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.
radiohead14
Mar 22, 02:59 PM
We are still missing an 8" Galaxy Tab to complete the 7", 9", and 10" line of tablets.
7", 8.9", 10" :)
i'm looking forward to reviews of that 10" samsung galaxy tab. the hardware seems sleeker than the original design they previously introduced. i hope it still has dual stereo speakers on both sides. i'm guessing that they reduced down from 8mp to 3mp camera due to the price matching and not because it's thinner, since phones can easily fit 8mp cams in their slim forms. i also hope that they don't mess it up with that touchwiz interface, as far as updating the os. at this stage of honeycomb, you'd figure that google will be rolling quite a few updates to it. although, engadget reported that there will be versions that will come vanilla.
7", 8.9", 10" :)
i'm looking forward to reviews of that 10" samsung galaxy tab. the hardware seems sleeker than the original design they previously introduced. i hope it still has dual stereo speakers on both sides. i'm guessing that they reduced down from 8mp to 3mp camera due to the price matching and not because it's thinner, since phones can easily fit 8mp cams in their slim forms. i also hope that they don't mess it up with that touchwiz interface, as far as updating the os. at this stage of honeycomb, you'd figure that google will be rolling quite a few updates to it. although, engadget reported that there will be versions that will come vanilla.
NAG
Mar 31, 03:24 PM
Emphasis on the important bit for those who didn't bother to actually read the article. If you want to wait a bit, you can get the code and do whatever you want. Well that's my reading of it anyway, but please, don't let get in the way of giving the new enemy number one a good kicking.
If early access to the code is so unimportant then why the big fuss over cutting corners with Honeycomb to get it on the Xoom? Why not delay the Xoom or put Gingerbread on it and update it later?
Pretending that getting a jump on the market by weeks isn't enough to make or break you in the Android market isn't going to work. Having early access only doesn't matter if the features in the update are irrelevant (which they are for the feature phone makers who pretty much ignore any software updates anyway) or they're the life blood of the device (usually the flagship device of the month).
If early access to the code is so unimportant then why the big fuss over cutting corners with Honeycomb to get it on the Xoom? Why not delay the Xoom or put Gingerbread on it and update it later?
Pretending that getting a jump on the market by weeks isn't enough to make or break you in the Android market isn't going to work. Having early access only doesn't matter if the features in the update are irrelevant (which they are for the feature phone makers who pretty much ignore any software updates anyway) or they're the life blood of the device (usually the flagship device of the month).
xStep
Apr 11, 08:20 PM
There are thousands if not more of us who would gladly pony up and stick with Apple.
Nailed it
Difinitely not. I won't say where I'd agree and disagree with for the rest of it, but that last sentence isn't right. Thousands implies a rather low number. Not nearly enough revenue for Apple to keep working on FCS. ;)
Nailed it
Difinitely not. I won't say where I'd agree and disagree with for the rest of it, but that last sentence isn't right. Thousands implies a rather low number. Not nearly enough revenue for Apple to keep working on FCS. ;)
skunk
Mar 3, 04:44 AM
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.If it were about truths and falsehoods, surely everybody would agree? But it isn't, is it? It's about how you feel about it.
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.You are simply avoiding responsibility for your own prejudice by an appeal to a spurious authority.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe.Or, to put it another way, what you feel.
Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?What does your own condition hint at in terms of "natural teleology"? What does the homosexuality exhibited by hundreds of other species tell you about "natural teleology"?
License causes chaos.This statement indicates that you are an authoritarian with a very dim view of human nature.
I don't see any point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the same sex, since I think homosexuality is a psychological problem caused by nurture, not by nature.Well, in that you are quite simply wrong. There are plenty of studies of identical twins which prove otherwise. You should lay the blame for this "aberrant" behaviour squarely at the feet of your aberrant "god"/nature, rather than seek to persuade people that their nature is "wrong".
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.You are simply avoiding responsibility for your own prejudice by an appeal to a spurious authority.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe.Or, to put it another way, what you feel.
Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?What does your own condition hint at in terms of "natural teleology"? What does the homosexuality exhibited by hundreds of other species tell you about "natural teleology"?
License causes chaos.This statement indicates that you are an authoritarian with a very dim view of human nature.
I don't see any point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the same sex, since I think homosexuality is a psychological problem caused by nurture, not by nature.Well, in that you are quite simply wrong. There are plenty of studies of identical twins which prove otherwise. You should lay the blame for this "aberrant" behaviour squarely at the feet of your aberrant "god"/nature, rather than seek to persuade people that their nature is "wrong".
yg17
Feb 28, 12:54 PM
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Why do you care what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home?
