~Shard~
Jul 15, 10:49 AM
I disagree. Using ATX power supplies is a stupid idea. I am sure Apple uses higher quality power supplies than you would pick up at your local CompUSA.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause to many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
Actually that is a good point. Another good example is how some people install incorrect RAM into their Mac - they just pick up generic cheapo RAM, not Mac-certified, and wonder why they have all sorts of issues.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause to many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
Actually that is a good point. Another good example is how some people install incorrect RAM into their Mac - they just pick up generic cheapo RAM, not Mac-certified, and wonder why they have all sorts of issues.
akac
Mar 26, 09:40 PM
Details found here :
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Apple-removes-Samba-from-Mac-OS-X-10-7-Server-1215179.html
Gist of it :
- less features than Samba
- no more Active Directory Services
- Just file sharing now.
Samba developers have also noted that the true motive behind this move might not be the GPLv3 per say, but a more global move away from the GPL. Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Anyway, Samba v4 could have given them all the "features" they implemented and much more. Their own in-house version won't necessarily be better just because it's written by Apple. The Samba team does a great job with what Microsoft puts out as documentation (if you can even call it that).
Note that from the article, this change only impacts OS X Server. The client was already an in-house solution.
Although from my understanding from people using this today, the Apple implementation is dramatically faster than the Samba implementation. Just like WebKit started from KHTML and had fewer features than Mozilla, its ended up being the best browser engine out there. Leaner. Meaner. Faster. But it took time. Apple's SMB/CIFS implementation is going the same route. Now I've read elsewhere that it DOES support Active Directory. And elsewhere that it doesn't. The Preview version of Lion was 2 months old by the time devs got it, so its also possible that those reports are all just wrong in as far as what works and what is supposed to work (i.e. it may support AD, but bugs cause it not to work well or at all on some installs).
You will be foolish to wait around unless you want to get buried in the on-slaught of new and improved apps to take advantage of Lion from day one.
Exactly. I know of at least one major app right now that is going to go Lion only...
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
You just gave the perfect answer. Using a VM. Run SL in a VM for Rosetta apps :)
It's needed for me.
Look, Rosetta isn't a part of OS X by default. If it is installed, then it is needed by the user, and thus isn't "crap." If the user doesn't need it, it won't be installed. For most users, it will be "cut out." I don't see why having the option there for people who need it stifles progress.
Actually its not a small piece. Its a big piece. EVERY OS X Library has to be provided in PowerPC code as well as x86. So Rosetta itself, by itself is tiny. But all the extra libraries that make up OS X is huge. And that's why its cut out.
In SL, it shipped with all the libraries, but not the Rosetta piece. So it was a simple install of just the Rosetta piece.
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Apple-removes-Samba-from-Mac-OS-X-10-7-Server-1215179.html
Gist of it :
- less features than Samba
- no more Active Directory Services
- Just file sharing now.
Samba developers have also noted that the true motive behind this move might not be the GPLv3 per say, but a more global move away from the GPL. Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Anyway, Samba v4 could have given them all the "features" they implemented and much more. Their own in-house version won't necessarily be better just because it's written by Apple. The Samba team does a great job with what Microsoft puts out as documentation (if you can even call it that).
Note that from the article, this change only impacts OS X Server. The client was already an in-house solution.
Although from my understanding from people using this today, the Apple implementation is dramatically faster than the Samba implementation. Just like WebKit started from KHTML and had fewer features than Mozilla, its ended up being the best browser engine out there. Leaner. Meaner. Faster. But it took time. Apple's SMB/CIFS implementation is going the same route. Now I've read elsewhere that it DOES support Active Directory. And elsewhere that it doesn't. The Preview version of Lion was 2 months old by the time devs got it, so its also possible that those reports are all just wrong in as far as what works and what is supposed to work (i.e. it may support AD, but bugs cause it not to work well or at all on some installs).
You will be foolish to wait around unless you want to get buried in the on-slaught of new and improved apps to take advantage of Lion from day one.
Exactly. I know of at least one major app right now that is going to go Lion only...
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
You just gave the perfect answer. Using a VM. Run SL in a VM for Rosetta apps :)
It's needed for me.
