marksman
Mar 22, 03:14 PM
The screen is not 50% smaller. Nice way of making yourself look stupid.
LOL
http://i54.tinypic.com/dma9nn.png
LOL
http://i54.tinypic.com/dma9nn.png
styles111
Jun 15, 01:49 PM
I went to Radioshack today right before 1:00pm like 12:58 and the store manager was able print out two pin numbers for me. One for my wife and the other for myself. They are only allowed to do one pin per person but I am going to start up another separate account for myself that's why he gave me two. I drove 8 minutes down the road (like a maniac) to another Radioshack to reserve my finally Iphone 32GB with them but they weren't able to print me out a pin number with that reservation.
This was literally 15 minutes apart from store to store. When the Manager of the first Radioshack that I went to completed my first reservation, he was like "Damn, there was literally over 100 pre-orders placed within a space of 2 minutes".
This is going to be crazy on release day.
This was literally 15 minutes apart from store to store. When the Manager of the first Radioshack that I went to completed my first reservation, he was like "Damn, there was literally over 100 pre-orders placed within a space of 2 minutes".
This is going to be crazy on release day.
OSXconvert
Aug 17, 03:32 PM
It will be exactly 25% faster in UB photoshop. How do I know? I tested in photoshop 7.01 in OS X and in XP on the mac pro. XP test was 25% faster. There you go.
Macenforcer, that's a good estimate based on PS7, but we have no idea how much Adobe will optimize the code in CS3.
The thing that makes the Mac vs PC battle so interesting now is that the hardware is essentially the same. So the differences will come down to the hardware drivers and the software and OS optimizations. Though I'd love to see Adobe preferentially optimize the UB code for CS3, I doubt they will financially risk it being much better than Windows. As much as I love the OSX interface better than Windows, I suspect that the deeper pockets of Microsoft will be able to ensure that Vista and CS3 remain neck and neck competitive if not superior in pure performance to Leopard and CS3. Before, when Apple had Motorola's and IBM's chips, things like vector processing speed shone on the Mac, but now the playing field is totally level.
Though it was a smart move to increase marketshare when Apple switched to Intel, it may actually hurt the high-end pro market because all pro machines will be running on the best Intel processors. Choosing, say AMD, over Intel might have been a wiser choice: Apple would have gotten PC compatibility with the possibility of increased performance or Mac customization which would have made the pro machines really scream compared to Windows.
From now on, whatever processor Apple has, Windows has, and the differences will come down mostly on the OS. I do have to tip my hat to Apple for developing BootCamp, because now we as Apple users get the best of both worlds.
Macenforcer, that's a good estimate based on PS7, but we have no idea how much Adobe will optimize the code in CS3.
The thing that makes the Mac vs PC battle so interesting now is that the hardware is essentially the same. So the differences will come down to the hardware drivers and the software and OS optimizations. Though I'd love to see Adobe preferentially optimize the UB code for CS3, I doubt they will financially risk it being much better than Windows. As much as I love the OSX interface better than Windows, I suspect that the deeper pockets of Microsoft will be able to ensure that Vista and CS3 remain neck and neck competitive if not superior in pure performance to Leopard and CS3. Before, when Apple had Motorola's and IBM's chips, things like vector processing speed shone on the Mac, but now the playing field is totally level.
Though it was a smart move to increase marketshare when Apple switched to Intel, it may actually hurt the high-end pro market because all pro machines will be running on the best Intel processors. Choosing, say AMD, over Intel might have been a wiser choice: Apple would have gotten PC compatibility with the possibility of increased performance or Mac customization which would have made the pro machines really scream compared to Windows.
From now on, whatever processor Apple has, Windows has, and the differences will come down mostly on the OS. I do have to tip my hat to Apple for developing BootCamp, because now we as Apple users get the best of both worlds.
LagunaSol
Mar 23, 09:33 AM
Exactly. What people don't understand is that the iPad market is more comparable to the iPod Touch then the iPhone for which there still isn't any competition.
They're in denial.
They're also waiting for the "inevitable" buy-one-Android-tablet-get-one-free deals that are sure to happen (just like with smartphones). Right? ;)
They're in denial.
They're also waiting for the "inevitable" buy-one-Android-tablet-get-one-free deals that are sure to happen (just like with smartphones). Right? ;)
Benjy91
Mar 31, 02:30 PM
Lol, the fragmentation that "doesnt exist".
I knew it would bite them in the ass someday.
I knew it would bite them in the ass someday.
