motulist
Aug 11, 12:49 PM
... It may launch this month, or a year from now.
I think you misunderstood. By "delays that could set it back as far as next year," I interpret that to mean calendar year. So my reading of what the rumor is suggesting is that at the most it'll be released sometime within the first 3 months of or 7 months from now.
I think you misunderstood. By "delays that could set it back as far as next year," I interpret that to mean calendar year. So my reading of what the rumor is suggesting is that at the most it'll be released sometime within the first 3 months of or 7 months from now.
emotion
Jul 20, 11:25 AM
Somehow I doubt that Intel would change thier roadmap for/because of Apple. They are probably one of their smallest customers :P
For an individual customer Apple are actually quite large. They are also high profile.
For an individual customer Apple are actually quite large. They are also high profile.
Rychy
Apr 10, 12:51 AM
Can't wait to see how it works.
Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make a their banner graphic...
lol. I was thinking the same thing.
Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make a their banner graphic...
lol. I was thinking the same thing.
MacBoobsPro
Jul 20, 09:22 AM
But as some already pointed out, many applications can't use multiple cores, therefore you won't get any performance improvements with multi cores.
Im not talking about performance, more about energy usage. I thought maybe they are using more cores as it is more energy efficient than using less cores or one big one. But as someone has pointed out its more likely a case of not having to squeeze more transistor thingies on a chip, they may as well just add another chip. :)
Im not talking about performance, more about energy usage. I thought maybe they are using more cores as it is more energy efficient than using less cores or one big one. But as someone has pointed out its more likely a case of not having to squeeze more transistor thingies on a chip, they may as well just add another chip. :)
ezekielrage_99
Aug 17, 12:59 AM
This is a very dumb question but is Photoshop running under rosetta in this test?
If Photoshop is that is nuts.
If Photoshop is that is nuts.
.jpg "prom updo hairstyles for short")
miamijim
Apr 8, 01:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I was at BB yesterday and inquired about buying one. They has them but the manager wouldn't sell me one. He refuses to tell me why and I was told that he was instructed to hault sales temporarily. Hmmm
He does not have to tell you anything... in fact if he did his job would be on the line.
I was at BB yesterday and inquired about buying one. They has them but the manager wouldn't sell me one. He refuses to tell me why and I was told that he was instructed to hault sales temporarily. Hmmm
He does not have to tell you anything... in fact if he did his job would be on the line.
CaoCao
Mar 1, 04:11 PM
You know how stupid that argument is? You are comparing physical defects to a different mental state. Physiologically, gay people are not any bit different from straight people. (IE one identical twin gay, one not cases...)
Here is a much closer analog to your view:
"I hate you for liking the color yellow. Your views are sick and your practice of having yellow things in your home is sick and wrong and immoral. A three thousand year old book written by some uneducated shepperds told me that people who like the color yellow are going to burn in Hell because someone hates them."
Do you see just how stupid this whole thing is?
Well my other options were paedophilia, incest, bestiality etc.
Your analogy does not make sense because I do not hate homosexuals.
I made it quite clearly. If you don't get it, I can't help you any further.
Good to hear. Can we now assume you support marriage rights for gay people?
You have made it quite clear you suffer from a dearth of cogency.
That is their problem, not yours.
You could say the same about the Catholic church. My link was specifically in reply to being asked for evidence - actually proof - that Plato was a homosexual. As for supporting bad stuff, the US Constitution was once quite content to support slavery and the subordination of women, and so were many of the founding fathers, both of the early church and the USA.
What absolute bollocks! Homosexuality does not need treatment, since it is not a disease.
Ah, let us define slavery, does: "slavery is the condition of involuntary servitude in which a human being is regarded as no more than the property of another, as being without basic human rights; in other words, as a thing rather than a person" work for you?
Why not? Whether gays are treated equally under the Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with how you feel about them. Whether you grant them the human dignity of being treated equally has absolutely nothing to do with your Catholic dogma. You are making excuses.
Another red herring: nobody is asking you to be a caregiver, simply to stop pontificating about something you clearly know very little about. You are simply broadcasting your prejudices to no useful effect: you are not going to make anyone heterosexual by trashing their feelings and their very nature, you are just going to add to their discomfiture.
What a pity you did not learn from her to keep your own counsel.
Feeble. Do you pontificate about sky-diving too?
