P-Worm
Nov 15, 08:01 AM
They say that the changes in speed aren't going to effect most people because the programs aren't written for multiple cores. Do you think that we are going to see more consumer apps optimized for multiple processors, or do you think that it just isn't needed?
P-Worm
P-Worm
SactoGuy18
Nov 29, 10:14 PM
Folks,
The reason why the Zune sells poorly comes down to these factors:
1) The software to interface with the Zune leaves much to be desired in terms of ease of use. Every reviewer expresses concern about the unneccessary complications of the Zune software copying media files to the player.
2) Microsoft blew it by going to a new digital rights management system, one totally different than the DRM system used in conjunction with Windows Media Player 10/11 with its Play for Sure initiative.
Technically, while the Zune is larger than it needs to be, most reviewers do laud the interface on the player itself. I think once Microsoft improves the interface software for the Zune acceptance of the device will climb dramatically. After all, when Apple started selling iPods for Windows users it didn't become really popular until the iPod switched to the USB 2.0 connection and iTunes became available in a Windows version.
The reason why the Zune sells poorly comes down to these factors:
1) The software to interface with the Zune leaves much to be desired in terms of ease of use. Every reviewer expresses concern about the unneccessary complications of the Zune software copying media files to the player.
2) Microsoft blew it by going to a new digital rights management system, one totally different than the DRM system used in conjunction with Windows Media Player 10/11 with its Play for Sure initiative.
Technically, while the Zune is larger than it needs to be, most reviewers do laud the interface on the player itself. I think once Microsoft improves the interface software for the Zune acceptance of the device will climb dramatically. After all, when Apple started selling iPods for Windows users it didn't become really popular until the iPod switched to the USB 2.0 connection and iTunes became available in a Windows version.
nagromme
Sep 6, 04:55 PM
The bottom model is now a great deal, but I agree that bringing in a cheaper model would be nice. $499 Core Solo would be power to spare for a lot of people. I know it's more power than the G4 I'm typing on has :)
There's a good reason apple didn't go Core2 on the mini...it would make it too close to the new minitower they'll be announcing soon!
I like where your head is :)
There's a good reason apple didn't go Core2 on the mini...it would make it too close to the new minitower they'll be announcing soon!
I like where your head is :)
FireStar
Oct 22, 07:03 PM
How are the Skullcandy Slider cases?
My friend's brother has one for his 3rd Gen and it looks pretty sturdy. But when I tried to take it off I couldn't get the top piece off, only the top piece. I didn't try that hard though.
My friend's brother has one for his 3rd Gen and it looks pretty sturdy. But when I tried to take it off I couldn't get the top piece off, only the top piece. I didn't try that hard though.
Evangelion
Sep 1, 12:21 PM
i don't think this rumor will come out to be true because this might take a lot of people from getting Mac Pro
so what?*What makes you think that Apple would be earning any less by selling 23" iMacs than Mac Pro's?*It doesn't really matter to Apple that do they earn X million dollars selling Mac Pro's or iMacs, as lomg as they do earn money.
As to this being a home-theater setup... sorry, not gonna fly. While 23" is a big size for a monitor, it's still a lot less than the 32 - 42" televisions people have.
so what?*What makes you think that Apple would be earning any less by selling 23" iMacs than Mac Pro's?*It doesn't really matter to Apple that do they earn X million dollars selling Mac Pro's or iMacs, as lomg as they do earn money.
As to this being a home-theater setup... sorry, not gonna fly. While 23" is a big size for a monitor, it's still a lot less than the 32 - 42" televisions people have.
blilly
Nov 28, 10:40 AM
It's far too early to make comparisons . . . . the competition is good and I think even Apple enjoys the challenge. I don't like this "us vs. them" attitude that seems to be so pervasive with the Zune . . even more, it seems, than with the OS wars . . . .
econgeek
Apr 12, 08:46 PM
I just finished reading the old thread, only to discover that there was a new story on MacRumors and a new thread... so here's my comments:
For context, I started cutting film back when I had two reels and a viewer in the middle... and I had to hand crank it to preview. Cutting involved a nice razor embedded in plastic and a splice was a fancy piece of tape with sprocket holes in it. I am a software developer and I've long lamented how early editing software has always been based on just replicating the film process electronically.