Look, Rosetta isn't a part of OS X by default. If it is installed, then it is needed by the user, and thus isn't "crap." If the user doesn't need it, it won't be installed. For most users, it will be "cut out." I don't see why having the option there for people who need it stifles progress.
Actually its not a small piece. Its a big piece. EVERY OS X Library has to be provided in PowerPC code as well as x86. So Rosetta itself, by itself is tiny. But all the extra libraries that make up OS X is huge. And that's why its cut out.
In SL, it shipped with all the libraries, but not the Rosetta piece. So it was a simple install of just the Rosetta piece.
dscuber9000
Apr 27, 02:57 PM
The birthers have moved on to say that because Obama "doesn't have allegiance to America" or some BS like that, he is now no longer a natural born citizen (http://www.birthers.org/). :rolleyes:
Vegasman
Apr 27, 08:46 AM
Not really. Although location services does not delete the log when you turn it off, it does cease to record to it. I don't see what the problem with that is.
And if you beleive that, you are misinformed.
And if you beleive that, you are misinformed.
.jpg "Disney Christmas coloring")
wnurse
Nov 29, 12:41 AM
I can't wait until Steve laughs in their faces. Who the hell do these guys think they are?
Hmm, the people that can tell apple to go screw themselves and take their music of itunes, that's who. One studio threatening to ask for a piece of ipods is not as threatening if they all do... what you gonna do, not buy music at all?.. of course you will buy music. You'll curse the studios but you'll buy music (and if not you, mom and pop will still buy music even if not available on itunes).
Wil universal get what they want?.. Apple is not totally powerless in this potential negotiation but i doubt steve has the power to laugh in their faces. Apple does not make music, it sells it. A seller can hardly laugh in the face of the producer of goods (or the gatekeeper of those goods). Want proof?.. walmart vs apple. Apple makes ipods.. Walmart refused to deal with apple the way apple wanted.. guess who lost in that battle.. walmart of course.. they are merely a seller, apple is the gatekeeper of ipods. The same is with the music studios.. apple is a seller, music companies are the gatekeepers. They can dictate who can and can't sell their music and while every corporation is motivated by profits.. they can always take their music and go home. Sure they lose but so does apple or they can make their music exclusively available only on microsoft service. You might not buy the music but you aren't 300 miliion americans. I gurantee apple does not want to be sitting by idly watching microsoft steal a market they grew. Naw, steve is not laughing in anyone's face.
Hmm, the people that can tell apple to go screw themselves and take their music of itunes, that's who. One studio threatening to ask for a piece of ipods is not as threatening if they all do... what you gonna do, not buy music at all?.. of course you will buy music. You'll curse the studios but you'll buy music (and if not you, mom and pop will still buy music even if not available on itunes).
Wil universal get what they want?.. Apple is not totally powerless in this potential negotiation but i doubt steve has the power to laugh in their faces. Apple does not make music, it sells it. A seller can hardly laugh in the face of the producer of goods (or the gatekeeper of those goods). Want proof?.. walmart vs apple. Apple makes ipods.. Walmart refused to deal with apple the way apple wanted.. guess who lost in that battle.. walmart of course.. they are merely a seller, apple is the gatekeeper of ipods. The same is with the music studios.. apple is a seller, music companies are the gatekeepers. They can dictate who can and can't sell their music and while every corporation is motivated by profits.. they can always take their music and go home. Sure they lose but so does apple or they can make their music exclusively available only on microsoft service. You might not buy the music but you aren't 300 miliion americans. I gurantee apple does not want to be sitting by idly watching microsoft steal a market they grew. Naw, steve is not laughing in anyone's face.
NathanMuir
Feb 28, 06:36 PM
Well, I have nothing to say, but that the University has grounds for dismissal if difference of opinion arises.
True, you can argue the gay card, but in this case, they college played the rights cards to get rid of him. Was it the best choice? No.
Still, it's the college's right on who teaches or not; and seeing how it's a Catholic Church college, I'd say it was bound to happen.
I agree, the situation in the OP was bound to happen sooner or later.
True, you can argue the gay card, but in this case, they college played the rights cards to get rid of him. Was it the best choice? No.
Still, it's the college's right on who teaches or not; and seeing how it's a Catholic Church college, I'd say it was bound to happen.