I have read many of Plato's dialogues, in Greek, and studied - and continue to study - Ancient Greek culture in depth. Your Dr Gould is bringing his own prejudices to the table. He should know better.
Homosexual friendship. Right.
But they are treated equal, any gay man can marry a woman and any lesbian woman can marry a man just as any heterosexual man can marry a woman and any heterosexual woman can marry a man
@CoCo & Bill: Please, just stop arguing with bogus reasons. The Catholic Church has everything wrong and upside down and only to control its followers. You two are a perfect example thereof.
CoCo, heterosexuality is not the norm, at least not outside our social understanding. In ancient Greece and Rome, sexuality wasn't even up for discussion. You followed a certain social conduct and explored your sexuality as you saw fit and didn't question it or that of others. When Christianity started taking over the laws and moral standards, they made it so they could control everything people do. Your reasoning comes from the same source as those who wrote the medical journals that condemn homosexuality as a mental illness. They did so out of fear of the unknown - the very essence th the Catholic Church uses to control its followers.
And Bill, please go out and live a little. Get a nice girlfriend and explore your and her sexuality a little and see how much more relaxed your attitude about the world can be. There's more to life than waiting for God's instructions. He certainly wouldn't want you to waste your life on such trivial things like analyzing other people's sexuality.
You two need to expand your world view and accept that there are plenty of things that make you uncomfortable, but there is no reason to condemn them so exhaustingly. You cannot reverse progress and you certainly cannot control the lives of other people.
There are plenty of folks in Northern Africa that can vouch for that.
Nay, the Romans and Greeks failed, they are retrogress
Here is a much closer analog to your view:
"I hate you for liking the color yellow. Your views are sick and your practice of having yellow things in your home is sick and wrong and immoral. A three thousand year old book written by some uneducated shepperds told me that people who like the color yellow are going to burn in Hell because someone hates them."
Do you see just how stupid this whole thing is?
Well my other options were paedophilia, incest, bestiality etc.
Your analogy does not make sense because I do not hate homosexuals.
I made it quite clearly. If you don't get it, I can't help you any further.
Good to hear. Can we now assume you support marriage rights for gay people?
You have made it quite clear you suffer from a dearth of cogency.
That is their problem, not yours.
You could say the same about the Catholic church. My link was specifically in reply to being asked for evidence - actually proof - that Plato was a homosexual. As for supporting bad stuff, the US Constitution was once quite content to support slavery and the subordination of women, and so were many of the founding fathers, both of the early church and the USA.
What absolute bollocks! Homosexuality does not need treatment, since it is not a disease.
Ah, let us define slavery, does: "slavery is the condition of involuntary servitude in which a human being is regarded as no more than the property of another, as being without basic human rights; in other words, as a thing rather than a person" work for you?
Why not? Whether gays are treated equally under the Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with how you feel about them. Whether you grant them the human dignity of being treated equally has absolutely nothing to do with your Catholic dogma. You are making excuses.
Another red herring: nobody is asking you to be a caregiver, simply to stop pontificating about something you clearly know very little about. You are simply broadcasting your prejudices to no useful effect: you are not going to make anyone heterosexual by trashing their feelings and their very nature, you are just going to add to their discomfiture.
What a pity you did not learn from her to keep your own counsel.
Feeble. Do you pontificate about sky-diving too?
I have read many of Plato's dialogues, in Greek, and studied - and continue to study - Ancient Greek culture in depth. Your Dr Gould is bringing his own prejudices to the table. He should know better.
Homosexual friendship. Right.
But they are treated equal, any gay man can marry a woman and any lesbian woman can marry a man just as any heterosexual man can marry a woman and any heterosexual woman can marry a man
@CoCo & Bill: Please, just stop arguing with bogus reasons. The Catholic Church has everything wrong and upside down and only to control its followers. You two are a perfect example thereof.
CoCo, heterosexuality is not the norm, at least not outside our social understanding. In ancient Greece and Rome, sexuality wasn't even up for discussion. You followed a certain social conduct and explored your sexuality as you saw fit and didn't question it or that of others. When Christianity started taking over the laws and moral standards, they made it so they could control everything people do. Your reasoning comes from the same source as those who wrote the medical journals that condemn homosexuality as a mental illness. They did so out of fear of the unknown - the very essence th the Catholic Church uses to control its followers.
