generik
Sep 19, 05:04 AM
I wish this board would block automatically "************" and replace it with "************" so this tired so-called-joke would end someday.
Huh? :confused:
Huh? :confused:
danielespejo
Apr 5, 10:59 PM
sorry but that's not the case. While some contend it's jaw-dropping, that's only because they're stacking it up against what FCS is currently.
.....
While some may find the new FCS exciting, and it does have some bells and whistles, it's typical Apple doing an incremental bump to keep up with what others are doing. Sad really.
Which 'new FCS' are you speaking about? Are you referring to the version that will allegedly be released at NAB? If so, how did you see it? You must be important!
.....
While some may find the new FCS exciting, and it does have some bells and whistles, it's typical Apple doing an incremental bump to keep up with what others are doing. Sad really.
Which 'new FCS' are you speaking about? Are you referring to the version that will allegedly be released at NAB? If so, how did you see it? You must be important!
Cheffy Dave
Apr 6, 11:31 AM
ULV CPUs (17W) will go to 11.6". The TDP of 320M is not known but 9400M has TDP of 12W so it is quite safe to assume that the TDP is similar to that. That means current 11.6" MBA has TDP of 22W (includes CPU, GPU, chipset) while SB 11.6" MBA would have a TDP of 21W (17W for the CPU and ~4W for the PCH).
13" will go with LV CPUs (25W). Again, currently it has 17W for the CPU and 12W for 320M. That's 29W. 25W CPU and ~4W for PCH gives you the same 29W.
11.6" - Core i5-2537M (option for Core i7-2657M)
13.3" - Core i7-2629M (option for Core i7-2649M)
Thanks HH for those stats!:cool:
13" will go with LV CPUs (25W). Again, currently it has 17W for the CPU and 12W for 320M. That's 29W. 25W CPU and ~4W for PCH gives you the same 29W.
11.6" - Core i5-2537M (option for Core i7-2657M)
13.3" - Core i7-2629M (option for Core i7-2649M)
Thanks HH for those stats!:cool:
amols
Aug 27, 02:02 AM
The next major upgrade to Intel's notebook design isn't expected until early 2007 with a new notebook platform named "Santa Rosa". Santa Rosa will combine the Core 2 Duo processors with new supporting chips as well as Intel's AMT (http://www.intel.com/technology/manage/iamt/) (Active Management Technology) and Robson technology.
I still pity those guys expecting "Major" MBP performance gain by moving to Merom without Santa Rosa. They are as ignorant as those people expecting G5s with their two pound heat sinks to go in powerbooks. I'm just looking forward to see Conroe iMac and better battery life for MBPs. And iPod update off course ;)
I still pity those guys expecting "Major" MBP performance gain by moving to Merom without Santa Rosa. They are as ignorant as those people expecting G5s with their two pound heat sinks to go in powerbooks. I'm just looking forward to see Conroe iMac and better battery life for MBPs. And iPod update off course ;)
sparkleytone
Mar 26, 12:45 AM
What is it with all the complaining? Lion is a fresh direction for OS X, of course it will be paid. It will probably cost $129, so go ahead and get yourself all cried out now about it. If you think it’s just a minor revision that should be given away for free or $29:
1) Don’t buy it
2) You’re wrong
Full-screen apps along is just…why haven’t we been doing this all along?
1) Don’t buy it
2) You’re wrong
Full-screen apps along is just…why haven’t we been doing this all along?
Multimedia
Aug 21, 05:43 AM
I stopped by the Apple store tonight to play with a Macpro. I'm getting ready to buy and thought I'd get some hands on experience to see how it performed with Finalcut Pro. I was especially interested in how it handles playback of uncompressed footage.
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.That's great info. Would you please tell us:
1. How fast that is compared to what Mac model-speed you are currently using?
2. IE Were you impressed or not so impressed with how fast-slow it rendered?
3. What kind of speed were you expecting?
I'm no expert, but my guess is that the lack of RAM may have been the culprit. Need more independent tests like this from other FCP users. Thanks a lot. :)
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.That's great info. Would you please tell us:
1. How fast that is compared to what Mac model-speed you are currently using?
2. IE Were you impressed or not so impressed with how fast-slow it rendered?
3. What kind of speed were you expecting?
I'm no expert, but my guess is that the lack of RAM may have been the culprit. Need more independent tests like this from other FCP users. Thanks a lot. :)
JGowan
Jul 15, 02:09 PM
Man if they put the power supply on the top that would just be insanely stupid.-markThat's just some guy's rendition who knows a little about Adobe software. Certainly not Jonathan Ive's work, nor will remotely look like that.
ethana
Mar 31, 02:43 PM
How is it biting them in the ass? Android is the fastest growing OS with a larger share than IOS. I think it's been a very succesfull strategy.
