Macnoviz
Jul 20, 08:23 AM
Would be a very long keynote too:
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
- new software (considerable update to iWork if the rumours are true)
- iMac/MacBook updates
- iPod/iTunes stuff
Strike:
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
Insert:
-release of 10.5
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
- new software (considerable update to iWork if the rumours are true)
- iMac/MacBook updates
- iPod/iTunes stuff
Strike:
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
Insert:
-release of 10.5
intlplby
Nov 28, 07:51 PM
i agree with this on one condition:
Universal agrees to give up its right to prosecute anyone who owns an iPod for piracy.
i.e. if I buy an iPod, then I can pirate Universal's catalogue all I want because I have effectively already paid for their content.
a few bucks is a small price to pay to get access to everything they got
Universal agrees to give up its right to prosecute anyone who owns an iPod for piracy.
i.e. if I buy an iPod, then I can pirate Universal's catalogue all I want because I have effectively already paid for their content.
a few bucks is a small price to pay to get access to everything they got
deconai
Aug 11, 03:42 PM
i just want a cell phone that works.
all these phones today(by all these phones i mean the motorolas i have had, so mayby motorola's jsut suck) have this ridiculous amount of latency when you are navigating the menus. cause they have to have all this fancy crap flyin around. its like phones are using the same technology from 5 years ago but they are just piling these features into them so they dog down. overall phones today seem to suck just a bit. my nokia 8260 was the best phone i ever had and it was monochrome with no camera or video or stupid crap like that...
I used to have a Motorola loaded with everything but the kitchen sink (that is, until my wife decided to wash it in the washing machine :P ). I got a cheap Samsung SGH-E317 to replace it and I swear it works 100% faster than my Moto. It seems to receive the signal stronger as well.
all these phones today(by all these phones i mean the motorolas i have had, so mayby motorola's jsut suck) have this ridiculous amount of latency when you are navigating the menus. cause they have to have all this fancy crap flyin around. its like phones are using the same technology from 5 years ago but they are just piling these features into them so they dog down. overall phones today seem to suck just a bit. my nokia 8260 was the best phone i ever had and it was monochrome with no camera or video or stupid crap like that...
I used to have a Motorola loaded with everything but the kitchen sink (that is, until my wife decided to wash it in the washing machine :P ). I got a cheap Samsung SGH-E317 to replace it and I swear it works 100% faster than my Moto. It seems to receive the signal stronger as well.
clientsiman
Apr 11, 12:55 PM
No problem for my as I am happy with my 3 years old Sony Ericsson damp phone. I can wait few more months to see if iPhone 5 can make me buy a new phone.
maclaptop
Apr 14, 04:48 PM
still, you cannot say the iphone is the best smartphone on the market, just as someone else can't say the atrix is the best. Different strokes for different folks!
+1
+1
ruutiveijari
Oct 15, 01:06 PM
Why would Apple show their Clovertown workstations after HP and not simultaneusly with HP?
Because HP is a much bigger company with much bigger sales volume and probably gets all the new processors before Apple does.
Because HP is a much bigger company with much bigger sales volume and probably gets all the new processors before Apple does.
braddouglass
Apr 6, 01:07 PM
Awesome, can't wait.
Picking up the 11" soon as they are out.
RICH B!tch! hahaha
I'm referring to his iMac and MBP and Iphone and Ipad and soon to be MBA
Picking up the 11" soon as they are out.
RICH B!tch! hahaha
I'm referring to his iMac and MBP and Iphone and Ipad and soon to be MBA
AppleFreak89
Jun 9, 08:58 AM
Everything BIBBZ is saying is correct and works the same at my store. we had a lot of people trade in their 3g for 3gs' and pay $5 out of pocket :). its a good deal.
Macnoviz
Jul 21, 02:23 AM
I think that the surprise will be next month when Steve J is talking about Leopard. He'll mention something like, "You might have read a bit about a new chip from Intel called Kentsfield. You might like to know that Leopard is designed to take full advantage of Kentsfield when it's released." He really doesn't need to say anything else - that alone will drive MS nuts.
Maybe they will want to implement it pushing the release back to december:D
Maybe they will want to implement it pushing the release back to december:D
treblah
Sep 19, 07:45 AM
The mermon G6s should be out before summer.
Fixed. :D
Fixed. :D
geerlingguy
Aug 16, 11:24 PM
When rendering in FCP, it's all about the CPU.
Fast hard drives contribute to real-time effects, but do NOT contribute to rendering.