And Bill, please go out and live a little. Get a nice girlfriend and explore your and her sexuality a little and see how much more relaxed your attitude about the world can be. There's more to life than waiting for God's instructions. He certainly wouldn't want you to waste your life on such trivial things like analyzing other people's sexuality.
You two need to expand your world view and accept that there are plenty of things that make you uncomfortable, but there is no reason to condemn them so exhaustingly. You cannot reverse progress and you certainly cannot control the lives of other people.
There are plenty of folks in Northern Africa that can vouch for that.
Nay, the Romans and Greeks failed, they are retrogress
daneoni
Aug 26, 04:13 PM
That doesn't make sense, marketing wise. If they do anything to the MacBooks and iMacs they would at least bump their speeds. It doesn't matter f the 2GHz Merom chip is faster than the 2GHz Yonah chip, the consumers don't give a crap about the chip... they want to see "them GHz numbers" go up.
Well unless they use Conroe in iMac thats how it will be. They'll just tell you the new machines are using intel's new Core 2 Duo (64 bit computing) chips. Apple WILL differentiate their pro laptops so the 2.16 & 2.33 GHz combo is a given. Maybe, just maybe, they might bump the mini to 1.83 and 1.66 on its low end. The imacs will use 1.83 & 2.00 there is just no other option apparent to me because the 17" & 20" will also be differentiated. The macbooks may become 2.00GHz only across the board but even that route is questionable.
Well unless they use Conroe in iMac thats how it will be. They'll just tell you the new machines are using intel's new Core 2 Duo (64 bit computing) chips. Apple WILL differentiate their pro laptops so the 2.16 & 2.33 GHz combo is a given. Maybe, just maybe, they might bump the mini to 1.83 and 1.66 on its low end. The imacs will use 1.83 & 2.00 there is just no other option apparent to me because the 17" & 20" will also be differentiated. The macbooks may become 2.00GHz only across the board but even that route is questionable.
hobo.hopkins
Apr 25, 01:46 PM
Oh please if someone has direct access to your phone or computer they could do or find almost anything they wanted. The fact that Apple doesn't even receive this information makes it a non-issue.
aohus
Apr 19, 02:35 PM
WRONG. A lot of modern GUI elements are INVENTED by Apple:
http://obamapacman.com/2010/03/myth-copyright-theft-apple-stole-gui-from-xerox-parc-alto/
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
Apple may face special problems because of admissions made by its chairman, John Sculley, in his 1987 book, ''Odyssey,'' a chronicle of his split with Apple's co-founder, Steven P. Jobs. ''Much of the Macintosh technology wasn't invented in the building,'' he wrote. ''Indeed, the Mac, like the Lisa before it, was largely a conduit for technology developed'' at Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center.
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
http://obamapacman.com/2010/03/myth-copyright-theft-apple-stole-gui-from-xerox-parc-alto/
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
Apple may face special problems because of admissions made by its chairman, John Sculley, in his 1987 book, ''Odyssey,'' a chronicle of his split with Apple's co-founder, Steven P. Jobs. ''Much of the Macintosh technology wasn't invented in the building,'' he wrote. ''Indeed, the Mac, like the Lisa before it, was largely a conduit for technology developed'' at Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center.
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
digitalbiker
Aug 25, 03:35 PM
Call it what you want but these new MacBooks are crap. Yea there is people who are enjoying theirs without a hitch but look at all the reports of problems. Not once on this forum have we had a flood of problems with a single unit. Apple dropped the ball on this one. Poorly made unit
I think you are exagerating this just a tad. The MacBook has had very few problems considering it is a generation one release. The MacBook Pro generation one and the G4 TI PB first generation were plagued with many, many more problems than the MacBook.
In my opinion Apple has done a very good job of quality control on the MacBook. This battery recall doesn't even apply to the MacBook.
I think you are exagerating this just a tad. The MacBook has had very few problems considering it is a generation one release. The MacBook Pro generation one and the G4 TI PB first generation were plagued with many, many more problems than the MacBook.
In my opinion Apple has done a very good job of quality control on the MacBook. This battery recall doesn't even apply to the MacBook.
yoak
Apr 12, 07:25 AM
I'm on a 2006 Mac Pro 2.66GHz.
I never set up QMaster. It's installed, but I never touched it. Mpeg2 (highest quality double pass) saturates all cores.
EDIT: sending to compressor from the timeline doesn't change. FCP and compressor together use 350% CPU (400% max).
Very interesting, could you check your batch monitor to see if it uses every core to compress?.