Then I started to meet the Video People. Video People are much of the industry- the editors for TV news, the editors for TV programs, the wedding photographers. Just about everbody but filmmakers, but also including a lot of the lower end film production support (eg: editing houses.) The Video People have been taught rules of thumb. They are not very technical. They know how it is "supposed" to work because that's what they learned in colllege or at their first jobs. They are all stuck in specific workflows and specific ways of doing things.
They output to tape because they cannot grasp the concept that tape became obsolete a decade ago (and the ones who can grasp it are stuck dealing with others who demand delivery and archive on tape.)
These are the same people who think that iMovie was a joke when it was reworked. I loved it. I was happy to see a tiny, little step forward in working with video. Apple thought just a smidgen different and people went crazy. Sure it had less features than the previous one-- but creativity was so unleashed that the minor hassle of working around those features not being built in was no big deal.
I think Apple is skating to where the puck is. Apple is going to release a Final Cut focused on the direction the industry is heading. If Apple does its job right, the Video People will be screaming their heads off. But the 20 year olds who don't know anything but "want to make movies" (and are more serious than those willing to limit themselves to iMovie) will take it and start cutting the next generation of indie features.
Maybe Apple will provide all the features the Video People are threatening to switch to Avid if they don't get (as if it is some sort of a hostage demand -- "I'm going to post to macrumors forums and threaten to switch to Avid! That will teach them!". I've met many people in many industries but the Video People are the most rigid, the least genuinely understanding of technology and the most fixated on rules of thumb and rigid perspectives about How Things Should Work. Seriously, computer illiterate grease monkies are more flexible and open to new technology, in my experience. The Video People think they are Pros (because hey earn a salary) and therefore, anything that causes them to stretch or adjust or re-think the processes they use is "bad". The idea that something might be more efficient or produce a better quality result seems unfathomable.
If Apple has spent the last several years working on something signficant (which is the implication of the claims Apple has "abandoned their pro products") then the Video People are going to be screaming bloody murder in a couple hours. I look forward to it.
(PS- I didn't call anyone in this thread a Video People. You can choose to take offense if you wish, but I'm talking about people I've met and had to work with in the industry, not posters to this thread whom I do not know personally.)
For context, I started cutting film back when I had two reels and a viewer in the middle... and I had to hand crank it to preview. Cutting involved a nice razor embedded in plastic and a splice was a fancy piece of tape with sprocket holes in it. I am a software developer and I've long lamented how early editing software has always been based on just replicating the film process electronically.
Then I started to meet the Video People. Video People are much of the industry- the editors for TV news, the editors for TV programs, the wedding photographers. Just about everbody but filmmakers, but also including a lot of the lower end film production support (eg: editing houses.) The Video People have been taught rules of thumb. They are not very technical. They know how it is "supposed" to work because that's what they learned in colllege or at their first jobs. They are all stuck in specific workflows and specific ways of doing things.
They output to tape because they cannot grasp the concept that tape became obsolete a decade ago (and the ones who can grasp it are stuck dealing with others who demand delivery and archive on tape.)
These are the same people who think that iMovie was a joke when it was reworked. I loved it. I was happy to see a tiny, little step forward in working with video. Apple thought just a smidgen different and people went crazy. Sure it had less features than the previous one-- but creativity was so unleashed that the minor hassle of working around those features not being built in was no big deal.
I think Apple is skating to where the puck is. Apple is going to release a Final Cut focused on the direction the industry is heading. If Apple does its job right, the Video People will be screaming their heads off. But the 20 year olds who don't know anything but "want to make movies" (and are more serious than those willing to limit themselves to iMovie) will take it and start cutting the next generation of indie features.
