Tones2
Apr 19, 01:33 PM
I'm sure quite sure what Apple hopes to accomplish here. Every smart phone steals from every other one. I don't know if you can differentiate design "concepts". It's like suing someone because the chords for his blues song goes in a 1-4-5 pattern like yours does. It's just part of the genre.
Tony
Tony
briansolomon
Jul 14, 05:26 PM
It's about time. For a company that prides itself on innovations, features, and ease of use this is something that should not just be coming to fruition now...and should have never been eliminated from the G5 during the change from G4 <<<weird wording but I think you all will get the idea
ergle2
Sep 13, 03:58 PM
The MP is so overkill for my needs right now, I wonder if I'd even notice the difference. I think I'll wait for 32 cores before I update!
In my experience, single to dual is a huge step up because the interactive response feels much snappier (esp on Windows, but that's not terribly relevant).
After that it gets less noticable -- but then, most long-term CPU bound work isn't interactive anyway, games aside :)
In my experience, single to dual is a huge step up because the interactive response feels much snappier (esp on Windows, but that's not terribly relevant).
After that it gets less noticable -- but then, most long-term CPU bound work isn't interactive anyway, games aside :)
randyharris
Sep 18, 11:59 PM
It would be fantastic for the MacBook to have the Core 2 Duo, (MacBookPro is a given), the fact is, Apple needs to do this update to stay in the same ballpark as the pc notebook makers.
Now if they could just give the MacBook a real graphics card, I'd be a taker.
Randy at MacSeven.com (http://www.MacSeven.com)
Now if they could just give the MacBook a real graphics card, I'd be a taker.
Randy at MacSeven.com (http://www.MacSeven.com)
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
daneoni
Aug 27, 05:54 PM
I was just checking out the CD vs C2D comparison at Anandtech, pretty interesting stuff.
My question is this, is Santa Rosa strictly the mobile platform? I'm a student holding off for an iMac revision, and am wondering if apple utilizes Conroe in the iMac, will the faster FSB's be supported? Is an updated platform already available for Conroe? (I guess I had more than one question )
Thanks
Santa Rosa is for mobile platforms only. As far as i can tell the Conroe chips already have a rich FSB by default 1066MHz i think. Apple may use conroe and may use merom but conroe is looking to be the slated candidate.
My question is this, is Santa Rosa strictly the mobile platform? I'm a student holding off for an iMac revision, and am wondering if apple utilizes Conroe in the iMac, will the faster FSB's be supported? Is an updated platform already available for Conroe? (I guess I had more than one question )
Thanks
Santa Rosa is for mobile platforms only. As far as i can tell the Conroe chips already have a rich FSB by default 1066MHz i think. Apple may use conroe and may use merom but conroe is looking to be the slated candidate.
glassbathroom
Aug 17, 08:13 AM
Edit: Please ignore this post, I can't count!!!
If you buy a Xeon 5160 (3.0GHz) at the moment they are £570. Apple are charging £530 to upgrade from Xeon 5150 (2.66GHz) to the Xeon 5160. Bearing in mind that you can probably sell the original 2.66Gz chip for around £300, it would be cheaper to buy the lower spec Mac Pro and upgrade yourself.
Forgive the £ for those that think in $.
If you buy a Xeon 5160 (3.0GHz) at the moment they are £570. Apple are charging £530 to upgrade from Xeon 5150 (2.66GHz) to the Xeon 5160. Bearing in mind that you can probably sell the original 2.66Gz chip for around £300, it would be cheaper to buy the lower spec Mac Pro and upgrade yourself.
Forgive the £ for those that think in $.
kallisti
Mar 22, 05:52 PM
I'm not american, perhaps you should be utilising the 'proper' English that was invented here.
And you're last sentence makes you look rather condescending and quite frankly a bit of a pretentious moron.
And I'm sorry to say, I've never been to the states, but of course you make an unfounded and ignorant assertion that I have never travelled. Really, you're not doing yourself much good with that mentality you have.