Why do you care what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home?
portishead
Apr 12, 12:17 AM
How about using more than one bloody core to render a timeline or do an export to the eternally-broken Compressor?
How about properly recognizing file attributes on import?
�stability?
�QMaster having better than coin-flip reliability?
�better R3D support (as well as other cameras)?
�GPGPU/OpenCL?
etc etc
Barely any of these are features you NEED. Yes we all want a faster NLE, but people are talking like FCP doesn't work, and is light years behind. All it needs is an update to 64 bit, new quicktime platform, and some other things which I won't go into.
How about properly recognizing file attributes on import?
�stability?
�QMaster having better than coin-flip reliability?
�better R3D support (as well as other cameras)?
�GPGPU/OpenCL?
etc etc
Barely any of these are features you NEED. Yes we all want a faster NLE, but people are talking like FCP doesn't work, and is light years behind. All it needs is an update to 64 bit, new quicktime platform, and some other things which I won't go into.
georgee2face
Mar 22, 02:07 PM
My apologies to the"greens", but these tablets ( and my ipad) will NEVER be a true enterprise product with out some sort of native printing and a FIRST CLASS STYLUS/WRITING APPS. PERIOD.
I use mine in two different business, but it takes drop box, print work-arounds and crude writing apps to use it for business.
I enjoy it for all the other reasosns, but business goes to my MAC AIR.
I use mine in two different business, but it takes drop box, print work-arounds and crude writing apps to use it for business.
I enjoy it for all the other reasosns, but business goes to my MAC AIR.
gnasher729
Aug 17, 05:32 AM
They are comparing a 2 generations old G5 (Dual 2,5) versus a new Intel (Quad 2,6) which is not even the fastest out there. What kind of comparison is that?
If you want to know what is the fastest Mac, the comparison is no good. If you want to know whether you should upgrade your machine, the comparison makes a lot of sense. First, the 2.66 GHz Quad has the best price/performance ratio. If you start with the 2.0 GHz, you get 666 MHz more for $300, then you get another 333 MHz for a mere $800. So if you want to upgrade, the 2.66 is _the_ machine to buy. Second, there will be much less difference between a Quad G5 and a Quad Xeon. On performance critical Rosetta applications (like Photoshop) the Quad G5 will be stronger. In that case, it doesn't matter how much stronger - you won't upgrade, that is all that matters. But if you have a dual G5, then the question whether to upgrade or not is really interesting.
And we need to know whether apps use four cores or not. In many cases, changing from two threads to four threads is very easy (that is if all the threads to the same work; it is much harder if the threads do different work), but the app uses only two threads because most machines had only two CPUs. As an example, early versions of Handbrake didn't gain anything from Quad G5s; the CPUs were 50% idle all the time. People complained, and it was changed. The same thing will happen again, especially since _all_ Mac Pros have four cores.
If you want to know what is the fastest Mac, the comparison is no good. If you want to know whether you should upgrade your machine, the comparison makes a lot of sense. First, the 2.66 GHz Quad has the best price/performance ratio. If you start with the 2.0 GHz, you get 666 MHz more for $300, then you get another 333 MHz for a mere $800. So if you want to upgrade, the 2.66 is _the_ machine to buy. Second, there will be much less difference between a Quad G5 and a Quad Xeon. On performance critical Rosetta applications (like Photoshop) the Quad G5 will be stronger. In that case, it doesn't matter how much stronger - you won't upgrade, that is all that matters. But if you have a dual G5, then the question whether to upgrade or not is really interesting.
And we need to know whether apps use four cores or not. In many cases, changing from two threads to four threads is very easy (that is if all the threads to the same work; it is much harder if the threads do different work), but the app uses only two threads because most machines had only two CPUs. As an example, early versions of Handbrake didn't gain anything from Quad G5s; the CPUs were 50% idle all the time. People complained, and it was changed. The same thing will happen again, especially since _all_ Mac Pros have four cores.
8CoreWhore
Apr 10, 04:37 AM
As bad as it sounds for Apple to "boot out the others", Apple doesn't have the authority to do that. FCUG organizers chose to do it at Apple's request because they require the space and time. FCUG could have said no to Apple, but why would they? It's not a Canon Group, it's a FCU Group...
~Shard~
Jul 14, 04:55 PM
I wasn't being a smartass.
iphone 4 covers pink.