Multimedia
Jul 14, 08:30 PM
This is good news for me.. it will make it easy to resist buying one this year. No 3ghz xeon, no bluray, no new case design.I agree as I am waiting for the 8 core model with Leopard while I continue to limp along on the Quad G5. ;) I run an external Optical on top of my Quad G5 so this would be a nice addition. But I also run an ATA/133 HD inside on top of my optical on it's spare bus port, so it's really not much of an improvement from an internal HD perspective.
What's great is the idea of Apple holding the prices the same in the middle and top while lowering the bottom model's price. Lowers the barrier to entry in this class of machine. But I do think this series is a good transitional setup for those who can't wait for Leopard and have been waiting for Intel longer than those of us with the last of the G5s - especially those coming from G4 Power Macs that are way long in the tooth.
What's great is the idea of Apple holding the prices the same in the middle and top while lowering the bottom model's price. Lowers the barrier to entry in this class of machine. But I do think this series is a good transitional setup for those who can't wait for Leopard and have been waiting for Intel longer than those of us with the last of the G5s - especially those coming from G4 Power Macs that are way long in the tooth.
iPaf
Apr 27, 10:02 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; fr-fr) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Your location is nothing compared to what Facebook collects about you :P
Your location is nothing compared to what Facebook collects about you :P
Zadillo
Aug 27, 07:49 PM
From the benchmarks I've seen, the 3000/X3000 stuff (the 965 integrated graphics) is *slower* than the 945 integrated graphics. The only advantage it offers is SM 3.0 (pixel shaders), which are required for Vista compliance -- and that nice little sticker that all new PC systems will want for this holiday season. I wouldn't consider it an upgrade.
Do you mean Vista Premium compliance? I'm pretty sure I've seen "Ready for Vista" stickers on plenty of current notebooks featuring GMA950 graphics, for example.
And btw, I have to say "good job" to Apple for doing whatever was necessary to avoid having to put a bunch of goofy decals on their computers. The most amazing thing to me is the number of PC notebook users that leave all those stickers on (I've even seen some people leave the "features" stickers on).
Do you mean Vista Premium compliance? I'm pretty sure I've seen "Ready for Vista" stickers on plenty of current notebooks featuring GMA950 graphics, for example.
And btw, I have to say "good job" to Apple for doing whatever was necessary to avoid having to put a bunch of goofy decals on their computers. The most amazing thing to me is the number of PC notebook users that leave all those stickers on (I've even seen some people leave the "features" stickers on).
fivepoint
Mar 22, 12:56 PM
Precisely. The UN mandate is to enforce a no-fly zone, amongst other things, tasks that are particularly suited for certain nations. I'm no gung-ho supporter of this action in Libya, but it strikes me as similar to Bosnia, with the real political pressure coming particularly from France for very real reasons.
Expect the overt US involvement to rapidly scale back soon.
Did Ronald Reagan get a go-ahead from Congress in 1986 for attacking Libya?
No he did not. It was a mistake then, it is a mistake now. The only difference is, I oppose it in all circumstances, regardless of who's president. You only oppose it when it's a Republican in office.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
The best short hairstyles for
“Super-short on round faces
Great haircuts for round faces
Short Haircuts Round Faces
People with a round face tend
short haircuts for round faces
Ear level short curly haircuts
short haircut for women
So women with round faces .
short haircuts for round faces
Expect the overt US involvement to rapidly scale back soon.
Did Ronald Reagan get a go-ahead from Congress in 1986 for attacking Libya?
No he did not. It was a mistake then, it is a mistake now. The only difference is, I oppose it in all circumstances, regardless of who's president. You only oppose it when it's a Republican in office.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
skunk
Mar 1, 10:46 AM
Lee, you should already know my answer to that question. It's an emphatic "no." Nor do I support the gay rights movement.Why not? Whether gays are treated equally under the Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with how you feel about them. Whether you grant them the human dignity of being treated equally has absolutely nothing to do with your Catholic dogma. You are making excuses.
I don't tell others what to do, but that doesn't mean I think it's all right for them do everything they want to do. I'll share my opinions with others if they're willing to hear them. I don't want to control anyone, and I will not be a codependent caregiver. I refuse to protect others from negative consequences when they need to learn from them.Another red herring: nobody is asking you to be a caregiver, simply to stop pontificating about something you clearly know very little about. You are simply broadcasting your prejudices to no useful effect: you are not going to make anyone heterosexual by trashing their feelings and their very nature, you are just going to add to their discomfiture.