Ram helps a little bit.
However, depending on what kind of rendering you're doing, the hard drive can be a limiting factor.
Say you're just rendering ten minutes worth of a blur effect on video�the CPU says 'gimme all you got' and goes to town on the frames, blurring each one quickly. But the hard drive may have a hard time keeping up with the CPU, because 10 minutes of footage needs to be read, then re-written to the drive. For HD-resolution video, that can be a couple gigs of data. And that data also has to pass through the RAM (which acts like a high-speed buffer).
However, in the case of these benchmarks, one would think the testers would choose some more CPU-intense rendering, which would allow the hard drive to take it's time while the CPU is overloaded with work.
But, to anyone configuring a graphics or video workstation: Everything�CPU, Hard Drives, RAM, and even the GPU for some tasks�should be as fast and ample as possible. "A chain is only as good as it's weakest link." If you pair up a Quad 3.0 GHz Xeon with a 5400 rpm USB 2.0 drive, you will be disappointed.
Fast hard drives contribute to real-time effects, but do NOT contribute to rendering.
Ram helps a little bit.
However, depending on what kind of rendering you're doing, the hard drive can be a limiting factor.
Say you're just rendering ten minutes worth of a blur effect on video�the CPU says 'gimme all you got' and goes to town on the frames, blurring each one quickly. But the hard drive may have a hard time keeping up with the CPU, because 10 minutes of footage needs to be read, then re-written to the drive. For HD-resolution video, that can be a couple gigs of data. And that data also has to pass through the RAM (which acts like a high-speed buffer).
However, in the case of these benchmarks, one would think the testers would choose some more CPU-intense rendering, which would allow the hard drive to take it's time while the CPU is overloaded with work.
But, to anyone configuring a graphics or video workstation: Everything�CPU, Hard Drives, RAM, and even the GPU for some tasks�should be as fast and ample as possible. "A chain is only as good as it's weakest link." If you pair up a Quad 3.0 GHz Xeon with a 5400 rpm USB 2.0 drive, you will be disappointed.
4JNA
Jul 20, 12:06 PM
'speakable items on' 'selecting hal9000 voice'
what are you doing dave?
you know i can't let you apply the filter to those pictures in that manner.
dave, i'm scared...
'speakable items off'
now we just need the big red glowing light on the front instead of the white one...:eek:
what are you doing dave?
you know i can't let you apply the filter to those pictures in that manner.
dave, i'm scared...
'speakable items off'
now we just need the big red glowing light on the front instead of the white one...:eek:
darh
Aug 15, 01:11 PM
Video cards won't make a difference in FCP as of now if that's what you are asking performance wise. If you are using Motion/Games, anything that really feeds off the video card, then I'd go for the higher end video card.
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
Couldn't it be the harddrive that is the limiting factor in this bnechmark?
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
Couldn't it be the harddrive that is the limiting factor in this bnechmark?
majorp
Sep 19, 05:08 AM
Im still on for today, 4 hours and counting.
feelthefire
Aug 7, 08:35 AM
We already have a Mac Pro line of products, we are also the owners of AppleLocks, and MacMice. The Tiger thing was silly.
According to a quick search, you have an application in for a service mark in the name of "Mac Pro" (which, by the way, is a service mark belonging to a cosmetics retailer which was granted in 2001) but no trademark on the name mac pro appears in your name. Apple's application states a number of hardware outside of computers, so if you don't already have a trademark to apply to your product line (and I couldn't find one) Apple may be coming after you, and not the other way around.
I'll happily retract my observation if you can document that you own the TRADEMARK and not an application for a service mark.
According to a quick search, you have an application in for a service mark in the name of "Mac Pro" (which, by the way, is a service mark belonging to a cosmetics retailer which was granted in 2001) but no trademark on the name mac pro appears in your name. Apple's application states a number of hardware outside of computers, so if you don't already have a trademark to apply to your product line (and I couldn't find one) Apple may be coming after you, and not the other way around.
I'll happily retract my observation if you can document that you own the TRADEMARK and not an application for a service mark.
jc1350
Apr 8, 08:33 AM
The CrunchGear story has been updated to state the rumor is "squashed."
eb6
Sep 19, 09:50 AM
Can't we stop all this Mac on Mac hate and just get along?:)
DocAlge
Sep 19, 09:39 AM
I am new to this (and still waiting to buy my first Mac). BUT why all this talk about speed and not about screen size.