I think maybe we are talking past each other and it�s my mistake. For Compressor to use all of the machines CORES you have to do what I described. This speeds up the rendering times as every core work at 80-90%, each core rendering a chunk (1/8) of the file.
I never set up QMaster. It's installed, but I never touched it. Mpeg2 (highest quality double pass) saturates all cores.
EDIT: sending to compressor from the timeline doesn't change. FCP and compressor together use 350% CPU (400% max).
Very interesting, could you check your batch monitor to see if it uses every core to compress?.
I think maybe we are talking past each other and it�s my mistake. For Compressor to use all of the machines CORES you have to do what I described. This speeds up the rendering times as every core work at 80-90%, each core rendering a chunk (1/8) of the file.
URFloorMatt
Apr 11, 11:55 AM
To me this means 4G and Verizon/AT&T hardware convergence. Both, good news.Agreed. But I don't get all this confusion over fiscal 2012 and calendar 2012. Are there analysts really stupid enough to believe that Apple would kill any future iPhone sales at Christmas by shifting the iPhone to a January release schedule? And do they really think Apple would preview iOS 5 a full six months before release? That said, if I sit on my iPhone 3GS until Sept/Oct and the new iPhone doesn't have 4G, I'll probably never buy another Apple product again.
For those interested in holding out for iPad 3, I do think moving the iPhone into a fall release frame opens the door to delaying the iPad 3 launch until summer 2012. On the plus side, that would leave the spring conspicuously empty, which might indicate a major MacBook Pro refresh (i.e. new casing) for next year.
For those interested in holding out for iPad 3, I do think moving the iPhone into a fall release frame opens the door to delaying the iPad 3 launch until summer 2012. On the plus side, that would leave the spring conspicuously empty, which might indicate a major MacBook Pro refresh (i.e. new casing) for next year.
DeVizardofOZ
Aug 27, 04:46 AM
No hard feelings indeed, but please show me numbers and facts, not anecdotal evidence of some dozens/hundreds of people (as compared to millions of purchasers). I will take your point when you do that, thanks very much. And really, to say that 25% of Apple products are lemons is to be, at very least, extremely glib.
Besides, if Apple is able to replace/fix those that have problems, there is no reason to complain whatsoever...this is what guarantees and technical support are for.
Especially the last paragraph of your rebuttal shows that you have not read ALL the threads about MB and MBp problems. I really would like to hear you, when you had your MBP replaced 3 times and still have problems... I have friends who just upgraded to MBPs all have one or more problems, ranging from screen, heat, whine, keyboard, and other problems, some of which they still have to discover. Sorry, buddy, but it truly looks like getting a good MBP is LUCK. I own a couple of laptops, my oldest ones are 9 years old (TOSHIBA), and never ever did I have problems like the ones described on these boards.
Proof my butt.... Wouldn"t it be nice if these threads had only happy APPLE fans? Dream on.
We are consumers, and should not accept getting a refurb lemon... but a new, preferably working product.
Besides, if Apple is able to replace/fix those that have problems, there is no reason to complain whatsoever...this is what guarantees and technical support are for.
Especially the last paragraph of your rebuttal shows that you have not read ALL the threads about MB and MBp problems. I really would like to hear you, when you had your MBP replaced 3 times and still have problems... I have friends who just upgraded to MBPs all have one or more problems, ranging from screen, heat, whine, keyboard, and other problems, some of which they still have to discover. Sorry, buddy, but it truly looks like getting a good MBP is LUCK. I own a couple of laptops, my oldest ones are 9 years old (TOSHIBA), and never ever did I have problems like the ones described on these boards.
Proof my butt.... Wouldn"t it be nice if these threads had only happy APPLE fans? Dream on.
We are consumers, and should not accept getting a refurb lemon... but a new, preferably working product.
notjustjay
Sep 19, 01:04 PM
It's more along the lines of "We see all these other laptop manufacturers releasing new CPU's in their products. We see that Apple has already recieved these chips. We feel that it is extremely likely that Apple's laptop lines will be updated with these CPU's, and soon. Finally, We don't want to buy a product that will be outdated in just a month or two.
...
As for "needing it yesterday", that is a product of the hype; but I think, for the most part, we feel that the laptops could have been ready earlier - and certainly would have liked Apple to have come out and said "MBP updates soonish" (of course that makes no business sense for clearing inventory though).
