crusaders. It's sad really, that some people can't think for themselves and they're so blinded by a tech company who could give two craps about them at the end of the day. While Apple does some good things for customers, it's not because they care. It's because they know by doing that, these customers will return. It's simple business, and $teve Job$ is a business and marketing god.
Good on Apple for keeping people so mentally invested in their company. It's a testament to the power of perception and lack of mental clarity from some of its consumers.
Charge on, Apple. :apple:
You must not frequent Apple forums. There are quite a few people who think Apple can do no wrong and twist their own morals and thoughts to justify things that Apple does in these forums. They think they are Apple's personal crusaders. It's sad really, that some people can't think for themselves and they're so blinded by a tech company who could give two craps about them at the end of the day. While Apple does some good things for customers, it's not because they care. It's because they know by doing that, these customers will return. It's simple business, and $teve Job$ is a business and marketing god.
Good on Apple for keeping people so mentally invested in their company. It's a testament to the power of perception and lack of mental clarity from some of its consumers.
Charge on, Apple. :apple:
bobbleheadbob
Apr 10, 11:06 AM
I hope the new version comes in a box with a free t-shirt.
ekwipt
Apr 5, 08:10 PM
Final Cut needs better media management, and also Avid-like support for multiple editors on a single project. I like Final Cut a lot, but Avid has some clear advantages for a feature film. Here's hoping this next version has some big new features!
Good Post
Good Post
starnox
Aug 5, 04:58 PM
My bad :p Never trust random world clock websites ;)
arkitect
Mar 22, 12:55 PM
Competition is good.
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
Silentwave
Jul 15, 01:12 AM
What about 4 SATA II Drives? This way I can have a mirrored 1TB RAID [clicks heals]
The speed of a RAID with the security of mirroring.. it doesn't get mucho better :)
You mean SATA 3Gbps? Sata II is often confused with Sata 3Gbps and has not been brought to market yet, unfortunately. the sata people even have a page explaining the difference on their site :confused: . the good part though is they're planning 6Gbps and IIRC 12 as well.
I want sata3g or SAS or both.
The speed of a RAID with the security of mirroring.. it doesn't get mucho better :)
You mean SATA 3Gbps? Sata II is often confused with Sata 3Gbps and has not been brought to market yet, unfortunately. the sata people even have a page explaining the difference on their site :confused: . the good part though is they're planning 6Gbps and IIRC 12 as well.
I want sata3g or SAS or both.
Moyank24
Apr 27, 12:23 PM
I read most of it. I haven't been carrying my birth certificate. It spent most of its time im Mom's china closet, where it still faded.
I guess you missed the part where the one that is being shown is a certified copy.
Maybe the certificate is legitimate, but I think the original short form would have been more convincing. I like Obama, but I loathe his extreme liberalism.
Maybe?? For someone who isn't a birther, you sure sound like one.
Apparently the short form wasn't convincing enough...which is why the long form has now been presented.
I guess you missed the part where the one that is being shown is a certified copy.
Maybe the certificate is legitimate, but I think the original short form would have been more convincing. I like Obama, but I loathe his extreme liberalism.
Maybe?? For someone who isn't a birther, you sure sound like one.
Apparently the short form wasn't convincing enough...which is why the long form has now been presented.
baryon
Apr 10, 08:22 AM
I'm all in for something new in Video Editing. I find that FCP is way too old and clunky, and Premiere is the same thing with a better interface. I rarely use the Viewer anymore, and I hate having to render. I hate the various pixel aspect ratios and formats there are, including PAL and NTSC. I still think tape cameras are the best in quality, but the practicality of recording on a card or a hard drive will soon beat that.
There has to be a performance and workflow improvement, as syncing sound to video precisely is near impossible due to the huge amounts of lag.
This sounds like an interesting update!
There has to be a performance and workflow improvement, as syncing sound to video precisely is near impossible due to the huge amounts of lag.
This sounds like an interesting update!
dclocke
Sep 19, 09:28 AM
AMEN!!!! This whole thread has the tone of a spoiled 13 year old's "I want" tirade. All the benchmarks show little difference between Merom and what you can buy today...and the 64 bit argument is really moot for most users because....(ready for it)....it's a laptop! Very few will have more than 2GB RAM on it anyway, and addressing larger RAM partitions is the #1 64 bit advantage.
Addressing larger RAM partitions is not the #1 advantage for me. I will not be putting >4GB of memory into my laptop. And I suspect it is not the #1 advantage for most of the people posting in this thread. If you don't like the subject matter of this thread, then don't read it. Simple as that.
Addressing larger RAM partitions is not the #1 advantage for me. I will not be putting >4GB of memory into my laptop. And I suspect it is not the #1 advantage for most of the people posting in this thread. If you don't like the subject matter of this thread, then don't read it. Simple as that.
No comments:
Post a Comment