I will buy a new Mac as soon as the new models arrive, but I could probably do with a MacBook - but I just think 13" is to small (my eyes are getting old). Does anyone think a 15" MacBook will be out anytime soon - or do I just have to pay the extra price for the MacBook Pro
I will buy a new Mac as soon as the new models arrive, but I could probably do with a MacBook - but I just think 13" is to small (my eyes are getting old). Does anyone think a 15" MacBook will be out anytime soon - or do I just have to pay the extra price for the MacBook Pro
KnightWRX
Apr 7, 09:36 AM
You make it seem like intel told apple they can't use the sb chips unless they use the IGP, which is obviously false.
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
sam10685
Aug 11, 01:19 PM
Now what I WANT that might not happen:
8) Lightweight, small FF
that would be a definite for Apple... also, i think this thing will be really really awesome considering the fact that Steve Jobs himself is already boasting about it... he never does that prior to a release. (unless he's previewing something for us like he just did with Leopard.)
8) Lightweight, small FF
that would be a definite for Apple... also, i think this thing will be really really awesome considering the fact that Steve Jobs himself is already boasting about it... he never does that prior to a release. (unless he's previewing something for us like he just did with Leopard.)
bedifferent
Apr 27, 11:07 AM
It clearly is an issue if they have a federal lawsuit on it. The fact that Apple are rolling out an update that changes the way it works alone shows that there is clearly a problem. Apple vary rarely roll out updates that change things, even if consumers are screaming for it (mouse acceleration in OS X for example).
You refuse to accept there is a problem. You refuse to see the breech of privacy. Why? The government and Apple have clearly accepted it.
Is this the same government that allowed warrantless wire tapping? The same federal government that allowed Halliburton no bid contracts in Iraq? Interesting how some cherry pick (this is not referring to you at all, just a general statement, not meant to be personal :) ), "government is bad, social healthcare is bad, but wait, federal lawsuits have merit, government is right".
A lot of federal lawsuits have no merit and there has been no ruling. Thus if a lawsuit is federal = all federal lawsuits are valid TRUE, doesn't make sense. Perhaps waiting this out for more information would be prudent instead of jumping down each others' throats. (again, this is not directed at you, just clarifying so no one thinks I'm "taking this to the mattresses" lol)
I do not understand why every thread on MacRumors turns into a free-for-all. It should be called "MacFeuders"… ;)
You refuse to accept there is a problem. You refuse to see the breech of privacy. Why? The government and Apple have clearly accepted it.
Is this the same government that allowed warrantless wire tapping? The same federal government that allowed Halliburton no bid contracts in Iraq? Interesting how some cherry pick (this is not referring to you at all, just a general statement, not meant to be personal :) ), "government is bad, social healthcare is bad, but wait, federal lawsuits have merit, government is right".
A lot of federal lawsuits have no merit and there has been no ruling. Thus if a lawsuit is federal = all federal lawsuits are valid TRUE, doesn't make sense. Perhaps waiting this out for more information would be prudent instead of jumping down each others' throats. (again, this is not directed at you, just clarifying so no one thinks I'm "taking this to the mattresses" lol)
I do not understand why every thread on MacRumors turns into a free-for-all. It should be called "MacFeuders"… ;)
Cachiro
Apr 6, 04:55 PM
[QUOTE=
Xoom.... I say Fail.
[/QUOTE]
Popeye, you hit a nail on the head.
:D
Xoom.... I say Fail.
[/QUOTE]
Popeye, you hit a nail on the head.
:D
ezekielrage_99
Aug 27, 12:53 AM
PowerBook G5 next tuesday?
Now that has been replaced with Core 2 Dup next Monday ;)
Now that has been replaced with Core 2 Dup next Monday ;)
Bill McEnaney
Apr 28, 12:40 PM
And you sure do like to talk in circles. So doubting and not believing the certificate is legitimate are two different things. What in the heck are you talking about?? You birthers are all alike...in the face of being proven wrong, you just try to make stuff up as you go along.
I ask you whether Rockwell Blake would be a competent President of the United States. You reply, "I have no idea. Who's Rockwell Blake?" You don't believe that he would be a competent President of the United States. You don't doubt that he would do that. You haven't formed any opinion about whether he would be a competent one.
I ask you whether Rockwell Blake would be a competent President of the United States. You reply, "I have no idea. Who's Rockwell Blake?" You don't believe that he would be a competent President of the United States. You don't doubt that he would do that. You haven't formed any opinion about whether he would be a competent one.
No comments:
Post a Comment