Smartphone OS, yes (iPhone vs. Android phones).
iOS as whole (iPads + iPods + iPhones) kills Android numbers though. By LARGE margins.
Smartphone OS, yes (iPhone vs. Android phones).
iOS as whole (iPads + iPods + iPhones) kills Android numbers though. By LARGE margins.
SevenInchScrew
Dec 9, 01:09 AM
DoFoT:
It depends on what you want from a game. If you care more about driving and tuning than painting and whatnot go buy GT5. Its all about driving and not much else.
I love it because i'm a bit of a car nerd. If you like cars you will like GT5. If you love cars you will love GT5, its just that simple.
I guess I'll throw in my counterpoint to that then, just to give him another opinion to mull over, because I love cars and don't love GT5....
The game is not real good. Every time I've played it, I can't help but think of how it could have been SOOO much better, if they just trimmed back on the crazy feature list a bit. The game tries to be everything to everyone who likes cars. But the problem with that is, trying to do many things means you'll never excel at any of them. Often the implementation of things in this game is a little weak or unfulfilling because of that. For example...
NASCAR is in, but is pretty plain and boring, and doesn't feel like a real cup race. If you like NASCAR, you'd be better served with a full game based on that.
Same with WRC stuff. Yes, the rally is pretty decent. But, I've played a bunch of REALLY awesome rally games before, and this is nowhere near as good.
Day and Night cycles, and Weather effects look amazing.... on the very few tracks that you can actually have them function on.
The sounds of the cars, just as with every GT game that has come before it, is terrible. Very few cars actually sound like their real-world version, and when you tune them up, they get even less distinctive.
The car list, while huge, is FILLED with cars that I have absolutely no desire to drive in a racing game. I get Kaz's intention, bringing in cars from many eras and different parts of the automotive spectrum to see them, and maybe appreciate them more. But this is a racing game at its core, and I don't ever want to race a VW Kombi.
And lastly, the menus are just pitiful. It really feels like they designed them first, all those years ago, and then never touched them again. So many games have come and gone with great menu systems, and this game took nothing away from them, because they are just awful in this game.
This game really had the potential to be amazing. If they got rid of NASCAR, WRC, Karts, etc, and took out about 4-500 of the boring, crappy cars, we'd be getting somewhere. Use the time and effort that those removed things would have occupied to make some manageable menus, more Premium cars, and get the Day-Night cycle and Weather on all tracks. That would have been great. But that isn't what we got.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good game. But GT games aren't supposed to just be good, they are supposed to be GREAT. But even after a 6 year wait, we only got pretty good.
But hey, as I've said on many occasions, it does make some DAMN GOOD screenshots. Almost unreal at times...
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/hLJ12.jpg
http://imgur.com/V06hb.jpg
http://imgur.com/Vciun.jpg
http://imgur.com/ZGPiF.jpg
http://imgur.com/IMrhk.jpg
It depends on what you want from a game. If you care more about driving and tuning than painting and whatnot go buy GT5. Its all about driving and not much else.
I love it because i'm a bit of a car nerd. If you like cars you will like GT5. If you love cars you will love GT5, its just that simple.
I guess I'll throw in my counterpoint to that then, just to give him another opinion to mull over, because I love cars and don't love GT5....
The game is not real good. Every time I've played it, I can't help but think of how it could have been SOOO much better, if they just trimmed back on the crazy feature list a bit. The game tries to be everything to everyone who likes cars. But the problem with that is, trying to do many things means you'll never excel at any of them. Often the implementation of things in this game is a little weak or unfulfilling because of that. For example...
NASCAR is in, but is pretty plain and boring, and doesn't feel like a real cup race. If you like NASCAR, you'd be better served with a full game based on that.
Same with WRC stuff. Yes, the rally is pretty decent. But, I've played a bunch of REALLY awesome rally games before, and this is nowhere near as good.
Day and Night cycles, and Weather effects look amazing.... on the very few tracks that you can actually have them function on.
The sounds of the cars, just as with every GT game that has come before it, is terrible. Very few cars actually sound like their real-world version, and when you tune them up, they get even less distinctive.
The car list, while huge, is FILLED with cars that I have absolutely no desire to drive in a racing game. I get Kaz's intention, bringing in cars from many eras and different parts of the automotive spectrum to see them, and maybe appreciate them more. But this is a racing game at its core, and I don't ever want to race a VW Kombi.
And lastly, the menus are just pitiful. It really feels like they designed them first, all those years ago, and then never touched them again. So many games have come and gone with great menu systems, and this game took nothing away from them, because they are just awful in this game.
This game really had the potential to be amazing. If they got rid of NASCAR, WRC, Karts, etc, and took out about 4-500 of the boring, crappy cars, we'd be getting somewhere. Use the time and effort that those removed things would have occupied to make some manageable menus, more Premium cars, and get the Day-Night cycle and Weather on all tracks. That would have been great. But that isn't what we got.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good game. But GT games aren't supposed to just be good, they are supposed to be GREAT. But even after a 6 year wait, we only got pretty good.
But hey, as I've said on many occasions, it does make some DAMN GOOD screenshots. Almost unreal at times...
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/hLJ12.jpg
http://imgur.com/V06hb.jpg
http://imgur.com/Vciun.jpg
http://imgur.com/ZGPiF.jpg
http://imgur.com/IMrhk.jpg
Val-kyrie
Jul 30, 01:27 PM
Gee, talk about getting ahead of yourself.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Everybody, be my witness, Core 3 (any processor that goes beyond Core 2 because I don't know if they'll call it "Core 3") will be out before a consumer version of Vista is shipped.
You don't think Vista will be out before the revision to the Core 2 Duo due in Q1 2007 with the Santa Rosa chipset??? I bet Vista will ship by the time the Santa Rosa chipset is ready, especially because MS is suggesting Vista systems use harddrives or Mobos with flash RAM to speed up the boot process.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Everybody, be my witness, Core 3 (any processor that goes beyond Core 2 because I don't know if they'll call it "Core 3") will be out before a consumer version of Vista is shipped.
You don't think Vista will be out before the revision to the Core 2 Duo due in Q1 2007 with the Santa Rosa chipset??? I bet Vista will ship by the time the Santa Rosa chipset is ready, especially because MS is suggesting Vista systems use harddrives or Mobos with flash RAM to speed up the boot process.
skunk
Mar 23, 06:41 PM
Well, I suppose it really should have been ad homines — the (proper) plural would I think mitigate the gender.I'll go with that. :)
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind.Indeed, the prospect of half a million or more refugees flooding neighbouring and hard-pressed countries begs the question of how much such events do in fact impact on world security.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind.Indeed, the prospect of half a million or more refugees flooding neighbouring and hard-pressed countries begs the question of how much such events do in fact impact on world security.
Multimedia
Aug 6, 07:20 PM
I have satellite internet and have not been able to see keynote streams since getting it. Quicktime just opens up and says "Connecting" but never does.
Is there some other source that I can expect to show the keynote (in its entirety, please)... Living in the country is a love/hate thing these days.
Thanks.It won't be a live video stream. In the afternoon Apple will begin streaming a compressed HD recording of it. I guess you'll have to go to a terrestrial caf� system. Have you complained to your Satellite provider?
Final Eagles 10 Raiders 16 :p
Is there some other source that I can expect to show the keynote (in its entirety, please)... Living in the country is a love/hate thing these days.
Thanks.It won't be a live video stream. In the afternoon Apple will begin streaming a compressed HD recording of it. I guess you'll have to go to a terrestrial caf� system. Have you complained to your Satellite provider?
Final Eagles 10 Raiders 16 :p
Amazing Iceman
Mar 22, 04:50 PM
I can assure that doubling the 256MB of the first iPad is not enough for people that need a lot of multitask, like me.
I don't need to own an iPad 2.
The competitors have 1GB RAM, iPad 2 has 512MB.
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance (besides the "so wonderful OS" ad). It's been this way for Macs, it seems to be the same way for iPads.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
There are 2 sides: Apple fanboys and realistic people.
I like products, not brands.
The problem with having too much memory and resources available to spare, is that many programmers tend to become sloppy and careless about optimizing their code. This is one reason why Microsoft Office requires more and more RAM and CPU every time a new version is released.
I don't need to own an iPad 2.
The competitors have 1GB RAM, iPad 2 has 512MB.
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance (besides the "so wonderful OS" ad). It's been this way for Macs, it seems to be the same way for iPads.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
There are 2 sides: Apple fanboys and realistic people.
I like products, not brands.
The problem with having too much memory and resources available to spare, is that many programmers tend to become sloppy and careless about optimizing their code. This is one reason why Microsoft Office requires more and more RAM and CPU every time a new version is released.
nerveosu
Aug 7, 04:23 PM
It says somewhere on the apple web site that macs with G3s will be supported with Leopard.. any word on specific computers that will be supported? I have a iMac DV 400 G3 that I am curious about.
SevenInchScrew
Dec 8, 12:54 PM
^^^ Again, from Sony and referenced in my post 152 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=11513752&postcount=152)
I'm not arguing, just pointing out what Sony themselves have to say on the subject. Of course, as you progress further into the game, you are going to use more Premium racing models.
I understand that Sony are saying damage is not "unlocked" at some point in the game. And that is correct. When you start the game, there is damage. You can head on crash at 120 into a wall, and your bumper will crumple a little, in a Premium car. But, do this same thing, in the same Premium car, at level 20 and 40 and you will see increasing levels of damage.
So yea, Sony is right that damage itself isn't "unlocked" at some point, but the higher degrees of damage ARE. And not just from using race cars, Premium cars as well. Just like how as you progress, the AI gets slightly less brain-dead, the cars will start to somehow damage more.
I'm not arguing, just pointing out what Sony themselves have to say on the subject. Of course, as you progress further into the game, you are going to use more Premium racing models.
I understand that Sony are saying damage is not "unlocked" at some point in the game. And that is correct. When you start the game, there is damage. You can head on crash at 120 into a wall, and your bumper will crumple a little, in a Premium car. But, do this same thing, in the same Premium car, at level 20 and 40 and you will see increasing levels of damage.
So yea, Sony is right that damage itself isn't "unlocked" at some point, but the higher degrees of damage ARE. And not just from using race cars, Premium cars as well. Just like how as you progress, the AI gets slightly less brain-dead, the cars will start to somehow damage more.
thejakill
Mar 22, 01:00 PM
I hope these catch on enough that I can actually buy an iPad.
cloudnine
Aug 25, 04:45 PM
maybe if apple wasn't so dead set on making everything as tiny as possible so that nothing had any room to ventilate and in turn, baking inside, there wouldn't be all these problems. i'd be interested to see the performance results of say, a macbook pro with the casing type of a mac pro.
hrm...
then again, i'm no hardware designer so :P *thinking outloud*
hrm...
then again, i'm no hardware designer so :P *thinking outloud*
amols
Aug 27, 02:28 AM
I don't give a rat's A** about Santa Rosa. What I do give a Rat's A** about is that Easy Access HD Bay. The ability to have multiple 160 GB HDs standing by for different field purposes can make for revolutionary work flow procedures.
Exactly!! I did swap my MBP HD from 100GB (Seagate 5400.2) to 160GB (Seagate 5400.3) and almost cracked the top cover, not to mention destroyed the warranty (which I don't mind anyway). Its really funny that we can easily swap HD in MB but not in MBP. I hope they fix this in next release instead of silly Merom updates.
Exactly!! I did swap my MBP HD from 100GB (Seagate 5400.2) to 160GB (Seagate 5400.3) and almost cracked the top cover, not to mention destroyed the warranty (which I don't mind anyway). Its really funny that we can easily swap HD in MB but not in MBP. I hope they fix this in next release instead of silly Merom updates.
kavika411
Mar 24, 01:13 PM
The vast majority of conservatives are WASP-ish
And the vast majority of WASPs are racists? Got it.
and almost all of the people who question Obama's religion/nationality are self-described conservatives.
And some people say the cucumber tastes better pickled. But the last time I checked, this thread, and my comment, dealt with Obama and military action. But feel free to teach me more about birthers, Charlie Sheen, and String Theory if we are going off topic.
Furthermore, conservatives as a group refuse to admit that this is the case. Got that?
Actually, I don't. I guess you can give me the the link - the one that says the vast number of conservatives are racist WASPS who who question Obama's religion and nationality and refuse to admit that this is the case. Thanks.
That's not what I said at all but feel free to parse things as you see fit.
Not what you said "at all"?
Perhaps you can tell us what you said "at all."
And the vast majority of WASPs are racists? Got it.
and almost all of the people who question Obama's religion/nationality are self-described conservatives.
And some people say the cucumber tastes better pickled. But the last time I checked, this thread, and my comment, dealt with Obama and military action. But feel free to teach me more about birthers, Charlie Sheen, and String Theory if we are going off topic.
Furthermore, conservatives as a group refuse to admit that this is the case. Got that?
Actually, I don't. I guess you can give me the the link - the one that says the vast number of conservatives are racist WASPS who who question Obama's religion and nationality and refuse to admit that this is the case. Thanks.
That's not what I said at all but feel free to parse things as you see fit.
Not what you said "at all"?
Perhaps you can tell us what you said "at all."
shawnce
Jul 20, 11:43 AM
Strike:
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
Insert:
-release of 10.5
Sorry I don't see that happening... Apple has basically always given developers a few months (to several months) lead time with the next major version of Mac OS X. That has taken place yet... so I don't see it being released at WWDC 2006.
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
Insert:
-release of 10.5
Sorry I don't see that happening... Apple has basically always given developers a few months (to several months) lead time with the next major version of Mac OS X. That has taken place yet... so I don't see it being released at WWDC 2006.
gregorsamsa
Aug 28, 07:35 AM
OEM licensing OS X would not be a panacea. I supported NeXTSTEP/Openstep for NeXT and Apple. We had a nightmare dealing with OEMs who pushed us into the trash heap.
When the merger happened they showed no more interest knowing that we could move the OS to Intel since we had it running on Intel.
Motherboard manufacturers cut corners. OEMs cut all sorts of corners on their I/O cards.
Corralling all necessary OEMs to stick to a specific spec would be a nightmare.
Vista is a classic example of diluting your OS. Five years and counting.
Apple is both a hardware and software company.
The price for their latest Mac Pro shows how price competitive it is with the rest of the industry.
Having built several clone boxes none of them from the case design, integrated motherboard design, controller design, heat transfer requirements, etc comes close to the Mac Pro. It doesn't include Hardware RAID out of the box. Big deal.
When the clone industry can produce cases in general that compete for structural integrity, motherboards with as few cables, easily maintanable cases that are easy to keep dust free then Apple might feel concerned about it's claim to having the most complete experience.
OS X has shortcomings in areas for Engineering (CAD/CAM, FEM, etc. All 3rd party concerns), Games (3rd party concerns, OpenGL 2 concerns that Apple will fix), Vertical Solution concerns (assuming Apple wants to attack the business sectors they will have to address this lack of productivity tools for Finance & Accounting within iWorks) and some other deficiencies.
They are covering their bases and growing their base, quarter by quarter.
When ROME is finally built are we all going to whine that you can save $50 here or there with a clone?
I expect no less.
Good points, some of which I don't disagree with. Yes, "Vista is a classic example of diluting your OS," but I'll still be surprised if it doesn't achieve record sales on release. Though Apple's userbase continues to grow (& rightly so!), the crunch time for Apple in sustaining this will surely come when the shops are full of competitively-priced, Vista-enabled PCs.
Licensing out OS X wouldn't necessarily mean compromising its security; the compromise would come in some of the non-Apple hardware OS X ran on. Much has changed since the days of the original Apple clones that proved to be an expensive failure. Today, technology generally is much less expensive. Customers would appreciate the kind of choice that, after all, hasn't done too much harm to sales of Windows PCs. (I'd probably still buy Apple, but some others may buy a cheaper Dell running OS X).
Granted that the Mac Pro is competitively priced, those recent comparisons with the more expensive Dell workstation overlook that the Mac Pro graphics (Geforce 7300 GT) cost approx $100; the Dell's Nvidia graphics are closer to $1,000. (A point for objectivity's sake).
Like most Mac owners, I believe Apple are still by far the best for overall quality & service (though I think they're currently lacking at least one more consumer-aimed computer). I'm just interested in any ideas that could further expand the OS X userbase, & sustain it long-term.
PS: ROME has already been built: M$. But that empire so overreached itself it now looks as if it's beginning to crumble.
When the merger happened they showed no more interest knowing that we could move the OS to Intel since we had it running on Intel.
Motherboard manufacturers cut corners. OEMs cut all sorts of corners on their I/O cards.
Corralling all necessary OEMs to stick to a specific spec would be a nightmare.
Vista is a classic example of diluting your OS. Five years and counting.
Apple is both a hardware and software company.
The price for their latest Mac Pro shows how price competitive it is with the rest of the industry.
Having built several clone boxes none of them from the case design, integrated motherboard design, controller design, heat transfer requirements, etc comes close to the Mac Pro. It doesn't include Hardware RAID out of the box. Big deal.
When the clone industry can produce cases in general that compete for structural integrity, motherboards with as few cables, easily maintanable cases that are easy to keep dust free then Apple might feel concerned about it's claim to having the most complete experience.
OS X has shortcomings in areas for Engineering (CAD/CAM, FEM, etc. All 3rd party concerns), Games (3rd party concerns, OpenGL 2 concerns that Apple will fix), Vertical Solution concerns (assuming Apple wants to attack the business sectors they will have to address this lack of productivity tools for Finance & Accounting within iWorks) and some other deficiencies.
They are covering their bases and growing their base, quarter by quarter.
When ROME is finally built are we all going to whine that you can save $50 here or there with a clone?
I expect no less.
Good points, some of which I don't disagree with. Yes, "Vista is a classic example of diluting your OS," but I'll still be surprised if it doesn't achieve record sales on release. Though Apple's userbase continues to grow (& rightly so!), the crunch time for Apple in sustaining this will surely come when the shops are full of competitively-priced, Vista-enabled PCs.
Licensing out OS X wouldn't necessarily mean compromising its security; the compromise would come in some of the non-Apple hardware OS X ran on. Much has changed since the days of the original Apple clones that proved to be an expensive failure. Today, technology generally is much less expensive. Customers would appreciate the kind of choice that, after all, hasn't done too much harm to sales of Windows PCs. (I'd probably still buy Apple, but some others may buy a cheaper Dell running OS X).
Granted that the Mac Pro is competitively priced, those recent comparisons with the more expensive Dell workstation overlook that the Mac Pro graphics (Geforce 7300 GT) cost approx $100; the Dell's Nvidia graphics are closer to $1,000. (A point for objectivity's sake).
Like most Mac owners, I believe Apple are still by far the best for overall quality & service (though I think they're currently lacking at least one more consumer-aimed computer). I'm just interested in any ideas that could further expand the OS X userbase, & sustain it long-term.
PS: ROME has already been built: M$. But that empire so overreached itself it now looks as if it's beginning to crumble.
Scarlet Fever
Jul 20, 08:23 AM
wow. 8 cores. *drool
and i was just getting used to dual cores...
i cant wait till they turn up as refurbs... ill own one faster than you can say "no you dont"
and i was just getting used to dual cores...
i cant wait till they turn up as refurbs... ill own one faster than you can say "no you dont"
Popeye206
Mar 31, 03:47 PM
Adobe showing how the iPad is only for consumption and not worth their time. (http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/03/30/adobe.photoshop.for.ipad.to.get.layers/)
Yeah... that's why they are "wasting their time" building a prototype. :rolleyes:
Adobe see's 15 million seats and growing fast.
Yeah... that's why they are "wasting their time" building a prototype. :rolleyes:
Adobe see's 15 million seats and growing fast.
Northgrove
Mar 26, 11:16 AM
Since the release of Leopard, the subsequent releases haven't had the wow factor of before.
Just what I think anyway.
Releases? There's just been one release since Leopard. :p
Just what I think anyway.
Releases? There's just been one release since Leopard. :p
I think this is one of the most significant information for me. And i’m glad reading your article. But should remark on some general things, The web site style is perfect, the articles is really great : D. Good job, cheers
ReplyDeleteCocktail Party Dresses