I agree, the situation in the OP was bound to happen sooner or later.
soundbwoy
Apr 27, 10:54 AM
Is it me or are there more idiots about. Damn it people, leave the damn tracking contro alone if I lose my phone, I want to be able to find. I'm so not in the mood to spend $600 again.
NAG
Mar 31, 04:45 PM
I don't think it is evil. It is crazy for people to pretend like Google makes Android to be benevolent and help the world. They have financial motives, and they have to protect their interests. Removing Google as search is probably going to be a huge no-no. It is kind of dumb that anyone has even tried to do that... That is part of the problem. Some of the carriers/manufacturers are stupid.
They have disrespected what Google has done for them and forced Google to clamp down. When someone gives you something for free and does a lot of work for you, you can at least respect their position and understand when you do things that might be stepping on their toes.
That is the real problem with the android commodity market though. It is not google, it is all the second rate manufacturers who sucked at making smartphones before Apple and Google, and continue to do dumb things to this day.
You mix a more general usage based OS with a hardware marketplace filled with knuckleheads, and you end up with the mess that is the Android hardware market and ecosystem.
That was a hoot changing the search to Bing. Only thing gutsier would be to somehow replace every admob ad to a competitor.
I wouldn't leave Google completely blameless here. They knew who they were dealing with. They need eyeballs to sell (ad business) so they made their bed. Same reason why the software marketplace on android sucks, they designed it for their bottom line (eyeballs). They aren't making a product for people to use, they're making a channel to deliver a product (eyeballs) to their customers (advertisers).
They have disrespected what Google has done for them and forced Google to clamp down. When someone gives you something for free and does a lot of work for you, you can at least respect their position and understand when you do things that might be stepping on their toes.
That is the real problem with the android commodity market though. It is not google, it is all the second rate manufacturers who sucked at making smartphones before Apple and Google, and continue to do dumb things to this day.
You mix a more general usage based OS with a hardware marketplace filled with knuckleheads, and you end up with the mess that is the Android hardware market and ecosystem.
That was a hoot changing the search to Bing. Only thing gutsier would be to somehow replace every admob ad to a competitor.
I wouldn't leave Google completely blameless here. They knew who they were dealing with. They need eyeballs to sell (ad business) so they made their bed. Same reason why the software marketplace on android sucks, they designed it for their bottom line (eyeballs). They aren't making a product for people to use, they're making a channel to deliver a product (eyeballs) to their customers (advertisers).
MacRumors
Aug 16, 10:33 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Barefeats provides (http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html) benchmarks comparing the Quad 3GHz Mac Pro (Xeon) vs the Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac (G5). This represents the new top of the line vs the old top of the line Mac.
They provide benchmarks for both non-Universal and Universal applications between the Mac Pro 3GHz, Mac Pro 2.66GHz and PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5GHz.
The top-end Mac Pro performed well compared to the Quad G5 with both Photoshop CS2 and After Effects 7.0 despite running under Rosetta emulation on the Mac Pro. Universal upgrades to these applications should provide additional performance boosts.
Meanwhile, Universal applications iMovie HD 6, Final Cut Pro 5, FileMaker Pro 8.5 and Cinebench 9.5 generally showed substantial improvements even in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro vs the 2.5GHz PowerMac.
There's no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc. As you can see from the four UB tests we ran in this session, the Mac Pro 2.66GHz was as much as 62% faster than the Quad-Core G5/2.5GHz. The Mac Pro 3.0GHz was as much as 85% faster.
Barefeats provides (http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html) benchmarks comparing the Quad 3GHz Mac Pro (Xeon) vs the Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac (G5). This represents the new top of the line vs the old top of the line Mac.
They provide benchmarks for both non-Universal and Universal applications between the Mac Pro 3GHz, Mac Pro 2.66GHz and PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5GHz.
The top-end Mac Pro performed well compared to the Quad G5 with both Photoshop CS2 and After Effects 7.0 despite running under Rosetta emulation on the Mac Pro. Universal upgrades to these applications should provide additional performance boosts.
