aegisdesign
Sep 13, 11:40 AM
Most people run more than one app at once.
Yes, that's true.
It's also true that most of the time, most people aren't even maxing out ONE core never mind eight.
And when they do, their program won't get any faster unless it's multithreaded and able to run on multiple cores at once.
Yes, that's true.
It's also true that most of the time, most people aren't even maxing out ONE core never mind eight.
And when they do, their program won't get any faster unless it's multithreaded and able to run on multiple cores at once.
cgc
Jul 15, 11:05 AM
:o well, that looks a real mess.. but I suppose it's a good idea since heated air tends to rise.. :-)
I think placing the PSU at the bottom of the case is good...heavy items near the top of the case may lead to Macs being prone to tipping over. Heat can be vented easy enough...
I think placing the PSU at the bottom of the case is good...heavy items near the top of the case may lead to Macs being prone to tipping over. Heat can be vented easy enough...
Tones2
Apr 19, 03:58 PM
Funny, I'm a Dallas Cowboy fan, the fans are fanatics and everyone who is not a Dallas fan HATES the Cowboys. I feel the same heat being an Apple fanatic. The fans are loyal and defending of the brand while every other tech fan hates us. I need a big white Apple logo with a blue Dallas Cowboy star in it. I might be shot!!!! lol
Dallas fans will criticize the Cowboys if they play poorly. Apple fanboys will not. It's not like being a fan, it's like being indoctrinated, with no real vested interest. It make no sense whatsover.
Dallas fans will criticize the Cowboys if they play poorly. Apple fanboys will not. It's not like being a fan, it's like being indoctrinated, with no real vested interest. It make no sense whatsover.
Multimedia
Aug 18, 06:50 PM
So what apps will saturate all four cores or at least get close to it, on either a quad G5 or quad xeon? Are there any?
Are there any apps that really take advantage of four cores on their own?Toast 7.1 UB can use more than two cores. In my test at the Apple stopre last Saturday I saw Toast 7.1 UB use more than 3 - between 2.3 and 3.1 cores all the time on the Mac Pro. It also uses more than two on the Quad G5 - just barely. Handbrake is not yet optimized for Mac Pro and uses a little less than two on both. That use of two is negatively impacted as soon as you start doiong something else especially both Toast and Handbrake at once.
But in future it will use all four. The problem with that "test" you so highly value, is that the testers didn't have a Quad to compare to, so they didn't even search out applications that are already "Quad Core Ready" - that would make a nice bullet on a software package wouldn't it?
Better yet: "MultiCore Ready".
If you don't think you are going to ever use more than one thing at a time, then you are right. But I think most of us here have 10-15 things open at once and do all sorts of things at once. That's the reason for "Spaces" in Loepard.
Are there any apps that really take advantage of four cores on their own?Toast 7.1 UB can use more than two cores. In my test at the Apple stopre last Saturday I saw Toast 7.1 UB use more than 3 - between 2.3 and 3.1 cores all the time on the Mac Pro. It also uses more than two on the Quad G5 - just barely. Handbrake is not yet optimized for Mac Pro and uses a little less than two on both. That use of two is negatively impacted as soon as you start doiong something else especially both Toast and Handbrake at once.
But in future it will use all four. The problem with that "test" you so highly value, is that the testers didn't have a Quad to compare to, so they didn't even search out applications that are already "Quad Core Ready" - that would make a nice bullet on a software package wouldn't it?
Better yet: "MultiCore Ready".
If you don't think you are going to ever use more than one thing at a time, then you are right. But I think most of us here have 10-15 things open at once and do all sorts of things at once. That's the reason for "Spaces" in Loepard.
Acerone
Apr 6, 10:50 AM
can we also expect, ?
-backlit keys
-brighter display, colors, and ips
-hd facetime
all would be greatly appreciated along with the sandy bridge
fingers crossed for no over-heating issues, you know how those turbo speeds can get and how they've treated the 13'' pros
+1
-backlit keys
-brighter display, colors, and ips
-hd facetime
all would be greatly appreciated along with the sandy bridge
fingers crossed for no over-heating issues, you know how those turbo speeds can get and how they've treated the 13'' pros
+1
amac4me
Jul 14, 07:26 PM
WWDC ... it's getting closer ... can't wait to see what's announced. Oh yeah ... we'll see the preview of Leopard too.
Bring it on Steve :D
Bring it on Steve :D
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
AppleScruff1
Apr 19, 10:42 PM
Even if that were true, so what? Apple Records was not a competitor of Apple Computer. Trademark law allows multiple companies to have the same trademark so long as they don't sell the same type of products in the same location. This is why you can have a 100 companies like "AAA Locksmith, AAA Laundry," etc. Or you can have "Hollywood Video" in Michigan being totally different than "Hollywood Video" everywhere else [interesting story that. I may have the state wrong.]