Maybe Apple will provide all the features the Video People are threatening to switch to Avid if they don't get (as if it is some sort of a hostage demand -- "I'm going to post to macrumors forums and threaten to switch to Avid! That will teach them!". I've met many people in many industries but the Video People are the most rigid, the least genuinely understanding of technology and the most fixated on rules of thumb and rigid perspectives about How Things Should Work. Seriously, computer illiterate grease monkies are more flexible and open to new technology, in my experience. The Video People think they are Pros (because hey earn a salary) and therefore, anything that causes them to stretch or adjust or re-think the processes they use is "bad". The idea that something might be more efficient or produce a better quality result seems unfathomable.
If Apple has spent the last several years working on something signficant (which is the implication of the claims Apple has "abandoned their pro products") then the Video People are going to be screaming bloody murder in a couple hours. I look forward to it.
(PS- I didn't call anyone in this thread a Video People. You can choose to take offense if you wish, but I'm talking about people I've met and had to work with in the industry, not posters to this thread whom I do not know personally.)
abhimat.gautam
Mar 31, 03:00 AM
Apple has never mentioned before the new "Scene Kit":
Introduced in Mac OS X v10.7, the Scene Kit framework enables your application to import, manipulate, and render three-dimensional assets. It supports 3D assets imported via COLLADA, an XML-based schema that facilitates the transport of 3D assets between applications. Architecturally, a scene is composed of the 3D entities of cameras, lights, and meshes. Scene Kit lets you access attributes of scene objects�for example, geometry, bounding volume, and material�and is consistent with the APIs of other graphical frameworks, such as Core Animation and Image Kit.
Scene Kit is intended for developers who quickly need to integrate 3D rendering into their applications. It doesn�t require that you have advanced graphical programming skills.
Nice, didn�t know about that.
Introduced in Mac OS X v10.7, the Scene Kit framework enables your application to import, manipulate, and render three-dimensional assets. It supports 3D assets imported via COLLADA, an XML-based schema that facilitates the transport of 3D assets between applications. Architecturally, a scene is composed of the 3D entities of cameras, lights, and meshes. Scene Kit lets you access attributes of scene objects�for example, geometry, bounding volume, and material�and is consistent with the APIs of other graphical frameworks, such as Core Animation and Image Kit.
Scene Kit is intended for developers who quickly need to integrate 3D rendering into their applications. It doesn�t require that you have advanced graphical programming skills.
Nice, didn�t know about that.
Rodimus Prime
Apr 11, 04:55 PM
I don't think people are pumping it up at all. I personally think that people who can't drive a standard transmission, are just lazy (and that goes for my mother, and her habit of doing her makeup while driving). People only get autos, because they don't want to have to "inconvenience" themselves with pushing down on the clutch and throwing the car into the next gear; because doing so requires them to stop shoving food down their face, or to get of the damn phone. I also hate to hear people moan about how inconvenient a standard transmission is during stop and go traffic; I mean it's not that bad, and I recently took my standard transmission accord to chicago and drove in stop and go traffic for over two hours, and it was not as annoying as some would make it out to be. People are just too willing to sacrifice the fun of driving for convenience.
-Don
dealing with it once is annoying but if you have to deal with that traffic every day you start to really consider going automatic. While I lived in Dallas and driving threw morning and evening rush hour every day in my manual I really was debating about giving up the manual and going auto because it was annoying putting up with it every day. Once or twice a week I would never of considered it but dealing with it every day I would go to work really made me consider it.
I was honestly shocked at myself when I realized that when I love driving a manual and have been driving one since I was 15. I was around 25 at the time. That should give you some reason.
My brother gave up an manual to go auto because he was dealing with traffic around his school and lot and just did not want to deal with it. he has no regrets about it. Of my family only my sister never learned out to drive a manual tranny and she has zero interest in wanting to do it.
As for me I still am driving a manual and I am pretty sure I will try to make my next car a manual tranny as one thing I can not stand is lazy automatic. I like being able to drop to a lower gear for more power when I want to. It makes passing a hell of a lot easier.
-Don
dealing with it once is annoying but if you have to deal with that traffic every day you start to really consider going automatic. While I lived in Dallas and driving threw morning and evening rush hour every day in my manual I really was debating about giving up the manual and going auto because it was annoying putting up with it every day. Once or twice a week I would never of considered it but dealing with it every day I would go to work really made me consider it.