Case Cover for Iphone 4
Pattern iPhone 4 Cover by
If you have iPhone 4 you can
iphone 4G hard back cover case
Iphone 4 pink Coach Simplicity
White Butterfly iPhone 4 Cover
ATamp;T Apple iPhone 4 Case
mac1984user
Apr 27, 08:40 AM
if any of you are concerned about being tracked - why on earth would you buy any product that has a GPS in it (all computers cash info) and why on earth would you buy a cell phone - the towers know almost exactly when (which apple doesn't know) and where you are? The reaction to this news is stupid.
I pretty much agree with you, but I can see where others are coming from on this one. Mobile phones and computers are, in this age, a necessity. There's very little point in denying that. Still, people want to maintain their privacy. I think some people thought it was possible to maintain privacy while owning necessary items. You can't expect someone not to buy a computer or phone. That's not a solution. I respect the idea that people enjoy anonymity and I do too. It's nearly impossible in this world, but what little can be done is worth pursuing in my opinion, so people's expectations, while perhaps a bit naive are not absurd.
I pretty much agree with you, but I can see where others are coming from on this one. Mobile phones and computers are, in this age, a necessity. There's very little point in denying that. Still, people want to maintain their privacy. I think some people thought it was possible to maintain privacy while owning necessary items. You can't expect someone not to buy a computer or phone. That's not a solution. I respect the idea that people enjoy anonymity and I do too. It's nearly impossible in this world, but what little can be done is worth pursuing in my opinion, so people's expectations, while perhaps a bit naive are not absurd.
Nuvi
Apr 11, 12:50 AM
He's also the guy that headed up Adobe Premiere. Sure, the iMovie revamp wasn't a high point but the guy laid the foundations for two of the three most popular NLE's so he can't be all bad. ;)
Lethal
And if Randy / Apple screws it up then we can always do this (http://www.avid.com/US/specialoffers/fcppromotion?intcmp=AV-HP-S3).
Lethal
And if Randy / Apple screws it up then we can always do this (http://www.avid.com/US/specialoffers/fcppromotion?intcmp=AV-HP-S3).
kentkomine
Apr 11, 03:42 PM
Aww, I was really hoping/expecting for a summer release :( But with all the other rumors suggesting that WWDC 2011 will be software-oriented, it makes sense. The iPhone 5 better be AWESOME, or else!!
obeygiant
Apr 28, 11:14 AM
I heard if you take Obama's long form birth certificate and fold just the right way, you can see the twin towers collapsing..OMG!
BReaking News! White House releases longer whiteish birth certificate:
http://i55.tinypic.com/jgi4xv.jpg
BReaking News! White House releases longer whiteish birth certificate:
http://i55.tinypic.com/jgi4xv.jpg
matticus008
Nov 29, 06:13 AM
One wonders why it hasn't been used in a Court of Law.
Not really, though. There are countless ways of maneuvering around any such royalties, from framing it as an access toll to a deposit or anything in between. This added cost doesn't actually get you anywhere in litigation, most importantly because it in no way stipulates between you, the customer, and the label.
What's also interesting is that if this fee is added they have now unwittingly legimized the stolen music.
Far from it. Each tax payer contributes to fund their local DMV, and yet their services aren't free. The state collects a tax on car sales, which goes in most cases to road improvement, police departments, and the DMV (along with a truly bizarre array of other causes), but it's only part of the cost. You also pay taxes to a general fund, which is distributed to agencies and services you may never use (or even be aware of). Contributing some money cannot be construed as contributing sufficient money here.
You also pay for car insurance which protects you in the event of an accident; intentionally putting yourself in an accident is insurance fraud. There's no such thing as "music fraud" (at least in this construction), but the result is a sort of piracy insurance policy for the label. Naturally, though, the labels claim such exorbitant losses and damages from piracy that even $1 per iPod would hardly dent that figure.
If this went into effect, I would have a defense in court when I downloaded the entire Universal Label Catalog (All Their Music) off the net.
If only it worked that way...
Just to be clear, this whole idea of collecting on music players is nothing short of outrageous. But it doesn't have the legal implications or weight that have been popularized here. They CAN have their cake and eat it, too, and they know it. That's why it's important for me to ensure that these false notions don't become ingrained as part of the Internet groupthink--when you step back into the real world, you'll be equally screwed, with or without this fee.
Not really, though. There are countless ways of maneuvering around any such royalties, from framing it as an access toll to a deposit or anything in between. This added cost doesn't actually get you anywhere in litigation, most importantly because it in no way stipulates between you, the customer, and the label.
