steve_hill4
Jul 27, 02:13 PM
What difference does it make if virtually no consumer software is effected by 64-bit processors, even now?
Remember that the G5 is 64 bit. While the consumer apps may not be too directly affected at first, (speed increases, but nothing else), as more memory is required, 32 bit will hit a brick wall at 4GiB, whereas 64 bit can go along happily to 2,305,843,009,200,000,000GiB.
Realistically, it will take some time to get to that level, but with the last G5 supporting 16GiB, 32 then 64 wouldn't be too far off. within 10 years, I'm sure 1TiB will start to become common.
Remember that the G5 is 64 bit. While the consumer apps may not be too directly affected at first, (speed increases, but nothing else), as more memory is required, 32 bit will hit a brick wall at 4GiB, whereas 64 bit can go along happily to 2,305,843,009,200,000,000GiB.
Realistically, it will take some time to get to that level, but with the last G5 supporting 16GiB, 32 then 64 wouldn't be too far off. within 10 years, I'm sure 1TiB will start to become common.
reel2reel
Apr 11, 09:43 AM
I hope they remove the Constant Crash feature.
I hope the new version comes in a box with a free t-shirt.
I've still got the t-shirt they gave out w/ Version 1.0. Somewhere.
Aww, give them a break, they're probably just trying to keep with the 90's design of the UI. :D
Honestly, the website totally sucks. Looks like a get-rich-quick advertisement site. They might be FCP pros, but they know amateur HTML.
In keeping with the videos they produce (the one's I've seen anyway)
I hope the new version comes in a box with a free t-shirt.
I've still got the t-shirt they gave out w/ Version 1.0. Somewhere.
Aww, give them a break, they're probably just trying to keep with the 90's design of the UI. :D
Honestly, the website totally sucks. Looks like a get-rich-quick advertisement site. They might be FCP pros, but they know amateur HTML.
In keeping with the videos they produce (the one's I've seen anyway)
intlplby
Nov 28, 09:05 PM
the way i see it, MP3 players have been the single biggest factor in increasing sales of music (as well as song piracy) so in a way the ipod is driving the purchase of CDs, not CDs driving the purchase of iPods
both items feed each other
Music increases iPod sales and iPod sales increase music sales... it's a feedback loop
Universal owes Apple money on the same logic......
both items feed each other
Music increases iPod sales and iPod sales increase music sales... it's a feedback loop
Universal owes Apple money on the same logic......
Benjy91
Apr 27, 09:06 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
A lot of people are upset over this. But, no one seems to care that the US Government can snoop on any electronic communication it wants for well over 10 years now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echelon_(signals_intelligence)
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
Of course, anyone who doesnt like this idea, is a communist who hates America and Freedom.
A lot of people are upset over this. But, no one seems to care that the US Government can snoop on any electronic communication it wants for well over 10 years now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echelon_(signals_intelligence)
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
Of course, anyone who doesnt like this idea, is a communist who hates America and Freedom.
sikkinixx
Aug 25, 06:53 PM
well im certainly annoyed with Apple's support right now. 3 times my Macbook has been in and now they tell me they cant FIX the problem (the only way I can get my macbook to boot up is to zap the PRAM every time). If I had known it was gonna be this much trouble I would have stuck with my pb or bought a Vaio... :mad:
LagunaSol
Apr 6, 04:31 PM
Don't hate. I have money and I can spend it however. Maybe I'll buy an ipad and leave it in the bathroom for people to use as they're taking care of business.
Yeah, I also remember you always talking about how your mom had an iMac (or something like that) but how you thought Apple stuff was overpriced crap. Of course now you own a MBP and "love" Apple stuff, except for the iPad of course, cuz your XOOM has 2 native apps and runs widgets. (I also remember you bragging about how much money you made. So it is you.)
As for tablets-for-toilets, you have far more chance of seeing those pallets of XOOMs at Costco (as balamw mentioned) being firesold for high-tech bumwipes.
Yeah, I also remember you always talking about how your mom had an iMac (or something like that) but how you thought Apple stuff was overpriced crap. Of course now you own a MBP and "love" Apple stuff, except for the iPad of course, cuz your XOOM has 2 native apps and runs widgets. (I also remember you bragging about how much money you made. So it is you.)