Absolutely. I don't disagree with you one bit. i'm waiting patiently too, as I'm one of those that could stand for a new machine -- my 1 GHz Powerbook G4 is starting to feel sluggish for dealing with the volumes of photos and video I throw at it. It is, however, still doing the same job as it did 3 years ago when I bought it, so my desire for a new machine is tempered by the fact that I don't realistically NEED a new machine in the immediate future.
There are those who post in these threads who, without having any kind of photo as a reference, I imagine are sitting at their keyboards frothing at the mouth! These are the folks who exclaim that they NEED 64-bit computing RIGHT NOW, 32-bit is CRAP and they just can't stand it any longer, Yonah SUCKS now that Merom is out, and Apple BY GOLLY had better deliver or they're buying a Dell tomorrow. You'd think that all the previous-generation machines suddenly stopped working or slowed down when Merom was announced.
...
As for "needing it yesterday", that is a product of the hype; but I think, for the most part, we feel that the laptops could have been ready earlier - and certainly would have liked Apple to have come out and said "MBP updates soonish" (of course that makes no business sense for clearing inventory though).
Absolutely. I don't disagree with you one bit. i'm waiting patiently too, as I'm one of those that could stand for a new machine -- my 1 GHz Powerbook G4 is starting to feel sluggish for dealing with the volumes of photos and video I throw at it. It is, however, still doing the same job as it did 3 years ago when I bought it, so my desire for a new machine is tempered by the fact that I don't realistically NEED a new machine in the immediate future.
There are those who post in these threads who, without having any kind of photo as a reference, I imagine are sitting at their keyboards frothing at the mouth! These are the folks who exclaim that they NEED 64-bit computing RIGHT NOW, 32-bit is CRAP and they just can't stand it any longer, Yonah SUCKS now that Merom is out, and Apple BY GOLLY had better deliver or they're buying a Dell tomorrow. You'd think that all the previous-generation machines suddenly stopped working or slowed down when Merom was announced.
portishead
Apr 12, 02:44 AM
Are you saying you would prefer they give it the ability to use more memory before they give it the ability to use more processing cores? Because that's the only thing 64bit is going to give you.
Yes, it does most of what I "need", but the competition does most of them better. Final Cut used to be cutting edge, now it's slow, inefficient and buggy.
Naw, memory too. There's probably a lot I left out, it was just a quick list off the top of my head.
Yes, it does most of what I "need", but the competition does most of them better. Final Cut used to be cutting edge, now it's slow, inefficient and buggy.
Naw, memory too. There's probably a lot I left out, it was just a quick list off the top of my head.
gibbz
Apr 27, 08:20 AM
Wow. That's surprising. This whole time people downplayed it because there was no evidence that apple was actually transmitting this data. It wasn't a big deal because the db file was local only. Now when Apple addresses it they had to not only admit that the file exists but that they actually were transmitting data.
Ah well, still not a big deal. :p
It is not surprising (http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf) (pdf).
Ah well, still not a big deal. :p
It is not surprising (http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf) (pdf).
notjustjay
Apr 8, 12:13 AM
I wouldn't be surprised. The quota explanation was given already, but they might also be holding back stock of the cheaper models in order to drive more sales of the higher end ones. "Oh, you wanted the 16 gig wifi model? Sorry, all sold out. But we do have this lovely 64 gig 3G version. If you really want the iPad 2, this is your big chance... it's only a little bit more..."
That happened to me, almost, when I bought the original iPad from Best Buy here in Canada on our launch day last year. The guy almost smirked when he said, sorry, the 16 gig ones were all sold out, but they had plenty of the 64 gig models. Luckily I persisted and he managed to find one more 16 gig, the last one! How lucky was that! :rolleyes:
That happened to me, almost, when I bought the original iPad from Best Buy here in Canada on our launch day last year. The guy almost smirked when he said, sorry, the 16 gig ones were all sold out, but they had plenty of the 64 gig models. Luckily I persisted and he managed to find one more 16 gig, the last one! How lucky was that! :rolleyes:
Prom1
Aug 7, 06:52 PM
Excellent SHOW Apple EXCELLENT!
I think I just creamed my shorts.
THATS the last straw NO MORE EXCUSES for not owning a MAC FULL Out.
the piggy bank is now gonna be frugal!
I think I just creamed my shorts.