Glad that you're just showcasing your pitiful character to the rest of us.
Just stop already. You made a couple of stupid and incorrect statements. You got called on them. Suck it up and admit you were wrong. It happens to the best of us :)
And you're last sentence makes you look rather condescending and quite frankly a bit of a pretentious moron.
And I'm sorry to say, I've never been to the states, but of course you make an unfounded and ignorant assertion that I have never travelled. Really, you're not doing yourself much good with that mentality you have.
Glad that you're just showcasing your pitiful character to the rest of us.
Just stop already. You made a couple of stupid and incorrect statements. You got called on them. Suck it up and admit you were wrong. It happens to the best of us :)
faroZ06
Apr 8, 12:52 AM
This.
I went to buy a Time Capsule 1TB from these goons one day and noticed the pricing. I pulled up Apple.com's pricing of the TC and asked the "mac specialist" WHY they are charging a $34.99 premium over Apple themselves. He instantly said "no problem, we'll price match." I told him I'd buy it now for instant gratification, and then order from Amazon for $285 w/no tax and free Prime shipping.
Then I'd return the overpriced "pricematched" one back to best buy. He said I can't do that.
I did it 48 hrs later.
I hate that place. If they just had the MSRP Apple price on the shelf without me having to catch them trying to make an extra few bucks, I would have bought it and walked out happy.
That stunt **** me off and I hope they had to resell it as an open box.
I hate Best Buy.
Yeah, get Apple stuff from Apple. However, Best Buy is good for getting video games. I used to get all of my GameCube games (before the Wii came out) from Best Buy for cheap.
Now I don't have much to buy from there since they stopped selling old games, and I have a GameCube and XBOX so they don't support me :(
Sorry, the Wiimote sucks too much, the PS3 is a ripoff with barely any good games and Bluray, and the XBOX360 is MS hardware which runs horribly and always breaks.
I went to buy a Time Capsule 1TB from these goons one day and noticed the pricing. I pulled up Apple.com's pricing of the TC and asked the "mac specialist" WHY they are charging a $34.99 premium over Apple themselves. He instantly said "no problem, we'll price match." I told him I'd buy it now for instant gratification, and then order from Amazon for $285 w/no tax and free Prime shipping.
Then I'd return the overpriced "pricematched" one back to best buy. He said I can't do that.
I did it 48 hrs later.
I hate that place. If they just had the MSRP Apple price on the shelf without me having to catch them trying to make an extra few bucks, I would have bought it and walked out happy.
That stunt **** me off and I hope they had to resell it as an open box.
I hate Best Buy.
Yeah, get Apple stuff from Apple. However, Best Buy is good for getting video games. I used to get all of my GameCube games (before the Wii came out) from Best Buy for cheap.
Now I don't have much to buy from there since they stopped selling old games, and I have a GameCube and XBOX so they don't support me :(
Sorry, the Wiimote sucks too much, the PS3 is a ripoff with barely any good games and Bluray, and the XBOX360 is MS hardware which runs horribly and always breaks.
puuukeey
Sep 13, 12:32 PM
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0007US79Y.01._AA240_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg
MORE POWER!
MORE POWER!
LightSpeed1
Mar 31, 02:40 PM
I knew it would happen eventually.
noire anqa
Mar 26, 07:33 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)
This might explain the shambles that is 10.6.7.
Last release before Lion - semi-brick your machine to force an upgrade.
iOS 4.3, last release before iPhone 5 - murder your battery to force an upgrade.
You've guessed it, I'm not very happy with Apple at the moment. So which is it; underhand tactics, sloppy Q&A or declining standards?
It must be conspiracy right. Right.
It couldn't just be an honest mistake as a result of a stretched development team.
No. It must be the same guys who shot Kennedy messing up all our tech. It's probably something to do with the Chinese.