Only truly "famous" marks (e.g. Coke, McDonalds, etc.) which can be "diluted" by use with other types of products are protected against this sort of thing.
But App Store is like Coke, right? Of course it's ok if Apple does it. They've becoming one of the most hypocritical companies on the planet. Maybe Steve suffers from extreme paranoia?
Only truly "famous" marks (e.g. Coke, McDonalds, etc.) which can be "diluted" by use with other types of products are protected against this sort of thing.
But App Store is like Coke, right? Of course it's ok if Apple does it. They've becoming one of the most hypocritical companies on the planet. Maybe Steve suffers from extreme paranoia?
SuperCachetes
Mar 4, 12:02 AM
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions.
And yet I doubt Macaroony sees opposite-sex attractions as immoral or placing oneself in grave danger. I know what your religious beliefs tell you, and it is your right to follow those as explicitly as you are legally able. But why does that have to impact the rest of the world when you know many of them share different beliefs and have different experiences?
Personally, I think people who believe in gods are weak-minded fools. But I would never support a law that mandated atheism or banned religious gatherings. Because these religious things, while they are not in line with my worldview, do not impact my way of life directly, and allow people to live how they think they need to, not how I think they need to.
Invalid because it endorses something that could cause the collapse of society
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that you don't have a non-biased fact source for a retarded statement like that. :rolleyes:
And yet I doubt Macaroony sees opposite-sex attractions as immoral or placing oneself in grave danger. I know what your religious beliefs tell you, and it is your right to follow those as explicitly as you are legally able. But why does that have to impact the rest of the world when you know many of them share different beliefs and have different experiences?
Personally, I think people who believe in gods are weak-minded fools. But I would never support a law that mandated atheism or banned religious gatherings. Because these religious things, while they are not in line with my worldview, do not impact my way of life directly, and allow people to live how they think they need to, not how I think they need to.
Invalid because it endorses something that could cause the collapse of society
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that you don't have a non-biased fact source for a retarded statement like that. :rolleyes:
Willis
Jul 28, 04:27 PM
Okay, I did some tinkering myself, just for kicks, and here's what I came up with. I thought that we were talking about a computer that was somewhere between a Mac Mini and a Mac Pro (Power Mac), so I thought, maybe the style should be a combination of the two. Let me know what you think.
It's not a Mac Plus... It's a Mac++!
http://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++1.PNGhttp://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++2.PNG
can you say "G4 Cube"?
It's not a Mac Plus... It's a Mac++!
http://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++1.PNGhttp://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++2.PNG
can you say "G4 Cube"?
DocNo
Apr 11, 10:24 AM
I think they want to make FCP a tool for consumers who have no idea about narrative structure and storytelling.
So wouldn't that make the recent pushes with iMovie, particularly on the iOS redundant? That' doesn't seem a very smart use of resources or use of branding...
FCP isn't useful for Apple any more.
Really? Had lunch with SJ lately? Care to share more?
Regarding editing conventions, they are far older then 20 or so years. However, they've been around for a very long time and those conventions will be here to stay. Why? Because in the end of the day stories are linear and that fact won't change one bit even if Apple releases iMovie Pro.
I guess time will tell. I remember reading comments like yours from industry "experts" when I first started playing around with PageMaker 1.0 on my school's Mac Plus - dismissing it as a toy and not a serious or professional tool.
Perhaps "old timers" problems like yours is that you have been in your box for so long that you can't possibly imagine how it could be different and useful? The panel touched on that - I think it was in Part 2. It was fun to see who embraced that notation and which members of the panel dismissed it (either verbally or by their body language).
Final thought: evolve or die; be prepared to get out of your comfort zone. Heck, you might even like it!
So wouldn't that make the recent pushes with iMovie, particularly on the iOS redundant? That' doesn't seem a very smart use of resources or use of branding...
FCP isn't useful for Apple any more.
Really? Had lunch with SJ lately? Care to share more?
Regarding editing conventions, they are far older then 20 or so years. However, they've been around for a very long time and those conventions will be here to stay. Why? Because in the end of the day stories are linear and that fact won't change one bit even if Apple releases iMovie Pro.
I guess time will tell. I remember reading comments like yours from industry "experts" when I first started playing around with PageMaker 1.0 on my school's Mac Plus - dismissing it as a toy and not a serious or professional tool.