As for tablets-for-toilets, you have far more chance of seeing those pallets of XOOMs at Costco (as balamw mentioned) being firesold for high-tech bumwipes.
badpup
Apr 10, 06:17 AM
I'm a little confused...why was Avid presenting at a Final Cut Pro User Group's meeting anyway? Do they just come in and are like "Hey, you've all made a mistake!" or something?
Lets not forget that Avid ISIS and unity storage products have been FCP compliant for some time now. + the amount of times I go FCP > pro-tools, which is also an Avid piece of kit :p
I'm a long standing FCP user - I cut my own work on it, but the post place I work in uses Avid. Lately I've really been thinking FCP (FCS in general) needs to catch up in a few areas... it'll be interesting to see what they update.
What sounds bad to me about apple hogging the whole stage is the wording in the original article... "demanded all lectern time". Whatever way you dress it "demanding" stuff seems mean, but as others have mentioned I bet it was all properly discussed. The sad thing is I wouldn't put it past Apple to demand something like this.
Lets not forget that Avid ISIS and unity storage products have been FCP compliant for some time now. + the amount of times I go FCP > pro-tools, which is also an Avid piece of kit :p
I'm a long standing FCP user - I cut my own work on it, but the post place I work in uses Avid. Lately I've really been thinking FCP (FCS in general) needs to catch up in a few areas... it'll be interesting to see what they update.
What sounds bad to me about apple hogging the whole stage is the wording in the original article... "demanded all lectern time". Whatever way you dress it "demanding" stuff seems mean, but as others have mentioned I bet it was all properly discussed. The sad thing is I wouldn't put it past Apple to demand something like this.
DTphonehome
Nov 28, 06:49 PM
Hahahahahahahahahaha(breathe)hahahahahahahahaha!
As if Apple would ever agree to this! Back when the iTMS was in its infancy, I could see Universal making a demand like this. But now, what leverage do they have? "If you don't pay, we're going to pull all Universal songs off the iTMS!" Um, ok, great, lose one of the only profitable revenue streams the music industry has these days? Right.
As if Apple would ever agree to this! Back when the iTMS was in its infancy, I could see Universal making a demand like this. But now, what leverage do they have? "If you don't pay, we're going to pull all Universal songs off the iTMS!" Um, ok, great, lose one of the only profitable revenue streams the music industry has these days? Right.
iliketyla
Mar 31, 08:21 PM
Has LTD ever posted anything not pro-Apple?
I'll give it to you dude, you're very articulate and you have a way of spinning things to sound like you're right, but you are blatantly against anything that encourages competition or threatens Apple in any way.
I'll give it to you dude, you're very articulate and you have a way of spinning things to sound like you're right, but you are blatantly against anything that encourages competition or threatens Apple in any way.
whooleytoo
Sep 13, 07:22 AM
Man, I don't know why people keep saying this. On OS X, *all software utilizes the extra cores*. The only way it wouldn't is if you have less than 8 processes running, which I guarantee you that you don't. (System alone requires 20-30 processes to run.)
Actually, it's even less than 8 - as a process can have several threads each of which can be moved to idle processors. Safari alone on my Mac currently has 23 threads at the moment, my system overall 277.
Actually, it's even less than 8 - as a process can have several threads each of which can be moved to idle processors. Safari alone on my Mac currently has 23 threads at the moment, my system overall 277.
aristotle
Apr 6, 04:54 PM
If the sales are so bad why don't they just replace it from the stock they have?
Why put out good money after bad? Shouldn't Motorola be responsible for providing a new demo unit?
If there are no sales then why should the store bother spending their own money on creating a demo unit out of one of the units on sale?
Why put out good money after bad? Shouldn't Motorola be responsible for providing a new demo unit?
If there are no sales then why should the store bother spending their own money on creating a demo unit out of one of the units on sale?
dsnort
Aug 7, 04:41 PM
As a recent switcher to Mac, I have had a lot of experience with M$'s System Restore function. It is NOT a "go back and find that data I deleted" application. It IS a "can we please go back to a time when this computer wasn't totally ********* up" application.
REDolution
Apr 10, 07:34 AM
Well I bet they handle Formats differently.