This might explain the shambles that is 10.6.7.
Last release before Lion - semi-brick your machine to force an upgrade.
iOS 4.3, last release before iPhone 5 - murder your battery to force an upgrade.
You've guessed it, I'm not very happy with Apple at the moment. So which is it; underhand tactics, sloppy Q&A or declining standards?
It must be conspiracy right. Right.
It couldn't just be an honest mistake as a result of a stretched development team.
No. It must be the same guys who shot Kennedy messing up all our tech. It's probably something to do with the Chinese.
starflyer
Nov 29, 11:03 AM
Oh yeah - for anyone who thinks most music these days sucks, you're just looking in the wrong place. Major labels ceased to produce anything of worth quite some time ago. Dig a little deeper and there's a wealth of wonderful music being made right now (and over the last 10 years specifically).
I'll help you dig...
www.sf59.com
www.toothandnailrecords.com
www.themilitiagroup.com
www.velvetbluemusic.com
www.jadetree.com
I'll help you dig...
www.sf59.com
www.toothandnailrecords.com
www.themilitiagroup.com
www.velvetbluemusic.com
www.jadetree.com
MrNomNoms
Mar 26, 03:57 AM
I use my computer as a "real computer" and I like virtually every change I've seen. I wish people wouldn't generalize so broadly and presume that because certain additions aren't something that they use that it has nothing to do with "real work."
Why shouldn't they be related? Borrowing concepts and sharing library isn't the same as being merged. The only people who honestly believe the OSes are being merged into one are the paranoid people on this forum.
Unless I'm missing something, Mission Control is added in addition to Expos� as it is now. The old functionality will still be there. As for it being "ruined," a couple of days before the Lion preview the graphic artist I work with most was describing changes he wished they'd make to Expos� and we were laughing together a few days later when we watched the preview and boom, there it was. Incidentally, he makes his living off what he does with his "real" computer.
Cool. Don't use "full screen apps." However, they make a lot of sense in a few places. Paired with Spaces I'm looking forward to this when working on my laptop without an external monitor. Also, on a multimonitor setup it makes a lot of sense.
Again, don't do any of it. I've been using Steam for my games on the PC basically since CounterStrike: Condition Zero was released. It's awesome. I was thrilled with the AppStore for similar reasons. It's just convenient. However, it's not the only distribution method available for software so its existence doesn't impede you.
I also use my trackpad when using my computer like a desktop and love having my Expos� gestures there.
What's being dumbed down exactly? Ease of use is very different than "dumbing down." Workflows that aren't what one particular individual likes are not "dumb." There are plenty of UNIX fanatics that think people using anything but CLI for half their workflow are using "dumbed down" interfaces. They're wrong and they're annoying.
Launchpad is, in my opinion, the lamest and most unnecessary addition to Lion. However, it's so minor that I don't care. I know some people will really like it. I am not personally offended by the inclusion of a feature I don't use or care about either.
The vast majority of people using computers are not techies, pros or developers. They're people like my parents. As a developer, I'm generally more excited about a new release of XCode than I am about OS X because overall, it's going to affect what I do far more than the OS will.
If they merge in the sense that the Mac becomes as locked down as an iPhone, I agree that that's it on Macs and even if they don't die in the market from Apple's would be hubris I'll be leaving Apple for something else. Thankfully, this will only occur if most of Apple's leadership is replaced with an army of complete morons.
Really, my point is this: you don't have to like these features. However, that doesn't mean they're not useful. It doesn't mean that they're "dumbed down." It doesn't mean "pros" won't like them. It doesn't mean people who like them don't use their computer as a "real computer" and instead treat it as a "toy." It means you don't like them.
Thank you for your constructive reply but I have a feeling it will all fall on deaf ears given that most have never actually gone on Google and researched what has been added/changed/enhanced to Mac OS X Lion. For example SAMBA has been removed and completely replaced with a ground up clean room implementation of SMB2 which will translate into better support for Windows Vista and 7 clients as well as the latest versions of Windows. Why hasn't that been mentioned by the nay sayers here?