Perhaps "old timers" problems like yours is that you have been in your box for so long that you can't possibly imagine how it could be different and useful? The panel touched on that - I think it was in Part 2. It was fun to see who embraced that notation and which members of the panel dismissed it (either verbally or by their body language).
Final thought: evolve or die; be prepared to get out of your comfort zone. Heck, you might even like it!
nick123222
Mar 27, 03:59 AM
I use Spotlight, but Launchpad is terribly inefficient compared to stacks. You have to click on its icon to invoke it, hunt through potentially a bunch of different screens, click on a folder if you've organized your apps, and then click on your app. With stacks, I move my cursor down to the dock, click on the appropriate stack, and then click on my app. 2 clicks vs a button press, a bunch of swipes, hunting, and 2 more clicks.
Yes but, with stacks, I often have to do a lot of scrolling to find the app in my applications folder because I haven't spent the time to organise it all into folders. With launchpad, I would have every app in a folder (probably) so I would probably have only 1-3 pages. For me the number of clicks will be the same for the apps that I store in folders already, just with less scrolling:
Stacks: click the stack, scroll to the folder, click the folder, click the app.
Launchpad: click launchpad, swipe to the correct page (if necessary), click the folder, click the app.
I think it will be easier to find apps in launchpad because of the easy use of folders and the fact that it is fullscreen.
Yes but, with stacks, I often have to do a lot of scrolling to find the app in my applications folder because I haven't spent the time to organise it all into folders. With launchpad, I would have every app in a folder (probably) so I would probably have only 1-3 pages. For me the number of clicks will be the same for the apps that I store in folders already, just with less scrolling:
Stacks: click the stack, scroll to the folder, click the folder, click the app.
Launchpad: click launchpad, swipe to the correct page (if necessary), click the folder, click the app.
I think it will be easier to find apps in launchpad because of the easy use of folders and the fact that it is fullscreen.
elgruga
Nov 29, 02:27 AM
If Universal get cash as 'compensation' for stolen music, then presumably once you have paid the 'compensation' money, you can steal as much music as you like. Cool.
Apple doesnt really sell music - it sells iPods and offers the music at cost (or close to it) to support the iPod. Its a smart move , and its a pity that almost ALL of the iTunes cash goes direct to the record companies.
I used to work in the music biz, and a bigger bunch of thieving clowns you have yet to meet.
Most artists get 6-8% of the CD sales. Yes folks thats a big fifty cents or so on an average CD sale.
But because they give you an advance against royalties, which you spend on recording and PR etc. etc, only the very successful (a huge 0.5% of bands) ever make any money. Its a losing gamble and it turns music into a commodity - which it shouldnt be.
This battle will run for a while yet, but there is hope that the DEMISE of record companies is on the horizon.
With computer recording etc., its not necessary to get a record deal - good music does exist outside of the music industry machine.
Maybe Micro$oft will implode too - the zune fiasco suggests that they are up their own arses as far as common sense goes.....
Apple doesnt really sell music - it sells iPods and offers the music at cost (or close to it) to support the iPod. Its a smart move , and its a pity that almost ALL of the iTunes cash goes direct to the record companies.
I used to work in the music biz, and a bigger bunch of thieving clowns you have yet to meet.
Most artists get 6-8% of the CD sales. Yes folks thats a big fifty cents or so on an average CD sale.
But because they give you an advance against royalties, which you spend on recording and PR etc. etc, only the very successful (a huge 0.5% of bands) ever make any money. Its a losing gamble and it turns music into a commodity - which it shouldnt be.
This battle will run for a while yet, but there is hope that the DEMISE of record companies is on the horizon.
With computer recording etc., its not necessary to get a record deal - good music does exist outside of the music industry machine.
Maybe Micro$oft will implode too - the zune fiasco suggests that they are up their own arses as far as common sense goes.....
firestarter
Apr 12, 03:10 PM
Would not excluding capture from tape be quite dumb?
Maybe I'm the stone age man using XH A1...
You could use an app to turn it into a file first.
That's what effectively happens anyway...
Maybe I'm the stone age man using XH A1...
You could use an app to turn it into a file first.
That's what effectively happens anyway...
h'biki
Apr 11, 01:51 AM
I would think this revision will support 3D video editing, right?
I sure hope so. If it doesn't, then they're not really skating to where the puck will be.
Lightworks is already there. Avid is getting there quick.
I sure hope so. If it doesn't, then they're not really skating to where the puck will be.
Lightworks is already there. Avid is getting there quick.
11thIndian
Apr 6, 10:25 PM
I use FCP and am VERY hesitant to go back to Premiere. Haven't used it since Premiere 6.0, and definitely do NOT want to go back. I have tens of thousands of dollars invested in Apple and FCP, and it would be a huge pain to abandon them. But I absolutely will jump ship if the next update to FCP doesn't show me that Apple is still paying attention to the professional users that initially were the bread and butter of the company.