Gone is Pulldown. Gone is Film Support...replaced with the best web movie rendering support in the industry. Also Apple will change the antiquated delivery method for productions. Once your done you publish to the itunes store and you have now distributed your movie. The interface will be a multitrack version of iMovie. From watching this clip and all the industry big wigs saying "its wonderful" Ya its great but in a different way ... because whats going to be released is not FCP studio 4. I'm sure its a whole new thing. So all the iMovie 7 users who had to keep using it because iMovie 8 was a total re-write because of no legacy no pluggin support will happen to FC Editors. This will force Editors who use Studio 3 to continue to use S3 until they build up the features of this "new" editor. Its going to be a very interesting NAB. Avid and Premiere are going to gain a lot of new friends if this is true. But the larger batch of new editors who really could care less about 99% of what this small market needs will be very happy. I also bet the price is quite a bit lower as well.
This will be the everything is gone and changed upgrade.
Are you speculating or have you just disobeyed your NDA? ;-)
Gone is Pulldown. Gone is Film Support...replaced with the best web movie rendering support in the industry. Also Apple will change the antiquated delivery method for productions. Once your done you publish to the itunes store and you have now distributed your movie. The interface will be a multitrack version of iMovie. From watching this clip and all the industry big wigs saying "its wonderful" Ya its great but in a different way ... because whats going to be released is not FCP studio 4. I'm sure its a whole new thing. So all the iMovie 7 users who had to keep using it because iMovie 8 was a total re-write because of no legacy no pluggin support will happen to FC Editors. This will force Editors who use Studio 3 to continue to use S3 until they build up the features of this "new" editor. Its going to be a very interesting NAB. Avid and Premiere are going to gain a lot of new friends if this is true. But the larger batch of new editors who really could care less about 99% of what this small market needs will be very happy. I also bet the price is quite a bit lower as well.
This will be the everything is gone and changed upgrade.
Are you speculating or have you just disobeyed your NDA? ;-)
8CoreWhore
Apr 10, 04:37 AM
As bad as it sounds for Apple to "boot out the others", Apple doesn't have the authority to do that. FCUG organizers chose to do it at Apple's request because they require the space and time. FCUG could have said no to Apple, but why would they? It's not a Canon Group, it's a FCU Group...
mrkramer
Apr 27, 03:13 PM
Now are we done with this useless nonsense?
Of course not, they will find something else to argue about.
Of course not, they will find something else to argue about.
Burnsey
Apr 27, 11:00 AM
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2711155/posts?q=1&;page=101
There you have it. The birthers aren't satisfied. I knew it.
If this birth certificate said that Obama wasn't born in the US they would be singing a different tune. Heck they would be singing a different tune given the tiniest most unlikely evidence that he wasn't born in the US.
There you have it. The birthers aren't satisfied. I knew it.
If this birth certificate said that Obama wasn't born in the US they would be singing a different tune. Heck they would be singing a different tune given the tiniest most unlikely evidence that he wasn't born in the US.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 25, 02:18 PM
Because Apple is not tracking you. Apple does not get any of that data, they will never see or touch it. It is data that is stored locally on your phone out of reach from everyone except you. "Apple tracks you" would mean that the phone is sending the data 'home', but it doesn't. APPLE HAS NO IDEA WHERE THE F YOU ARE OR WERE (and they probably couldn't care less)
Prove it.
Prove it.
cmaier
Apr 20, 02:52 PM
Apple filed similar suits again HTC and Nokia last spring. You'll notice that the ITC is not favoring Apple's claims.
The suits aren't very similar at all.
The suits aren't very similar at all.
Multimedia
Jul 15, 05:15 AM
I prefer the Simpsons' parody of that cartoon:
"...and I'll make Ted Kennedy pay, if he fights back I'll say that he's gay."
But seriously, the $1799 price point is a step in the right direction. If we could get it down to $1599 or <gasp> $1499, then that would be the de facto mini tower so many have clamored for. I would like a redesigned case, but that'll come eventually.
Sometimes the right price can make a person forget about what might have been.We have that already on the Refurbished page. :) Dual Core 2GHz G5 is only $1699 there. Quad only $2799. So your dream of $1499 will come when the 2GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Pro hits the refurb page - which, according to recent history, should happen before Christmas.I believe that the MacBook was on the refurb page in around 3-4 weeks. The iMac Core Duo took AGES though.Yes MacBook broke the speed record for shift to the refurb page in record time. Right now everything is up there except the 17" MacBook Pros. My Quad made it there in only 3 months last Winter.
"...and I'll make Ted Kennedy pay, if he fights back I'll say that he's gay."