My parents, especially my Mom, hated to see me do some foolish things when I was a boy.What a pity you did not learn from her to keep your own counsel.
I believe that people with same-sex attractions are endangering themselves at least physically when they have sex with each other.Feeble. Do you pontificate about sky-diving too?
Knowing is one thing. Having strong evidence is something else. Even if Dr. Gould doesn't know that the Ancient Greeks thought sodomy was repugnant, he probably knew a lot about the history of Ancient Greece. To accurately interpret Plato's writings, he needed to know about Ancient Greek Society and Ancient Greek culture.I have read many of Plato's dialogues, in Greek, and studied - and continue to study - Ancient Greek culture in depth. Your Dr Gould is bringing his own prejudices to the table. He should know better.
When the Lysis begins, a boy of about 13 is stands outside the Lyceum, telling everyone about the boy he's in love with. But the dialogue was about friendship, not about homosexuality.Homosexual friendship. Right.
I don't tell others what to do, but that doesn't mean I think it's all right for them do everything they want to do. I'll share my opinions with others if they're willing to hear them. I don't want to control anyone, and I will not be a codependent caregiver. I refuse to protect others from negative consequences when they need to learn from them.Another red herring: nobody is asking you to be a caregiver, simply to stop pontificating about something you clearly know very little about. You are simply broadcasting your prejudices to no useful effect: you are not going to make anyone heterosexual by trashing their feelings and their very nature, you are just going to add to their discomfiture.
My parents, especially my Mom, hated to see me do some foolish things when I was a boy.What a pity you did not learn from her to keep your own counsel.
I believe that people with same-sex attractions are endangering themselves at least physically when they have sex with each other.Feeble. Do you pontificate about sky-diving too?
Knowing is one thing. Having strong evidence is something else. Even if Dr. Gould doesn't know that the Ancient Greeks thought sodomy was repugnant, he probably knew a lot about the history of Ancient Greece. To accurately interpret Plato's writings, he needed to know about Ancient Greek Society and Ancient Greek culture.I have read many of Plato's dialogues, in Greek, and studied - and continue to study - Ancient Greek culture in depth. Your Dr Gould is bringing his own prejudices to the table. He should know better.
When the Lysis begins, a boy of about 13 is stands outside the Lyceum, telling everyone about the boy he's in love with. But the dialogue was about friendship, not about homosexuality.Homosexual friendship. Right.
netdog
Aug 11, 10:47 AM
"...Earlier than some may be expecting"??
Wasn't everyone expecting this a year ago?
Using TimeMachine, Steve is going to release it two years ago.
Wasn't everyone expecting this a year ago?
Using TimeMachine, Steve is going to release it two years ago.
plinden
Sep 12, 11:00 AM
The folks over at Anandtech have dropped engineering samples of the quad core cloverton into a Mac Pro - http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=6
and it worked ... all eight cores were recognised.
The rest of the article was interesting too.
and it worked ... all eight cores were recognised.
The rest of the article was interesting too.
bretm
Aug 17, 12:07 AM
Was there any doubt it wouldn't be a lot faster? I mean, I know it was already plenty fast, but come on...
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
balamw
Aug 7, 04:42 PM
Still, nothing fundamentally new, and definitely not Vista 2.0... ;)
Remember that Vista and Leopard are desktop OSes, not server OSes...
Anyhow, I'll wait until I see Vista 1.0 (not RC2) before I'm sure about that. ;)
B
Remember that Vista and Leopard are desktop OSes, not server OSes...
Anyhow, I'll wait until I see Vista 1.0 (not RC2) before I'm sure about that. ;)
B
geerlingguy
Aug 16, 11:29 PM
That's great that Adobe apps runs well under Rosetta in the new Mac Pro.
It makes very tempting to buy one.
My only concern comes to any Rev.A of any hardware.
I'll wait and buy the next version of Mac Pro. I think then, even under Rosetta Adobe apps will fly in comparison to the Quad G5. Can't wait for the universal apps though.
Always a judicious choice. I know that my Dad had about 6 months of little gripes with his DP G5 (1st generation) because of fan and 'buzzing' problems. He was kind of a 'beta tester' of the new hardware until a firmware update fixed his main problems.
Plus, if the 1st generation turns out to be reliable, you could get a used 1st gen. machine for a nice deal once the 2nd gen. machines are released!
It makes very tempting to buy one.
My only concern comes to any Rev.A of any hardware.
I'll wait and buy the next version of Mac Pro. I think then, even under Rosetta Adobe apps will fly in comparison to the Quad G5. Can't wait for the universal apps though.