What's also interesting is that if this fee is added they have now unwittingly legimized the stolen music.
Far from it. Each tax payer contributes to fund their local DMV, and yet their services aren't free. The state collects a tax on car sales, which goes in most cases to road improvement, police departments, and the DMV (along with a truly bizarre array of other causes), but it's only part of the cost. You also pay taxes to a general fund, which is distributed to agencies and services you may never use (or even be aware of). Contributing some money cannot be construed as contributing sufficient money here.
You also pay for car insurance which protects you in the event of an accident; intentionally putting yourself in an accident is insurance fraud. There's no such thing as "music fraud" (at least in this construction), but the result is a sort of piracy insurance policy for the label. Naturally, though, the labels claim such exorbitant losses and damages from piracy that even $1 per iPod would hardly dent that figure.
If this went into effect, I would have a defense in court when I downloaded the entire Universal Label Catalog (All Their Music) off the net.
If only it worked that way...
Just to be clear, this whole idea of collecting on music players is nothing short of outrageous. But it doesn't have the legal implications or weight that have been popularized here. They CAN have their cake and eat it, too, and they know it. That's why it's important for me to ensure that these false notions don't become ingrained as part of the Internet groupthink--when you step back into the real world, you'll be equally screwed, with or without this fee.
kainjow
Sep 19, 11:35 AM
As for me, they have 2 more weeks of my patience before I revert back to my PC days. I'm tired of getting made fun of by my PC Geek friends while I play on my outdated G4 PB.
I'm beginning to believe my friends when they say that Apple pats their own backs for crap that PC makers created a year ago.
If you want to switch back to a PC, no one's stopping you.
But realize, using a PC vs a Mac isn't about the hardware - it's about the software. True, G4's suck and are slow, and should have been given the boot YEARS ago. But it's not Apple's fault for you sticking with it. You should have at LEAST upgraded to the MBP when it was initially launched. How is the Merom update going to be THAT much better than the current MBP?
I'm beginning to believe my friends when they say that Apple pats their own backs for crap that PC makers created a year ago.
If you want to switch back to a PC, no one's stopping you.
But realize, using a PC vs a Mac isn't about the hardware - it's about the software. True, G4's suck and are slow, and should have been given the boot YEARS ago. But it's not Apple's fault for you sticking with it. You should have at LEAST upgraded to the MBP when it was initially launched. How is the Merom update going to be THAT much better than the current MBP?
Fabio_gsilva
Jul 28, 04:52 PM
Thanks, and yes, me too. I just hope they do something to fill that headless hole between the mini and pro. And I hope the innards are more accessible than the mini.
A headless iMac would be very nice to mee, indeed. I own a Mini, so I don't want to throw my keyboard, mouse and display right now... And I don't have enough money to replace them now too.
A headless iMac would be very nice to mee, indeed. I own a Mini, so I don't want to throw my keyboard, mouse and display right now... And I don't have enough money to replace them now too.
aricher
Sep 13, 09:31 AM
Are these processors 32 or 64 bit? I told one of my PC-lovin' IT guys about the 8 core Mac this morning and he said, "32 bit processors are ancient technology no matter how many you stuff into a box, but I guess they are OK for entertainment computers." :rolleyes:
NewSc2
Sep 19, 02:18 AM
Does it even MATTER if Apple keeps up? Do we actually WANT Apple to release a new computer every month when Intel bumps up their chips a few megahertz?
See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.
So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
Hm, well my Powerbook runs barely 4 instances of Sculpture on some of my works. MacBook Pros can run about 15-17, but I've been holding off on the Rev. A because of all the heat issues. Hopefully those get cleared up.
Anyways -- yes, I think we should expect Apple to update along with everybody else on the PC front. Maybe not every small speed bump, but whenever a newly designed chip comes out.
See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.
So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
Hm, well my Powerbook runs barely 4 instances of Sculpture on some of my works. MacBook Pros can run about 15-17, but I've been holding off on the Rev. A because of all the heat issues. Hopefully those get cleared up.
Anyways -- yes, I think we should expect Apple to update along with everybody else on the PC front. Maybe not every small speed bump, but whenever a newly designed chip comes out.
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 3, 05:00 PM
I got a prize car for getting all golds in Beginner and Amateur categories. I dont remember what it was, but i recall that when i got my last gold in each bracket they gave me a car for completing the whole thing.