Although the only thing that will ultimately matter is what Apple releases on Tuesday, if you want to get an inkling as to why FCP development has been at loggerheads since do yourself a favour and read a couple articles from Philip Hodgett's blog on FCP, QTkit, Cocoa, and it's unfortunate collision with OSX's 64 bit platform development.
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/category/technology/apple-pro-apps/
Although the only thing that will ultimately matter is what Apple releases on Tuesday, if you want to get an inkling as to why FCP development has been at loggerheads since do yourself a favour and read a couple articles from Philip Hodgett's blog on FCP, QTkit, Cocoa, and it's unfortunate collision with OSX's 64 bit platform development.
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/category/technology/apple-pro-apps/
Bigdaddyguido
Mar 22, 05:17 PM
Wirelessly posted (Iphone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
If your still looking at specs on tablets you don't understand the market well enough to call anything. Of the 15 million people who purchased an iPad 1, how many do you think could tell you how much ram was in the system?
Until a company has a viably competitive app store with applications even approaching the quality if GarageBand, this is beyond a ridiculous statement to make.
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
If your still looking at specs on tablets you don't understand the market well enough to call anything. Of the 15 million people who purchased an iPad 1, how many do you think could tell you how much ram was in the system?
Until a company has a viably competitive app store with applications even approaching the quality if GarageBand, this is beyond a ridiculous statement to make.
Multimedia
Aug 27, 12:24 AM
PowerBook G5 next tuesday?that is so not funny at all any more:rolleyes:The current Yonah MacBook is more powerful than any G5 - even dual core G5's. So why would you even make a fake joke about a weak mobile G5 coming? It's a joke that was only briefly funny two years ago. :rolleyes:
Hamish
Apr 11, 10:36 PM
Looking forward to the new final cut studio.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
ABernardoJr
Apr 25, 03:12 PM
statistics show that distribution of firearms mainly lead to more homocides and also suicides using firearms.
if guns are outlawed, their distribution is greatly limited, making it a lot harder for outlaws to obtain them.
the more you spread guns, the greater is the risk of them being used in illegal activities.
..oh wait... this forum is about apple and computers, right? :rolleyes:
Do you know what an outlaw is? Much less how an outlaw determined to obtain something is not going to stop "because it's harder" or because they are not allowed to? Hence the "outlaw" term?
if guns are outlawed, their distribution is greatly limited, making it a lot harder for outlaws to obtain them.
the more you spread guns, the greater is the risk of them being used in illegal activities.
..oh wait... this forum is about apple and computers, right? :rolleyes:
Do you know what an outlaw is? Much less how an outlaw determined to obtain something is not going to stop "because it's harder" or because they are not allowed to? Hence the "outlaw" term?
diamornte
Apr 9, 02:23 AM
However...most, if not ALL of the pros I know that have been using FCP continue to do so....and there are more motion pictures, BIG ones...this year, edited on FCP than I can remember in years past. Pulling this BS out of your arse is crap. The iToy phenomenon, in my very humble opinion will actually HELP the Pro Apps...as Apple is making more money than EVER!!! This will afford them the expertise they need to develop the pro apps...more so than they've ever been able to do in the past. Keep in mind...for these iToys to be great, they need content....and again, IMHO...I think Apple knows this, and would be happy if every app, movie, song, etc...that resides in iTunes, Mac Store, App Store, etc....was created WITH their soft/hardware as well. Again, just my opinion....Apple won't shoot themselves and the entire creative community in the foot....just when they've becoming the HIGHEST gaining computer sales platform in the world!!! They're selling more computers (MB, MBP, MBair, MP, iMacs) then EVER...and I attribute that somewhat to the excellent user experience so many folks have had with their "iToys". You gotta figure some of those folks will be "Pro" creative guys. And enticed they will be (my Yoda impersonation) by the hardware and software that Apple offers....so if anything, there is Growth in the Pro sector...hardware and software both. NOT a mass exodus. Again...if you truly have proof that "All those Pros have already left Mac"...I'm all ears. If anything, they've made significant gains. Hence the reason AVID has DECREASED their pricing from the astronomical rates it used to cost...and the proprietary rigs you had to have to run the program.
J
Final Cut jobs tend to pay less than Avid jobs.
J
Final Cut jobs tend to pay less than Avid jobs.
2IS
Apr 10, 10:39 AM
Sorry not all of us are blessed with 'night vision' I dunno about your advanced genetics, but using my MBA on minimum setting will give me a headache in about 3 minutes.