I was honestly shocked at myself when I realized that when I love driving a manual and have been driving one since I was 15. I was around 25 at the time. That should give you some reason.
My brother gave up an manual to go auto because he was dealing with traffic around his school and lot and just did not want to deal with it. he has no regrets about it. Of my family only my sister never learned out to drive a manual tranny and she has zero interest in wanting to do it.
As for me I still am driving a manual and I am pretty sure I will try to make my next car a manual tranny as one thing I can not stand is lazy automatic. I like being able to drop to a lower gear for more power when I want to. It makes passing a hell of a lot easier.
AvSRoCkCO1067
Aug 29, 04:44 PM
As has been reported, it's because of high demand due to the back-to-school season. Apple is having difficulty keeping up with that demand.
Apple's wait to use new processors is brilliant, in my opinion. This is a crucial point in the buying season - students need new computers now, not in a month or two.
Quite a few people on this board want Apple to simply announce the next Macbook Pro with Merom, even if it has delayed shipping. That would, however, compel students who need computers now to look elsewhere.
The only reason why Dell can announce Merombooks now is because they offer both the Yonah chips (shipping today) and the Merom chips (shipping in 10-20 days) - I don't see Apple offering both configurations simultaneously.
(1000th post - WOOT!)
Apple's wait to use new processors is brilliant, in my opinion. This is a crucial point in the buying season - students need new computers now, not in a month or two.
Quite a few people on this board want Apple to simply announce the next Macbook Pro with Merom, even if it has delayed shipping. That would, however, compel students who need computers now to look elsewhere.
The only reason why Dell can announce Merombooks now is because they offer both the Yonah chips (shipping today) and the Merom chips (shipping in 10-20 days) - I don't see Apple offering both configurations simultaneously.
(1000th post - WOOT!)
batitombo
Apr 21, 10:58 PM
This is what I think about this: http://youtu.be/O6b9P963jW8?hd=1
Maclver
Mar 30, 08:35 PM
Launchpad is now fixed.. Click and hold to move multiple apps (shakes like iPhone)
When launching expose dock doesn't crash any more...
Much snappier in performance
Has anyone noticed when shutting down the menu bar up top stays into the blue screen?
When launching expose dock doesn't crash any more...
Much snappier in performance
Has anyone noticed when shutting down the menu bar up top stays into the blue screen?
gameface
Apr 12, 08:28 PM
I was at an NAB supermeet in maybe 2003? There was all of 30 of us there. That pictures is insane.
NebulaClash
Sep 15, 09:00 AM
No, you are missing the point. Yes auto manufactures have recalls all the time and yes the customer has to come in to get it fixed on previous purchases. HOWEVER, they also fix all NEW automobiles before continue to sell to new customers. Apple isn't doing that, and that is CR's complaint.
If it was a safety issue, as with cars, Apple would do the same thing. But it's not, so it's silly to to conflate the two. That was not the intent of my analogy, and that's being missed by those focusing on the trees.
If it was a safety issue, as with cars, Apple would do the same thing. But it's not, so it's silly to to conflate the two. That was not the intent of my analogy, and that's being missed by those focusing on the trees.
Dont Hurt Me
Aug 27, 06:26 PM
This is the $64K question. Does anyone know when the X3000 is due to be released?True, with it the mini is a solid little machine, without it it still lacks graphics. Its coming soon because Intel wants to take away $$$ from nvidia & ati.
qualleyiv
Nov 15, 10:30 AM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
OK, I'm hardly a programmer (PHP doesn't really count) but that's the exact same description that I've heard applied to the description of what it takes to vectorize a program (i.e. make it Alti-Vec optimized) [that and the process of making loops that can be unrolled]. So I've got to ask, is there some difference between those two concepts? If not, it sure seems like we would have a lot more multi-core enabled apps out there already...
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
OK, I'm hardly a programmer (PHP doesn't really count) but that's the exact same description that I've heard applied to the description of what it takes to vectorize a program (i.e. make it Alti-Vec optimized) [that and the process of making loops that can be unrolled]. So I've got to ask, is there some difference between those two concepts? If not, it sure seems like we would have a lot more multi-core enabled apps out there already...
twoodcc
Nov 4, 05:13 PM
congrats to rwh202 for getting 2 million points!