Meanwhile, Universal applications iMovie HD 6, Final Cut Pro 5, FileMaker Pro 8.5 and Cinebench 9.5 generally showed substantial improvements even in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro vs the 2.5GHz PowerMac.
There's no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc. As you can see from the four UB tests we ran in this session, the Mac Pro 2.66GHz was as much as 62% faster than the Quad-Core G5/2.5GHz. The Mac Pro 3.0GHz was as much as 85% faster.
LagunaSol
Apr 6, 04:08 PM
Is every app in the app store of the same caliber as those few apps you named?
Did I say that? No. (Strawman alert.) But there are a lot. Far more than you'll find for Honeycomb, despite mobilehavoc's contention to the contrary.
I'm sure you'll be the first to dance happy around when in the future finally some 5 year old Android apps/games will get ported to iOS like it is now with Windows/MacOS.
Ah, Android gaming. You seem to have things reversed in your head:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JICitdMtY5U
Did I say that? No. (Strawman alert.) But there are a lot. Far more than you'll find for Honeycomb, despite mobilehavoc's contention to the contrary.
I'm sure you'll be the first to dance happy around when in the future finally some 5 year old Android apps/games will get ported to iOS like it is now with Windows/MacOS.
Ah, Android gaming. You seem to have things reversed in your head:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JICitdMtY5U
digitalbiker
Aug 7, 08:19 PM
Wait. Does this mean that the Leopard doesn't support current MBP or MB? the ones that use 32 bit Yonah based Core Duo CPU.
No, it doesn't mean that at all. It works with both 32 and 64 bit CPU's. The only thing you won't be able to do is run 64 bit apps in 64 bit mode.
No, it doesn't mean that at all. It works with both 32 and 64 bit CPU's. The only thing you won't be able to do is run 64 bit apps in 64 bit mode.
toddybody
Apr 6, 02:59 PM
Funny, and true.
By the same token, if I explicitly told my wife I wanted a Xoom, Playbook, Tab 10.1 and she came home with an iPad, I wouldn't be the saddest kid on earth, but I do know that I'd be returning it for something I want.
Of course, I also hate it when she brings me home a cheeseburger when I wanted a hamburger.
Yeesh dude, at least your wife cares enough to do nice things for you. :(
By the same token, if I explicitly told my wife I wanted a Xoom, Playbook, Tab 10.1 and she came home with an iPad, I wouldn't be the saddest kid on earth, but I do know that I'd be returning it for something I want.
Of course, I also hate it when she brings me home a cheeseburger when I wanted a hamburger.
Yeesh dude, at least your wife cares enough to do nice things for you. :(
MacRumorUser
Nov 27, 04:13 PM
Gran Turismo: The REAL driving simulator ....as long as you've grinded long enough. :rolleyes:
Exactly. It's always been a contradictory game for me. The claim of real against the synthetic just has never jelled for me.
I'd rather a game like burnout, heck even Mario Kart not because it's easier or arcade, but because it doesn't have any pretentious about being what it is.
I'd love to love GT series, just find it impossible to do and I've given ALL of them a try including the even more pretentious PROLOGUE versions.
Exactly. It's always been a contradictory game for me. The claim of real against the synthetic just has never jelled for me.
I'd rather a game like burnout, heck even Mario Kart not because it's easier or arcade, but because it doesn't have any pretentious about being what it is.
I'd love to love GT series, just find it impossible to do and I've given ALL of them a try including the even more pretentious PROLOGUE versions.
DoFoT9
Aug 8, 07:12 PM
i don't know, i still think the Gran Turismo series is the best as far as real driving simulation. by far. and the number of copies sold backs that up
given that its been out for 10 years, i think it would have sold a fair few no matter what :rolleyes: i preferred GT3 A-Spec over anything else.
yeah i still might pre-order the special edition one. i'm not sure yet
do we have an official date yet? or will that be pushed back too :D
given that its been out for 10 years, i think it would have sold a fair few no matter what :rolleyes: i preferred GT3 A-Spec over anything else.
yeah i still might pre-order the special edition one. i'm not sure yet
do we have an official date yet? or will that be pushed back too :D
Pro31
Apr 6, 02:10 PM
If you bought 2 Xooms would you have a Mazda?