OpenGL 3.2 has been added and funny enough not a single thing has been said about the fact that it lays the foundation for future updates that will be more prompt.
Then there is Webkit2 based web browser whose knock on effects go well beyond Safari and into applications wishing to utilise web based technologies with framework that provides said functionality but handles all the mundane security/process isolation/etc behind the scenes.
The merging of AV Foundation that serves as the foundation for future development for media products that will span iOS and Mac OS X; that you can have the same media core on iOS and Mac OS X then build upon it to differentiate between the desktop and tablet version by having a different interface, more features on the desktop version etc.
Sandboxing is being enhanced further and more system components are being put into it as to reduce the security exposure when a bug is found.
I'm sure others can note even more enhancements but it is frustrating when I hear the same nauseating ignorance over and over again from the cheap seats screaming there are no new features and yet they've done zero in the way of researching and reading on the matter.
Why shouldn't they be related? Borrowing concepts and sharing library isn't the same as being merged. The only people who honestly believe the OSes are being merged into one are the paranoid people on this forum.
Unless I'm missing something, Mission Control is added in addition to Expos� as it is now. The old functionality will still be there. As for it being "ruined," a couple of days before the Lion preview the graphic artist I work with most was describing changes he wished they'd make to Expos� and we were laughing together a few days later when we watched the preview and boom, there it was. Incidentally, he makes his living off what he does with his "real" computer.
Cool. Don't use "full screen apps." However, they make a lot of sense in a few places. Paired with Spaces I'm looking forward to this when working on my laptop without an external monitor. Also, on a multimonitor setup it makes a lot of sense.
Again, don't do any of it. I've been using Steam for my games on the PC basically since CounterStrike: Condition Zero was released. It's awesome. I was thrilled with the AppStore for similar reasons. It's just convenient. However, it's not the only distribution method available for software so its existence doesn't impede you.
I also use my trackpad when using my computer like a desktop and love having my Expos� gestures there.
What's being dumbed down exactly? Ease of use is very different than "dumbing down." Workflows that aren't what one particular individual likes are not "dumb." There are plenty of UNIX fanatics that think people using anything but CLI for half their workflow are using "dumbed down" interfaces. They're wrong and they're annoying.
Launchpad is, in my opinion, the lamest and most unnecessary addition to Lion. However, it's so minor that I don't care. I know some people will really like it. I am not personally offended by the inclusion of a feature I don't use or care about either.
The vast majority of people using computers are not techies, pros or developers. They're people like my parents. As a developer, I'm generally more excited about a new release of XCode than I am about OS X because overall, it's going to affect what I do far more than the OS will.
If they merge in the sense that the Mac becomes as locked down as an iPhone, I agree that that's it on Macs and even if they don't die in the market from Apple's would be hubris I'll be leaving Apple for something else. Thankfully, this will only occur if most of Apple's leadership is replaced with an army of complete morons.
Really, my point is this: you don't have to like these features. However, that doesn't mean they're not useful. It doesn't mean that they're "dumbed down." It doesn't mean "pros" won't like them. It doesn't mean people who like them don't use their computer as a "real computer" and instead treat it as a "toy." It means you don't like them.
Thank you for your constructive reply but I have a feeling it will all fall on deaf ears given that most have never actually gone on Google and researched what has been added/changed/enhanced to Mac OS X Lion. For example SAMBA has been removed and completely replaced with a ground up clean room implementation of SMB2 which will translate into better support for Windows Vista and 7 clients as well as the latest versions of Windows. Why hasn't that been mentioned by the nay sayers here?
OpenGL 3.2 has been added and funny enough not a single thing has been said about the fact that it lays the foundation for future updates that will be more prompt.