Always a judicious choice. I know that my Dad had about 6 months of little gripes with his DP G5 (1st generation) because of fan and 'buzzing' problems. He was kind of a 'beta tester' of the new hardware until a firmware update fixed his main problems.
Plus, if the 1st generation turns out to be reliable, you could get a used 1st gen. machine for a nice deal once the 2nd gen. machines are released!
BoyBach
Nov 29, 06:20 AM
My initial reservations about this story (the Zune/Universal payment) was much like eveybody's elses on these forums - very bad for us and screw 'em. But now that I've had time to think it through I actually think it's a fantastic idea.
Fantastic for the consumer and the artist, and potentially catastrophic for Universal Music.
Allow me to explain! Somebody buys a Zune or iPod that has had the 'Universal Tax' applied to it and then fills it with 30GB of stolen Universal music. It goes to court and the 'Pirate' successfully argues that he/she has already compensated UMG by buying the iPod/Zune. The judge agrees and piracy of Universal music becomes legal so long as it's for the 'UMG taxed' iPod or Zune. UMG collapses overnight and the artists get to release music on their terms and get more of the money that they deserve, not the faceless corporations and shareholders.
Why is this good for us? Because every entertainment company would become very wary of labelling us all 'pirates' and might actually realise that digital distribution at a fair price is their future.
D'oh somebody has already written something to this effect whilst I was typing!!
Fantastic for the consumer and the artist, and potentially catastrophic for Universal Music.
Allow me to explain! Somebody buys a Zune or iPod that has had the 'Universal Tax' applied to it and then fills it with 30GB of stolen Universal music. It goes to court and the 'Pirate' successfully argues that he/she has already compensated UMG by buying the iPod/Zune. The judge agrees and piracy of Universal music becomes legal so long as it's for the 'UMG taxed' iPod or Zune. UMG collapses overnight and the artists get to release music on their terms and get more of the money that they deserve, not the faceless corporations and shareholders.
Why is this good for us? Because every entertainment company would become very wary of labelling us all 'pirates' and might actually realise that digital distribution at a fair price is their future.
D'oh somebody has already written something to this effect whilst I was typing!!
gugy
Aug 11, 12:22 PM
Seriously - unlocked phones won't float in the US. The carrier gives huge discounts and most of us don't really care about switching services (a lot people just get all their friends on the same network so all calling is free). I don't care how sweet the iPhone is. I'm not gonna pay 300-400 dollars for a phone when I can get one for 20 or less and stay with the carrier I plan to stay with anyway. Also note that I get a pretty nice company discount with the big guys on my plan and most all of my friends/family are with 1 carrier so it'd really be stupid of me to go with a diff carrier...
I agree with you. Unfortunately the USA cell phone market is sucks.
For me Apple has these options to make the iphone as popular as the ipod.
� offer it to all USA carriers. GSM and CDMA
� offer their own Apple network (hard option, because people would wait to see first if the network is reliable and wait for the end of their current carrier contracts to move to it)
� Make it very affordable to entice people to buy it. Less than $200
I agree with you. Unfortunately the USA cell phone market is sucks.
For me Apple has these options to make the iphone as popular as the ipod.
� offer it to all USA carriers. GSM and CDMA
� offer their own Apple network (hard option, because people would wait to see first if the network is reliable and wait for the end of their current carrier contracts to move to it)
� Make it very affordable to entice people to buy it. Less than $200
0815
Apr 6, 02:34 PM
This can't be right. MR posters have assured me that the Xoom is better than the iPad. I mean, if you can't trust MR posters, whom can you trust?
Ballmer?
As someone who likes his Apple products, part of me laughs seeing numbers like this for the Xoom, but the other part thinks the same thing you post above--that Apple needs to have a successful competitor in the space to keep Apple's progress from stagnating. More competition will make them take bigger steps more quickly.
As long as SJ has some say he (and Apple) will follow his vision, not the competition (and this is a good thing) - the competition will follow Apple [Remember how Android Phone Prototypes looked like before the iPhone was out - just a copy of BlackBerry phones]
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first, although its idea of using a touch UI was not.
As Jobs explained, there was a simple UI demo done on a touch device originally designed to be a keyboard input prototype. That demo gave him the idea to go all touch on the iPhone. That's what he meant by "the tablet came first".
Since we know that during summer/fall the first iPhone UI concepts were done using iPods with wheels, his touch "eureka" moment probably came in late with the UI demo almost certainly done under OSX.