VanNess
Jul 20, 02:27 AM
Most likely it would work exactly like how a normal streamed QuickTime movie downloads. It buffers for a few minutes, and then you can start watching it, and it downloads in the background, and saves it to file letting you watch it again for X times/days. This is exactly how Movielink works.
Ah, ok, thanks for the info. I never used Movielink and I'm not familiar with it. I've never steamed any content that would even approximate the length of a hollywood movie, with the possible exception of S. Jobs keynotes. So far, H264 seems to serve those very well. (Except for the first week or so, when it seems the server is bombarded.) In any event, I don't think that content is actually downloaded to disk as its streamed.
On the other hand, movie trailers (like Apple Quicktime trailers) are downloaded in the background to some secret location on the disk as they are watched, and, although they usually perform well, occasionally they hiccup (stall momentarily) for whatever reason (traffic, general internet latency), sometimes even the regular non-HD ones. So if Movielink has figured out a way to provide a bulletproof buffer for streaming high-quality (DVD) content over regular US DSL, great. Maybe Apple can one-up them with even higher, H264 quality.
But if the stream ever stalls, even momentarily, count me out. My gauge for judging (and accepting) any online Movie service is that it must meet or exceed the present terrestrial-based DVD experience. There is a local DVD rental store within 2 blocks of where I live. That modest, unassuming little establishment happens to be Apple's and Movielink's greatest competition in my book. They have to give me a compelling reason not to go there.
Ah, ok, thanks for the info. I never used Movielink and I'm not familiar with it. I've never steamed any content that would even approximate the length of a hollywood movie, with the possible exception of S. Jobs keynotes. So far, H264 seems to serve those very well. (Except for the first week or so, when it seems the server is bombarded.) In any event, I don't think that content is actually downloaded to disk as its streamed.
On the other hand, movie trailers (like Apple Quicktime trailers) are downloaded in the background to some secret location on the disk as they are watched, and, although they usually perform well, occasionally they hiccup (stall momentarily) for whatever reason (traffic, general internet latency), sometimes even the regular non-HD ones. So if Movielink has figured out a way to provide a bulletproof buffer for streaming high-quality (DVD) content over regular US DSL, great. Maybe Apple can one-up them with even higher, H264 quality.
But if the stream ever stalls, even momentarily, count me out. My gauge for judging (and accepting) any online Movie service is that it must meet or exceed the present terrestrial-based DVD experience. There is a local DVD rental store within 2 blocks of where I live. That modest, unassuming little establishment happens to be Apple's and Movielink's greatest competition in my book. They have to give me a compelling reason not to go there.
Compile 'em all
Jan 5, 08:22 AM
For a word processor, I'm using Open Office...I'm pretty happy with it except that it uses X11.
Use NeoOffice. It is a port of OpenOffice and uses Aqua instead of X11.
Use NeoOffice. It is a port of OpenOffice and uses Aqua instead of X11.
carve
Feb 5, 01:05 PM
Soon to be my first car...2001 Volvo S60 :)
http://www.featuredcars.com/images/full-2001-Volvo-S60_15366_1.jpg
http://www.featuredcars.com/images/full-2001-Volvo-S60_15366_1.jpg
eemsTV
Apr 19, 01:15 PM
oh joy:D, wondering what the high-end iMac will look like (since that's the one I'm planning on getting!)
mrblack927
Mar 31, 07:06 AM
I haven't noticed too many aesthetic differences (besides iCal of course) but it does feel overall smoother than DP1 to me. You can tell Apple is working hard to get this ready for prime time.
dsnort
Jul 19, 06:47 PM
As a recent "switcher", I feel personally responsible for these numbers. An iMac 20" intel, a Black Book, a Nano and a shuffle in the last 3 months! ( Of course, I'm totally broke now, and the kids are going hungry, but it's nice to see Apple doing well!)
BornAgainMac
Jul 19, 06:32 PM
I bet at the Developer's conference that Adobe and Microsoft announce Universal Binaries for September.
No comments:
Post a Comment