Dave00
Aug 7, 03:50 PM
Well, looks like Apple has figured out what to do with all that extra space most of us have on our hard drives. Even though only changes are saved, it seems like this will take up an enormous amount of space, especially for multimedia files like movies, etc. Plus, if only changes are stored, it would seem that to restore a file would entail starting with the original, and applying all the changes since then - wouldn't that take quite a long time? And saving a file would probably take longer too... smells like alot of system slowdown. Still, I'll be very impressed if this actually works without a huge number of bugs - it has to be a phenomenally complicated task to keep track of everything. And it LOOKS really cool. :)
Dave
Dave
.gif "coloring pages disney")
mdavis
Mar 26, 08:23 PM
What? this seems hard to believe... Already done on development? :confused:
it's not a particularly large release
it's not a particularly large release
Squire
Aug 5, 11:30 PM
Does anyone think the recent "problems" at Apple are going to have any effect on what happens Monday.
Story: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/05/BUGAHKBK3H1.DTL
If there are products that are they "maybe" list, this might put them on the "go" list. Big news pushes stock prices up and pushes the "problem" stories on page 2.
I agree. In fact, I was going to post the same thing. I was all set to be disappointed by the keynote until I read a new Forbes article on the topic. They are expecting some pretty amazing things; things that will divert media attention away from Apple's embarrassing financial scandal.
-Squire
P.S. How about seamless MSN/Yahoo! Messenger support in iChat?\
<edit> All of which has upped the stakes for Apple and Jobs, the company's public face. He must show the world something new when he delivers the keynote at Monday's conference. Really new. Something revolutionary, not evolutionary, that will excite the fans, grow the business--and change the subject.
http://www.forbes.com/home/technology/2006/08/04/ipod-jobs-zune_cx_ck_rr_0804apple.html
Story: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/05/BUGAHKBK3H1.DTL
If there are products that are they "maybe" list, this might put them on the "go" list. Big news pushes stock prices up and pushes the "problem" stories on page 2.
I agree. In fact, I was going to post the same thing. I was all set to be disappointed by the keynote until I read a new Forbes article on the topic. They are expecting some pretty amazing things; things that will divert media attention away from Apple's embarrassing financial scandal.
-Squire
P.S. How about seamless MSN/Yahoo! Messenger support in iChat?\
<edit> All of which has upped the stakes for Apple and Jobs, the company's public face. He must show the world something new when he delivers the keynote at Monday's conference. Really new. Something revolutionary, not evolutionary, that will excite the fans, grow the business--and change the subject.
http://www.forbes.com/home/technology/2006/08/04/ipod-jobs-zune_cx_ck_rr_0804apple.html
srxtr
Mar 31, 03:54 PM
This wont end androids openness. It will make is so that there is more of a consistent experience amung all android devices.
We will still be able to install from "unknown sources" for example.
Relaz macrumors.. not as big as deal as you are making it.
Openness means it should not matter whether it's consistent or not.
If every android device out there was consistent with each other, that defies the definition of openness.
Being able to install whatever you want from "unknown sources" is not the "open" OS this article is referring to.
We will still be able to install from "unknown sources" for example.
Relaz macrumors.. not as big as deal as you are making it.
Openness means it should not matter whether it's consistent or not.
If every android device out there was consistent with each other, that defies the definition of openness.
Being able to install whatever you want from "unknown sources" is not the "open" OS this article is referring to.
WWDC Lurker
Aug 6, 09:23 AM
I still think the apple employee's interview is probably on target of what to expect next week. this is just a developers meeting, not macworld. lots of leopard.
http://www.dvdnewsroom.com/apple/ (http://www.dvdnewsroom.com/news/breaking-inside-apple-on-blu-ray-macpro-and-apple%E2%80%99s-media-center-strategy-what-to-expect-and-not-to-expect-at-wwdc/)
http://www.dvdnewsroom.com/apple/ (http://www.dvdnewsroom.com/news/breaking-inside-apple-on-blu-ray-macpro-and-apple%E2%80%99s-media-center-strategy-what-to-expect-and-not-to-expect-at-wwdc/)
Chupa Chupa
Apr 10, 09:12 AM
Something is rotten in the state of Denmark, and it ain't the whole fact that Apple pushed aside every professional vid company just to announce their product. 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.