THATS the last straw NO MORE EXCUSES for not owning a MAC FULL Out.
the piggy bank is now gonna be frugal!
ergle2
Sep 14, 01:17 PM
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
Point of total (and obnoxious) pedantry here -- XP and W2K3 Server aren't strictly the same codebase; The latter was a huge rewrite job with some fairly significant internal changes.
XP 64bit is based on W2K3, and Vista originally started out on the XP code base and then was scrapped, and was started over using the W2K3 codebase.
It doesn't invalidate your point in any way and the latter is most definitely descended from the former, but unlike previous products they weren't released in parallel. I mention it purely because I find it interesting, and it's also an example of how Windows is "evolving", so to speak.
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.
This is very common on both sides of the divide. Many Mac-only people seem to think Windows is still stuck in the Win9x days, and many of the Windows-only types seem to think MacOS is still in the 8.x days.
I guess it's a little like when your friend has kids and you don't see them for a few years, and you're surprised that instead of still being little kids they're teenagers... :)
Point of total (and obnoxious) pedantry here -- XP and W2K3 Server aren't strictly the same codebase; The latter was a huge rewrite job with some fairly significant internal changes.
XP 64bit is based on W2K3, and Vista originally started out on the XP code base and then was scrapped, and was started over using the W2K3 codebase.
It doesn't invalidate your point in any way and the latter is most definitely descended from the former, but unlike previous products they weren't released in parallel. I mention it purely because I find it interesting, and it's also an example of how Windows is "evolving", so to speak.
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.
This is very common on both sides of the divide. Many Mac-only people seem to think Windows is still stuck in the Win9x days, and many of the Windows-only types seem to think MacOS is still in the 8.x days.
I guess it's a little like when your friend has kids and you don't see them for a few years, and you're surprised that instead of still being little kids they're teenagers... :)
jkane08
Apr 6, 07:19 AM
I've been using Premier Pro CS5 on a 2008 MBP....
HecubusPro
Aug 26, 05:26 PM
I'll believe it when I see it. Merom rumours have been flying for a long long time now. Not that it really concerns me anyway. Just hope its what you guys are anticipating
Thankfully this isn't a rumor. It was reported on CNET as fact. Of course, there's always a chance that any news source is mistaken, but considering Intel announced their merom plans at the end of July, I don't have a problem with taking what CNET reported as most likely fact.
Coupled with the report of large shipments from overseas due to arrive on the 5th of September, connecting the dots to merom equipped macs seems fairly obvious to me. Whether it happens in September or October, it is going to happen.
I'm sure it will be what I'm anticipating, but thanks for your concern. :D
Thankfully this isn't a rumor. It was reported on CNET as fact. Of course, there's always a chance that any news source is mistaken, but considering Intel announced their merom plans at the end of July, I don't have a problem with taking what CNET reported as most likely fact.
Coupled with the report of large shipments from overseas due to arrive on the 5th of September, connecting the dots to merom equipped macs seems fairly obvious to me. Whether it happens in September or October, it is going to happen.
I'm sure it will be what I'm anticipating, but thanks for your concern. :D
Yamcha
Apr 19, 02:01 PM
What annoys me even more is that Apple always seems to make these claims that they made such and such first, and that Windows is copying Mac OS.. What annoys me is if you know a bit of the history you'll find that Apple copied Xerox interface, with permission of course, but it's not like they came up with it first..
Now they are making another claim that Samsung is copying..
Now they are making another claim that Samsung is copying..
shamino
Jul 14, 03:59 PM
My PC (in a full tower case) has the PSU at the bottom. Having had a case with the PSU at the top before, it seems more stable with all that weight in the base of the case. It also makes it easier to reach around the back for cables, as I don't need to stretch as far.
As long as you don't have liquid cooling (a-la the quad G5 systems.)
If your radiator springs a leak, the liquid runs into your power supply, blowing it out (and usually taking out the motherboard as well.)
With the PS on top, this doesn't happen. A leaky radiator simply means a liquid mess in the case (and a system that hits thermal-shutdown very quickly until you get it fixed, of course.)
As long as you don't have liquid cooling (a-la the quad G5 systems.)
If your radiator springs a leak, the liquid runs into your power supply, blowing it out (and usually taking out the motherboard as well.)
With the PS on top, this doesn't happen. A leaky radiator simply means a liquid mess in the case (and a system that hits thermal-shutdown very quickly until you get it fixed, of course.)
No comments:
Post a Comment