Majority of laptops don't have a BL keyboard yet the majority of people still manage just fine despite not having it or night vision.
Majority of laptops don't have a BL keyboard yet the majority of people still manage just fine despite not having it or night vision.
Reach9
Apr 11, 04:45 PM
"Perfectly?" Really?
I can do everything you listed above in iOS just as well as Android - and in many cases better - except in the area of notifications. An area in which iOS truly does suck. How Apple has not yet fixed this boggles the mind.
"Perfectly" as in, in my opinion perfectly. You don't have to agree with me.
No, you can't.
Checking email and Browsing the Internet is better on a bigger screen. Listening to songs is universal. Texting, some Android phones vibrate when you touch the keys making it feel more real. Multitasking, Android did that long before iOS did and does it in a better way, especially with the "kill all open apps" option. Notifications..that's a no brainer. Ability to open Office files, yes the iPhone does that well, but it's much better with a bigger screen. Navigation system..using an Android you don't have to pay $70 (TomTom) for something which should've come with your device. Basic tools, yes iPhone does that too.
Again, it's preference.
If you're going to use "late" as a barometer of success, Android was "later" than iOS at doing just about everything else.
It was late because other Android smartphones already had these features. These are key features that a smartphone should have, and the iPhone didn't. Again, keep in mind my definition of a smartphone is different than yours.
What did Android release which was later than the iOS which defined a smartphone?
Yep, like an...iPad? :p
Yup, but not many people want to lug around a 10" tablet and would like the extra screen real estate on their phones. I know i would.
Of course. Those bajillion apps, most of which completely destroy Android in quality, are an unimportant aside.
If Google thinks like you - that the App Store is merely a "bonus feature" - this war will be won by Apple.
Of course the App Store apps are higher quality, but conveniently you didn't read when i said, for argument sake..
Imagine your iPhone without the App store and all the apps you downloaded from it. Now imagine the HTC EVO without the Android app store. Which is the better smartphone? It's pretty obvious if you ask me.
Anyway, i'll have an iPod Touch for the App Store features. Thus having the best of both worlds, i'll be able to enjoy a productive smartphone using Android, and a nice media device with the App Store.
sure i still use my iPhone 4 for some apps i can't get on the android, but apps r really the only thing that still saves the iPhone. of course its stupid to argue about that on a "mac"rumors site, so i'll just ***** up ^^
Well, apps aren't the only thing that saves the iPhone. But, yeah sadly, you're right.
I can do everything you listed above in iOS just as well as Android - and in many cases better - except in the area of notifications. An area in which iOS truly does suck. How Apple has not yet fixed this boggles the mind.
"Perfectly" as in, in my opinion perfectly. You don't have to agree with me.
No, you can't.
Checking email and Browsing the Internet is better on a bigger screen. Listening to songs is universal. Texting, some Android phones vibrate when you touch the keys making it feel more real. Multitasking, Android did that long before iOS did and does it in a better way, especially with the "kill all open apps" option. Notifications..that's a no brainer. Ability to open Office files, yes the iPhone does that well, but it's much better with a bigger screen. Navigation system..using an Android you don't have to pay $70 (TomTom) for something which should've come with your device. Basic tools, yes iPhone does that too.
Again, it's preference.
If you're going to use "late" as a barometer of success, Android was "later" than iOS at doing just about everything else.
It was late because other Android smartphones already had these features. These are key features that a smartphone should have, and the iPhone didn't. Again, keep in mind my definition of a smartphone is different than yours.
What did Android release which was later than the iOS which defined a smartphone?
Yep, like an...iPad? :p
Yup, but not many people want to lug around a 10" tablet and would like the extra screen real estate on their phones. I know i would.
Of course. Those bajillion apps, most of which completely destroy Android in quality, are an unimportant aside.
If Google thinks like you - that the App Store is merely a "bonus feature" - this war will be won by Apple.
Of course the App Store apps are higher quality, but conveniently you didn't read when i said, for argument sake..
Imagine your iPhone without the App store and all the apps you downloaded from it. Now imagine the HTC EVO without the Android app store. Which is the better smartphone? It's pretty obvious if you ask me.
Anyway, i'll have an iPod Touch for the App Store features. Thus having the best of both worlds, i'll be able to enjoy a productive smartphone using Android, and a nice media device with the App Store.
sure i still use my iPhone 4 for some apps i can't get on the android, but apps r really the only thing that still saves the iPhone. of course its stupid to argue about that on a "mac"rumors site, so i'll just ***** up ^^
Well, apps aren't the only thing that saves the iPhone. But, yeah sadly, you're right.
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.