According to all known histories, the actual creation of iOS didn't begin until 2006. Prior to that, some at Apple were still proposing using Linux for the phone OS.
Maybe it should be put in these words: iOS was designed for the iPhone with a tablet in mind ....
I didn't know the "proposing Linux" part, very interesting - do you have any links on this so that I can read up on it?
Ballmer?
As someone who likes his Apple products, part of me laughs seeing numbers like this for the Xoom, but the other part thinks the same thing you post above--that Apple needs to have a successful competitor in the space to keep Apple's progress from stagnating. More competition will make them take bigger steps more quickly.
As long as SJ has some say he (and Apple) will follow his vision, not the competition (and this is a good thing) - the competition will follow Apple [Remember how Android Phone Prototypes looked like before the iPhone was out - just a copy of BlackBerry phones]
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first, although its idea of using a touch UI was not.
As Jobs explained, there was a simple UI demo done on a touch device originally designed to be a keyboard input prototype. That demo gave him the idea to go all touch on the iPhone. That's what he meant by "the tablet came first".
Since we know that during summer/fall the first iPhone UI concepts were done using iPods with wheels, his touch "eureka" moment probably came in late with the UI demo almost certainly done under OSX.
According to all known histories, the actual creation of iOS didn't begin until 2006. Prior to that, some at Apple were still proposing using Linux for the phone OS.
Maybe it should be put in these words: iOS was designed for the iPhone with a tablet in mind ....
I didn't know the "proposing Linux" part, very interesting - do you have any links on this so that I can read up on it?
rockthecasbah
Aug 7, 11:07 PM
i liked all of the features but picked Time Machine because it just makes it so much easier to back up. Who cares if it isn't the most original thign ever? It's easy to use, integrated, and useful. :)
Evangelion
Aug 27, 04:34 AM
We are talking here about Macintosh buyers, not about idiots.
I'm sorry but I have seen plenty of evidence around the net (in this forum and elsewhere) that many Mac-users have zero clue when it comes to computers.
I'm sorry but I have seen plenty of evidence around the net (in this forum and elsewhere) that many Mac-users have zero clue when it comes to computers.
BlizzardBomb
Jul 27, 10:22 AM
Well there's always going to be some die-hard PPC and Core Duo users who will vote negative on this story :p
Well Apple, get those Core 2 Duos in the iMacs and MacBook Pros, and a Woodcrest... No... 2 Woodcrests in the Mac Pros.
Well Apple, get those Core 2 Duos in the iMacs and MacBook Pros, and a Woodcrest... No... 2 Woodcrests in the Mac Pros.
chatin
Aug 18, 08:42 PM
From the time the Apple logo is displayed. There is a pause before that starts, I'd say only 10 seconds or so.
alphaod
Dec 4, 05:08 PM
I've been doing B-spec the whole time. Just set a race up and then go do other stuff. Come back it's done; repeat. :p
Dunepilot
Aug 21, 09:51 AM
- 3D Artists
- Coders
- Graphic Designers
- IT
- Multimedia Artists
- Musicians
- Photographers
- Video Editors
Who can fully utilize 4 cores right now? I'd say possibly 3D Artists, Musicians(quad G5 only), and IT.
There's been controversy on Apple's forums over the last few days about the fact that Apple has optimised Logic for quad-core Intel but has never properly utilised the quad G5. Owners of quad G5s have been up in arms about this, as it is being suggested this is a deliberate crippling to avoid admitting that the quad G5 is potentially faster for musicians (reverbs etc have historically been heavily optimised for velocity engine). Apple has removed the threads on the topic, which either points to a smokescreen, or to the fact that they may have software engineers working on rectifying it.
Whatever the case, this is not the way to please your professional customers.
- Coders
- Graphic Designers
- IT
- Multimedia Artists
- Musicians
- Photographers
- Video Editors
Who can fully utilize 4 cores right now? I'd say possibly 3D Artists, Musicians(quad G5 only), and IT.
There's been controversy on Apple's forums over the last few days about the fact that Apple has optimised Logic for quad-core Intel but has never properly utilised the quad G5. Owners of quad G5s have been up in arms about this, as it is being suggested this is a deliberate crippling to avoid admitting that the quad G5 is potentially faster for musicians (reverbs etc have historically been heavily optimised for velocity engine). Apple has removed the threads on the topic, which either points to a smokescreen, or to the fact that they may have software engineers working on rectifying it.
Whatever the case, this is not the way to please your professional customers.
0 comments:
Post a Comment