Then there is Webkit2 based web browser whose knock on effects go well beyond Safari and into applications wishing to utilise web based technologies with framework that provides said functionality but handles all the mundane security/process isolation/etc behind the scenes.
The merging of AV Foundation that serves as the foundation for future development for media products that will span iOS and Mac OS X; that you can have the same media core on iOS and Mac OS X then build upon it to differentiate between the desktop and tablet version by having a different interface, more features on the desktop version etc.
Sandboxing is being enhanced further and more system components are being put into it as to reduce the security exposure when a bug is found.
I'm sure others can note even more enhancements but it is frustrating when I hear the same nauseating ignorance over and over again from the cheap seats screaming there are no new features and yet they've done zero in the way of researching and reading on the matter.
nunes013
Mar 25, 11:41 PM
If they start pumping out release candidates now, I think late July is is too far away. WWDC early June is more likely.
Major OS releases have historically been $129. I don't think that'll happen this time--$99 or $79 makes more sense (Apple likes people to upgrade, and their software prices aren't as high as they used to be). But that's just me speculating.
i was thinking and kind of hoping for that. wwdc release and them saying that it is a great price. apple has definitely been done a lot with pricing lately with the ipad starting at $500, snow leopard and ilife prices pretty cheap and maybe mobileme coming down in price. apple is getting better with pricing imo. they are more reasonable for many things lately.
Major OS releases have historically been $129. I don't think that'll happen this time--$99 or $79 makes more sense (Apple likes people to upgrade, and their software prices aren't as high as they used to be). But that's just me speculating.
i was thinking and kind of hoping for that. wwdc release and them saying that it is a great price. apple has definitely been done a lot with pricing lately with the ipad starting at $500, snow leopard and ilife prices pretty cheap and maybe mobileme coming down in price. apple is getting better with pricing imo. they are more reasonable for many things lately.
Silentwave
Aug 17, 11:05 AM
pc world, september issue, mentioned amd's plan for a quad core processor in 2007 and if that happens, some pc box will be faster than our best xeon powered machines...that is, he he, unless we get that quad core K8L amd with their 4x4 motherboard architecture which would enable a desktop to run two quads for a total of 8 amd cores (but the price of such a machine will debut at a very high price and probably won't directly compete with the mac pro)
Um....that's why intel has quad core chips coming out...starting in *2006*
On the Xeon side, Clovertown, on the consumer side, kentsfield. Sometime in the first half of 2007 I believe we'll see Tigerton, which will be an even more formidable quad core xeon, capable of more than 2 processor configurations- so if apple gets a 3 socket logic board, or a 4 socket one, we could have 12 or 16 cores.
Um....that's why intel has quad core chips coming out...starting in *2006*
On the Xeon side, Clovertown, on the consumer side, kentsfield. Sometime in the first half of 2007 I believe we'll see Tigerton, which will be an even more formidable quad core xeon, capable of more than 2 processor configurations- so if apple gets a 3 socket logic board, or a 4 socket one, we could have 12 or 16 cores.
gnasher729
Jul 20, 05:12 PM
I think Reverse Hyperthreading will have to be processor-bound, like Hyperthreading. Intel has its mitosis project, so let's hope that works out well!
There is no such thing as "Reverse Hyperthreading". This has been completely debunked.
There is no such thing as "Reverse Hyperthreading". This has been completely debunked.
Popeye206
Apr 25, 02:54 PM
Anybody doing credit card fraud would have a somewhat better chance of staying undetected if they knew you usually whereabouts. Credit card companies use highly evolved software to track if a CC transaction is unusual.
I think it is save to assume that most people do not store their credit card number in plain text on their computer. If some piece of software (eg, a browser) would do this, wouldn't this be something you preferred it would not do?
Ahhhh..... dude... I'm more worried about my wallet being stolen.
Again... the tower tracking does nothing and for your average crook to put your iPhone database together with your physical credit card... for what? They slash and burn not sit there and try and sort out if you go to Target or JC Penneys more. What do they care?