I've started rally a bit today while i save up for a car with a bit more balls. Rally is completely sublime. I am loving every second of it. I had no problem with the dirt and snow tracks, but the tarmac rally is giving me some trouble. I use an 06 Focus ST that is around 215hp, so i can bump up the HP and still compete in the series. I might just have to do that.
I've started rally a bit today while i save up for a car with a bit more balls. Rally is completely sublime. I am loving every second of it. I had no problem with the dirt and snow tracks, but the tarmac rally is giving me some trouble. I use an 06 Focus ST that is around 215hp, so i can bump up the HP and still compete in the series. I might just have to do that.
reflex
Sep 19, 07:51 AM
Maybe I'm missing something here, but I'd of thought buying the latest and fastest computer every year would be the first thing a 'pro-user' would do with his money.
I can't speak for everyone, but there are a few considerations apart from speed:
- the available funds
- the ability to deduct the purchase from taxes
- having to reinstall everything on the new computer
Speed is nice, but when a two year old laptop is mostly fast enough (in my case), then why buy a new one after only a year?
I usually buy a new laptop about every two years. This is a relatively nice trade off between my desire to have the latest of everything and actually getting any work done.
I can't speak for everyone, but there are a few considerations apart from speed:
- the available funds
- the ability to deduct the purchase from taxes
- having to reinstall everything on the new computer
Speed is nice, but when a two year old laptop is mostly fast enough (in my case), then why buy a new one after only a year?
I usually buy a new laptop about every two years. This is a relatively nice trade off between my desire to have the latest of everything and actually getting any work done.
DStaal
Sep 13, 10:03 AM
I'm just wondering if I can drop one of these into an iMac... Are they pin-compatible? Also sort of wondering about a heat issue.
Nope - Different processor archetecture. Even if the pins were the same, the motherboards are different.
Both Clovertown and Woodcrest are 'Xeon' chips, which is a particular processor family. Chips in one processor family may be replaceable with others from that family, but generally different families are not replacable with each other. (Unless specifially designed to do so.)
Also, the iMac is a 32-bit computer, and these are 64-bit chips, reducing any possiblity to zero.
Nope - Different processor archetecture. Even if the pins were the same, the motherboards are different.
Both Clovertown and Woodcrest are 'Xeon' chips, which is a particular processor family. Chips in one processor family may be replaceable with others from that family, but generally different families are not replacable with each other. (Unless specifially designed to do so.)
Also, the iMac is a 32-bit computer, and these are 64-bit chips, reducing any possiblity to zero.
Unspeaked
Nov 29, 01:08 PM
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
Dude, I think you're right on, and your English is fine (better than some native English speakers who post here, in any case!).
Distribution methods like iTunes make the middle men - the labels - obsolete. It puts artists on a level playing field and coupled with viral marketing like MySpace and such it really spells the end for record labels as we know them.
If anything, all a "record label" might hope to be in the future is a marketing branch that works with an artists and takes a small cut of their sales, not the eight headed monster who controls ever aspect of an artists career - from where they record their album to what sizes their t-shirts come in - that we find today.
And as far as radio goes, it's totally done as a means of making hits. Heck, even next generation satellite radio is struggling - you're telling me terrestrial radio, which is nothing more than 15 minutes of talk and 20 minutes of commercial per hour is deciding what's popular today? Nuh uh. Try: MySpace, commercials, blogs, television series background music, etc. THAT's where today's hits come from.
FM radio and MTV lost all significance ages ago. If you're using them to find hits, maybe you should get off your PowerMac 6100 and upgrade your 14,000 baud modem to a DSL connection so you can visit the real world...
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
Dude, I think you're right on, and your English is fine (better than some native English speakers who post here, in any case!).
Distribution methods like iTunes make the middle men - the labels - obsolete. It puts artists on a level playing field and coupled with viral marketing like MySpace and such it really spells the end for record labels as we know them.
If anything, all a "record label" might hope to be in the future is a marketing branch that works with an artists and takes a small cut of their sales, not the eight headed monster who controls ever aspect of an artists career - from where they record their album to what sizes their t-shirts come in - that we find today.
And as far as radio goes, it's totally done as a means of making hits. Heck, even next generation satellite radio is struggling - you're telling me terrestrial radio, which is nothing more than 15 minutes of talk and 20 minutes of commercial per hour is deciding what's popular today? Nuh uh. Try: MySpace, commercials, blogs, television series background music, etc. THAT's where today's hits come from.
FM radio and MTV lost all significance ages ago. If you're using them to find hits, maybe you should get off your PowerMac 6100 and upgrade your 14,000 baud modem to a DSL connection so you can visit the real world...
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu