adamfilip
Jul 21, 10:13 AM
Now you just need to decide what color your want your new computer... (again)
I want Apple to take the current PowerMac G5 Case
make it 25% shorter, add a second optical drive
and two more Internal hard drives
add some External Sata ports. and 4 more USB2 ports
1 more front usb2 port
make the mic port powered
and then make the case black anodized aluminum. and have the apple logo on the sides backlit just like the notebooks
I want Apple to take the current PowerMac G5 Case
make it 25% shorter, add a second optical drive
and two more Internal hard drives
add some External Sata ports. and 4 more USB2 ports
1 more front usb2 port
make the mic port powered
and then make the case black anodized aluminum. and have the apple logo on the sides backlit just like the notebooks
Evangelion
Aug 12, 03:51 AM
Is it possible for Apple to release a phone sold in their stores that would work on all networks? Or have several versions of the phone that will work for Verizon, Cingular...
I'll never be ceased at just how retarded the phone-system is outside Finland (or Scandinavia). I just buy a phone, and I get a SIM-card, and boom, it just works. I can replace the SIM at will, and it will just work. No hassle, no worries that "but this phone wotn work with that operator!". Unsatisfied with your current operator? It takes maybe ten minutes to get a new operator, and you get to keep your old number, AND your phone (it is YOUR phone, after all!).
I think that the scheme where the phones are tied to certain operator is just plain retarded. This is a perfect example as to why that is so. And I'm REALLY surprised that you folks (the rest of the world that is) hasn't seen the light on this issue. You just happily accept a scheme that limits choice and competition.
I'll never be ceased at just how retarded the phone-system is outside Finland (or Scandinavia). I just buy a phone, and I get a SIM-card, and boom, it just works. I can replace the SIM at will, and it will just work. No hassle, no worries that "but this phone wotn work with that operator!". Unsatisfied with your current operator? It takes maybe ten minutes to get a new operator, and you get to keep your old number, AND your phone (it is YOUR phone, after all!).
I think that the scheme where the phones are tied to certain operator is just plain retarded. This is a perfect example as to why that is so. And I'm REALLY surprised that you folks (the rest of the world that is) hasn't seen the light on this issue. You just happily accept a scheme that limits choice and competition.
Banjhiyi
Mar 26, 04:49 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
This might explain the shambles that is 10.6.7.
Last release before Lion - semi-brick your machine to force an upgrade.
iOS 4.3, last release before iPhone 5 - murder your battery to force an upgrade.
You've guessed it, I'm not very happy with Apple at the moment. So which is it; underhand tactics, sloppy Q&A or declining standards?
This might explain the shambles that is 10.6.7.
Last release before Lion - semi-brick your machine to force an upgrade.
iOS 4.3, last release before iPhone 5 - murder your battery to force an upgrade.
You've guessed it, I'm not very happy with Apple at the moment. So which is it; underhand tactics, sloppy Q&A or declining standards?
polyesterlester
Aug 7, 03:55 PM
From the Xcode 3.0 (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/xcode.html) page:
"Project Snapshots
"Record the state of your project anytime, and restore it instantly. Experiment with new features without spending time or brain cells committing them to a source control system. Like saving a game in Civilization 4, Xcode 3.0 lets you go back in time without repercussions. If only reality worked this way at the Pentagon..."
I love you, Apple.
"Project Snapshots
"Record the state of your project anytime, and restore it instantly. Experiment with new features without spending time or brain cells committing them to a source control system. Like saving a game in Civilization 4, Xcode 3.0 lets you go back in time without repercussions. If only reality worked this way at the Pentagon..."
I love you, Apple.
NY Guitarist
Apr 5, 08:50 PM
I agree I for see FCP needing Mac OS X Lion
I'm just guessing but it's possible that Apple will announce the new FCS and ship it when Lion ships, perhaps around the June WWDC.
I'm just guessing but it's possible that Apple will announce the new FCS and ship it when Lion ships, perhaps around the June WWDC.
OutThere
Apr 27, 01:29 PM
Don't jack up America for those of us who love it for what it was founded on.
(insert here where some smart-A responds with "slavery?" or something equally inapplicable)
I don't know about you, but I love America because it was founded on stolen native land. Just makes me so proud of my forefathers, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
(insert here where some smart-A responds with "slavery?" or something equally inapplicable)
I don't know about you, but I love America because it was founded on stolen native land. Just makes me so proud of my forefathers, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
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!
.gif "in New York City#39;s Central")
Multimedia
Jul 14, 08:34 PM
Burn two DVD's at once and DVD copying.How would you burn two DVDs at once Eldorian? I don't know of any software that lets you do this do you? :confused:
I agree it would be nice. But I can't imagine how.
I agree it would be nice. But I can't imagine how.
gnasher729
Aug 18, 03:31 PM
Thats showing that the quad core Mac Pro is essentially the same speed as dual core Mac Pro. To translate it to normal mac scenario: If apple releases a 2.66GHz Conroe iMac/Mac/whathaveyou it will be able to crunch through FCP/Photoshop/etc faster than a Mac Pro because it can use regular DDR2 and won't suffer from horrendous memory latency.
It only shows that one company can expect to get massive complaints from its customers soon about its crappy software. An H.264 encoder can easily use two dozen cores if they are there (apart from the fact that it might be limited by the speed of the DVD drive if you encode straight from DVD); there is no reason at all why this software shouldn't be twice as fast on a Quad core and four times as fast on an eight core machine.
It only shows that one company can expect to get massive complaints from its customers soon about its crappy software. An H.264 encoder can easily use two dozen cores if they are there (apart from the fact that it might be limited by the speed of the DVD drive if you encode straight from DVD); there is no reason at all why this software shouldn't be twice as fast on a Quad core and four times as fast on an eight core machine.
Lollypop
Jul 20, 08:12 AM
seems the tragic days of the P4 are gone for intel, good for us! :p With all the high end stuff from intel thats apparently going into the mac im a bit worried about the price of the systems though!
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 05:07 PM
Let's hope the "opposite of Hyperthreading" will come along (Leopard feature???).. So, instead of a "emulating" a Dual Core / CPU config (like on later Pentium 4's), emulate a Single CPU on multiple cores. :cool:
Then, you get 8 * 3 GHz = 1 * 24 GHz...!!!
I think Reverse Hyperthreading will have to be processor-bound, like Hyperthreading. Intel has its mitosis project, so let's hope that works out well!
Then, you get 8 * 3 GHz = 1 * 24 GHz...!!!
I think Reverse Hyperthreading will have to be processor-bound, like Hyperthreading. Intel has its mitosis project, so let's hope that works out well!
marksman
Apr 11, 01:20 PM
The iPhone 4 is still the best smartphone in the market, so not surprising.
As for people expecting a 4" screen on the next iPhone dream on. They are not going to make an iPhone with a bigger screen.]]
The people who are saying this is bad for apple are clearly spec chasers.. Which is not what 99% of all iPhone customers are.... They buy into apple for the experience of the UI, the device and the ecosystem. None of that changes or goes away... None of that experience stops existing because some sucky android phone has a better CPU.
The iPhone 4 runs everything that is available for it really well... That some commodity android handset maker has to beef up their spec sheet because they can't compete where it really counts doesn't matter.
The reality is the iPhone doesn't get surpassed until the next iPhone comes out...
Again I am amazed at how many people here think a 4" screen is the wave of the future. It is not.
As for people expecting a 4" screen on the next iPhone dream on. They are not going to make an iPhone with a bigger screen.]]
The people who are saying this is bad for apple are clearly spec chasers.. Which is not what 99% of all iPhone customers are.... They buy into apple for the experience of the UI, the device and the ecosystem. None of that changes or goes away... None of that experience stops existing because some sucky android phone has a better CPU.
The iPhone 4 runs everything that is available for it really well... That some commodity android handset maker has to beef up their spec sheet because they can't compete where it really counts doesn't matter.
The reality is the iPhone doesn't get surpassed until the next iPhone comes out...
Again I am amazed at how many people here think a 4" screen is the wave of the future. It is not.
Tones2
Apr 11, 02:08 PM
LOL at all of the people saying it's a big mistake and bad move on Apple's part. They know what they are doing. Why would they do something that would hurt their iPhone sales?!
No. I think people are just saying it's a stupid rumor.
Tony
No. I think people are just saying it's a stupid rumor.
Tony
Machead III
Sep 19, 08:05 AM
Engadget have the situation nailed. (http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/19/so-where-the-hell-are-our-core-2-duo-macbooks/)
LagunaSol
Apr 19, 01:57 PM
wow @ post 2.
apple will have a hard time fighting this in court.
Hardly. Samsung would have been fine had they stuck to that original theme, rather than move into Apple's house as a squatter with a subsequent model:
http://www.tmobileniles.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/iphone4-vs-galaxy-s-head.jpg
apple will have a hard time fighting this in court.
Hardly. Samsung would have been fine had they stuck to that original theme, rather than move into Apple's house as a squatter with a subsequent model:
http://www.tmobileniles.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/iphone4-vs-galaxy-s-head.jpg
joecool85
Jul 27, 09:41 AM
Yay! Chips that don't suck and are fast! (I hate P4s)
Multimedia
Jul 27, 11:48 PM
Ahh so many announcments !!! Kill me now ! I'm waiting for the end of august then I'm buying whatever I can get.You might want to make that til Tuesday September 12 when the Paris Apple Expo opens with an Apple keynote.
"Otellini said the company expects to ship its 1 millionth Core 2 Duo processor in a little less than seven weeks after launch. In comparison, it took Pentium a year to reach that level of ramp-up. (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/27/core2duo/index.php)"
Two million cores shipped by this time in September. Wow!
"Otellini said the company expects to ship its 1 millionth Core 2 Duo processor in a little less than seven weeks after launch. In comparison, it took Pentium a year to reach that level of ramp-up. (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/27/core2duo/index.php)"
Two million cores shipped by this time in September. Wow!
Iconoclysm
Apr 19, 08:24 PM
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
Actually, you're WRONG!!!! to say he's wrong. You're trying to say that every GUI element was created at Xerox? EVERY one of them? Sorry, but your argument here is akin to something Fox News would air.
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
Actually, you're WRONG!!!! to say he's wrong. You're trying to say that every GUI element was created at Xerox? EVERY one of them? Sorry, but your argument here is akin to something Fox News would air.
highdefw
Apr 11, 10:23 AM
One more day and we'll know... Seriously, this better be one hell of an update.
bluedevil14
Nov 28, 10:22 PM
This is ridiculous. The record companies are obsessed with money. They didnt seek royalties on CD players but iPods are somehow different. They are MUSIC PLAYERS. They record industry should have no part in music hardware, its just ridiculous.:mad:
generik
Sep 18, 11:09 PM
All I have to say is:
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
All new diamond dust coated titanium MBP chasis! Strong enough to ground PCs into dust...
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
All new diamond dust coated titanium MBP chasis! Strong enough to ground PCs into dust...
studiomusic
Apr 10, 10:31 AM
It's that they never have announced pro-level products at/alongside professional trade shows prior to this. CES is one thing, but I don't ever recall Apple ever placing any presence at/during NAB or AES (the latter of which they would present something related to the Logic Pro) before.
They did it in 2007... I was there.
Back when Myspace was cool. (http://www.myspace.com/studiomusic1/blog/253736149)
They did it in 2007... I was there.
Back when Myspace was cool. (http://www.myspace.com/studiomusic1/blog/253736149)
arkitect
Mar 3, 04:52 AM
I believe that every "gay" person should be celibate.
Why?
I also think opposite-sex monogamous marriage is the only appropriate context for sex
Why?
Yes, I know you "explain", but I just never get it.
I'm heterosexual. I still feel opposite-sex attraction, but my sex drive has been weak for years. I'm grateful for that weakness, too, because I don't see others as mere objects.
Last year I (male) married my partner (male) — we've been together 11 years. (As an aside, that 11 year relationship has outlasted all — and I mean all my straight cousins's marriages and relationships).
Now, you may not like to hear this, but when we have sex we make love. I do not see him as just an object. I fell in love with him because he is a wonderful man. He makes me happy and content.
No different from other couples straight or gay.
So why should we suddenly live together in a platonic relationship — because you have issues with sex?
We're pretty middle class (Shock *gasp* horror). We look out for our neighbours, our friends come around for dinner and sometimes they bring their little kids along. Listen to music and nod off in front of the TV. We have sex, sorry to freak you out, but we do.
In all respects we are normal adults contributing to society, paying taxes, recycling our (maybe too many) wine bottles etc.
Look I am sorry life apparently dealt you a few nasty cards, but perhaps you should consider a religious retreat — life in a monastery can be I hear very fulfilling for men and women like you.
But please leave the rest of us to deal with 21st century issues.
And as for your two gay friends… well… I don't know if I wouldn't file them under I for imaginary. That is just my gut instinct. (Unless the couple you refer to are Catholic priests, in which case… I guess.)
Why?
I also think opposite-sex monogamous marriage is the only appropriate context for sex
Why?
Yes, I know you "explain", but I just never get it.
I'm heterosexual. I still feel opposite-sex attraction, but my sex drive has been weak for years. I'm grateful for that weakness, too, because I don't see others as mere objects.
Last year I (male) married my partner (male) — we've been together 11 years. (As an aside, that 11 year relationship has outlasted all — and I mean all my straight cousins's marriages and relationships).
Now, you may not like to hear this, but when we have sex we make love. I do not see him as just an object. I fell in love with him because he is a wonderful man. He makes me happy and content.
No different from other couples straight or gay.
So why should we suddenly live together in a platonic relationship — because you have issues with sex?
We're pretty middle class (Shock *gasp* horror). We look out for our neighbours, our friends come around for dinner and sometimes they bring their little kids along. Listen to music and nod off in front of the TV. We have sex, sorry to freak you out, but we do.
In all respects we are normal adults contributing to society, paying taxes, recycling our (maybe too many) wine bottles etc.
Look I am sorry life apparently dealt you a few nasty cards, but perhaps you should consider a religious retreat — life in a monastery can be I hear very fulfilling for men and women like you.
But please leave the rest of us to deal with 21st century issues.
And as for your two gay friends… well… I don't know if I wouldn't file them under I for imaginary. That is just my gut instinct. (Unless the couple you refer to are Catholic priests, in which case… I guess.)
ergle2
Sep 14, 08:42 PM
I think you're a bit arse-about-face there. Someone else has already pointed out the differences between XP and Windows 2003 aren't trivial, so I won't go into that. However, if you're sufficient vintage, you should remember the "outrage" when someone demonstrated that you could turn NT 4 Workstation into NT 4 Server (including the boot and login screens) just by changing a few Registry settings (although the part that usually doesn't get said is that those Registry settings then triggered a whole range of different tuning settings for the scheduler, memory management, etc). NT 3.5 & 3.51 were the same, and IIRC, NT 3.1 didn't even have a "Server" version.
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Quite a few bits of XP Pro functionality can be enabled in XP home with some minor hex editing, too.
And of course, NT started as a reimplementation of VMS for a failed Intel RISC CPU...
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Quite a few bits of XP Pro functionality can be enabled in XP home with some minor hex editing, too.
And of course, NT started as a reimplementation of VMS for a failed Intel RISC CPU...
No comments:
Post a Comment