Come one people... think and come back to earth.
I think it is save to assume that most people do not store their credit card number in plain text on their computer. If some piece of software (eg, a browser) would do this, wouldn't this be something you preferred it would not do?
Ahhhh..... dude... I'm more worried about my wallet being stolen.
Again... the tower tracking does nothing and for your average crook to put your iPhone database together with your physical credit card... for what? They slash and burn not sit there and try and sort out if you go to Target or JC Penneys more. What do they care?
Come one people... think and come back to earth.
xStep
Apr 10, 04:58 AM
I'm a little confused...why was Avid presenting at a Final Cut Pro User Group's meeting anyway? Do they just come in and are like "Hey, you've all made a mistake!" or something?
No, they come in and professionally present their product like they would do for any audience, as personally seen at an LAFCPUG (http://www.lafcpug.org/) meeting.
Michael Horton who runs LAFCPUG, and is one of the main organizers of the Supermeet, has the attitude that editors should be aware of all the tools available, including competition to FCP. Also remember that not all people are tied to one tool.
The speculation of how Apple got into the meeting is humorous. Hopefully Michael will eventually give up some information.
Apple can easily make there own event, just book that building in SF and invite some journalists or plan in advance!!
Giving an in depth presentation to this FCP centric audience will likely get Apple much more buzz in the editing community than a standard announcement in front of journalists.
No, they come in and professionally present their product like they would do for any audience, as personally seen at an LAFCPUG (http://www.lafcpug.org/) meeting.
Michael Horton who runs LAFCPUG, and is one of the main organizers of the Supermeet, has the attitude that editors should be aware of all the tools available, including competition to FCP. Also remember that not all people are tied to one tool.
The speculation of how Apple got into the meeting is humorous. Hopefully Michael will eventually give up some information.
Apple can easily make there own event, just book that building in SF and invite some journalists or plan in advance!!
Giving an in depth presentation to this FCP centric audience will likely get Apple much more buzz in the editing community than a standard announcement in front of journalists.
LagunaSol
Apr 12, 11:33 PM
I personally wouldn't recommend people buy a subsidized phone, but people are price sensitive. YMMV. :(
You're going to be paying for a data plan anyway, so why not make some of that money back in a subsidy?
You're going to be paying for a data plan anyway, so why not make some of that money back in a subsidy?
blahblah100
Mar 31, 07:31 PM
true, but the smugness and self righteousness of Google fanboys are so much worse.
HA HA. You have got to be kidding me.
HA HA. You have got to be kidding me.
Macky-Mac
Apr 27, 03:33 PM
.... To the contrary, I said from the very beginning that there was likely a simple explanation and that I wanted to hear such an explanation which I think MattSepta (unlike the rest of you) has begun to offer. Are there any other expert opinions out there on this issue? ....(
perhaps the Design & Graphics forum would have been a better place to post a technical question about layers in PDF documents.
Instead you posted it in the PRSI forum.....that certainly seems like you actually wanted the political responses you got.....and expected?
perhaps the Design & Graphics forum would have been a better place to post a technical question about layers in PDF documents.
Instead you posted it in the PRSI forum.....that certainly seems like you actually wanted the political responses you got.....and expected?
Lord Blackadder
Mar 24, 01:07 PM
Oh. So when a person criticizes Obama for keeping us in Afghanistan, Iraq, and/or Libya, just level an accusation of racism.
Got it.
The vast majority of conservatives are WASP-ish, and almost all of the people who question Obama's religion/nationality are self-described conservatives. Furthermore, conservatives as a group refuse to admit that this is the case. Got that?
Got it.
The vast majority of conservatives are WASP-ish, and almost all of the people who question Obama's religion/nationality are self-described conservatives. Furthermore, conservatives as a group refuse to admit that this is the case. Got that?
Multimedia
Jul 27, 11:48 PM
Duplicate.