But seriously, the $1799 price point is a step in the right direction. If we could get it down to $1599 or <gasp> $1499, then that would be the de facto mini tower so many have clamored for. I would like a redesigned case, but that'll come eventually.
Sometimes the right price can make a person forget about what might have been.We have that already on the Refurbished page. :) Dual Core 2GHz G5 is only $1699 there. Quad only $2799. So your dream of $1499 will come when the 2GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Pro hits the refurb page - which, according to recent history, should happen before Christmas.I believe that the MacBook was on the refurb page in around 3-4 weeks. The iMac Core Duo took AGES though.Yes MacBook broke the speed record for shift to the refurb page in record time. Right now everything is up there except the 17" MacBook Pros. My Quad made it there in only 3 months last Winter.
shawnce
Sep 19, 11:09 AM
Please tell me what is majorly new about the current MacBook Pro besides an intel chip :confused: (and the name of course :rolleyes: )
- 2 CPU cores compared to 1 CPU core
- Radically greater FSB bandwidth
- PC2-5300 DDR2 memory compared to PC2-4200 DDR2
- PCIe 16x for graphics controller compared to AGP 8x
- Improved graphics controller with more VRAM
- Dedicated 1.5 Gbps SATA for hard disk compared to UATA-100
- ExpressCard/34 (has PCIe 1x and USB 2.0) compared to CardBus
- MagSafe power connector
- Built-in iSight camera
- etc.
The ExpressCard alone allows high-speed adapters to external SATA, FireWire, Fibre Channel, etc. devices. It allows for some interesting flexibility that never existed with the PowerBooks.
- 2 CPU cores compared to 1 CPU core
- Radically greater FSB bandwidth
- PC2-5300 DDR2 memory compared to PC2-4200 DDR2
- PCIe 16x for graphics controller compared to AGP 8x
- Improved graphics controller with more VRAM
- Dedicated 1.5 Gbps SATA for hard disk compared to UATA-100
- ExpressCard/34 (has PCIe 1x and USB 2.0) compared to CardBus
- MagSafe power connector
- Built-in iSight camera
- etc.
The ExpressCard alone allows high-speed adapters to external SATA, FireWire, Fibre Channel, etc. devices. It allows for some interesting flexibility that never existed with the PowerBooks.
gnasher729
Mar 22, 01:38 PM
You are the funniest poster on here. Thanks for the entertainment. (Not sure if it's your intent, but thanks anyway.)
Here's what he doesn't realise: Every product has both a price, and a value. In case of the iPhone, Apple has left a lot of space for others to undercut it in price. And many people will go for something that is cheaper, even when it doesn't have quite the value. But as we can see now, Apple hasn't left any margin with the iPad for competitors to undercut it in price. If the iPad was starting at around $1000 as had been suggested originally, then Samsung would be able to sell lots and lots of tablets for $499. But the iPad starts at $499. Samsung could sell lots and lots of tablets for $249 or $299, but they can't build them for the price. The reason why none of these tablets are cheaper than the iPad is because they just can't build them cheaper.
For the same price, people are going to buy the original and not a cheap copy. So they will buy and continue buying the iPad. And the iPad is the one that you know will be around next year, unlike others.
Here's what he doesn't realise: Every product has both a price, and a value. In case of the iPhone, Apple has left a lot of space for others to undercut it in price. And many people will go for something that is cheaper, even when it doesn't have quite the value. But as we can see now, Apple hasn't left any margin with the iPad for competitors to undercut it in price. If the iPad was starting at around $1000 as had been suggested originally, then Samsung would be able to sell lots and lots of tablets for $499. But the iPad starts at $499. Samsung could sell lots and lots of tablets for $249 or $299, but they can't build them for the price. The reason why none of these tablets are cheaper than the iPad is because they just can't build them cheaper.
For the same price, people are going to buy the original and not a cheap copy. So they will buy and continue buying the iPad. And the iPad is the one that you know will be around next year, unlike others.
bushido
Mar 22, 08:24 PM
love that UI, iOS looks like windows 95 compared to the latest offers on the market, some things need to change. getting kinda tired of it after 3 iPhones
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 10:05 AM
And I don't see the point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the opposite sex, but since society tells me it's "normal" I live with it nonetheless. It's all a matter of perception and experience. You have yours, I have mine and they're both normal to us.
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. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
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. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
funkyT80
Apr 6, 03:18 PM
Nice to see those small Mom and Pop tablet companies make there play too. :D