You need to consult a doctor ASAP because your memory isn't so good. It's only been a few years since Apple pulled out of NAB. Prior to that Apple use to announce products alongside NAB all the time. In fact the very first version of FCP was announced at Supermeet.
Since then:
NAB '01: DVD SP 1.5
NAB '02, '03: new versions of FCP
NAB '05, 06, 07, 09: new versions of FCS
Anyone else call BS on that whole article?
Huh? Did you see the video. This is a legit NAB discussion panel. But I see where you are coming from b/c it's completely unlike Apple to go off on a new paradigm. I mean Apple would be the last company to shock customers and the industry by ditching the floppy drive at the peak of it's existence. And it would never just completely rewrite a popular consumer program like iMovie. Or take the lead on a new connector like Thunderbolt. Never, because we all know Apple is a company that follows other's lead. :rolleyes:
I since there will be a lot of the usually howling when this new FCP is previewed. It looks like Apple is taking video editing in a completely new direction, hence the sentimental journey back to the place where FCP was first launched. Based on the video Apple is jettisoning old media (TV, Movie) editing for new media (web). The latter market is bigger and it also fits in better with Apple's new consumer-leaning sales model.
Personally I'm excited to see what Tues brings.
Although a new FCP is great news, I'm wondering if the new Motion is going to be equally exciting. It's about time it stepped up and challenged After Effects.
I suspect Apple did a re-think of the entire suite and the Motion graphics will not only give AE a run for it's money but that Motion will be better integrated into FCP.
You need to consult a doctor ASAP because your memory isn't so good. It's only been a few years since Apple pulled out of NAB. Prior to that Apple use to announce products alongside NAB all the time. In fact the very first version of FCP was announced at Supermeet.
Since then:
NAB '01: DVD SP 1.5
NAB '02, '03: new versions of FCP
NAB '05, 06, 07, 09: new versions of FCS
Anyone else call BS on that whole article?
Huh? Did you see the video. This is a legit NAB discussion panel. But I see where you are coming from b/c it's completely unlike Apple to go off on a new paradigm. I mean Apple would be the last company to shock customers and the industry by ditching the floppy drive at the peak of it's existence. And it would never just completely rewrite a popular consumer program like iMovie. Or take the lead on a new connector like Thunderbolt. Never, because we all know Apple is a company that follows other's lead. :rolleyes:
I since there will be a lot of the usually howling when this new FCP is previewed. It looks like Apple is taking video editing in a completely new direction, hence the sentimental journey back to the place where FCP was first launched. Based on the video Apple is jettisoning old media (TV, Movie) editing for new media (web). The latter market is bigger and it also fits in better with Apple's new consumer-leaning sales model.
Personally I'm excited to see what Tues brings.
Although a new FCP is great news, I'm wondering if the new Motion is going to be equally exciting. It's about time it stepped up and challenged After Effects.
I suspect Apple did a re-think of the entire suite and the Motion graphics will not only give AE a run for it's money but that Motion will be better integrated into FCP.
rmwebs
Mar 26, 04:54 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?
Probably all three ;) The QA team has gradually got worse and worse over the last few years. Apple have become more and more greedy, and you can bet the Mac OS coders cant be bothered to work on its ancient codebase when across the office a group of people get to play with the newer (granted still based on Mac OS) iOS.
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?
Probably all three ;) The QA team has gradually got worse and worse over the last few years. Apple have become more and more greedy, and you can bet the Mac OS coders cant be bothered to work on its ancient codebase when across the office a group of people get to play with the newer (granted still based on Mac OS) iOS.
iJohnHenry
Mar 5, 07:35 PM
That's (sadly) believable. See, now you're talking. I knew you didn't always pop round just to throw a cheeky non sequitur into the works. ;)
Yes, but actual critical thinking is no where near as much fun. :p
Yes, but actual critical thinking is no where near as much fun. :p
glassbathroom
Jul 28, 03:21 AM
Ok, here goes. (Quick pass)
http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/3350/macminidblwidepk4.jpg
Eeek. Not so sure I like that.
Hmmm... maybe with just one slot?
http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/4436/macminidblwideunislotvr9.jpg
A little better. I personally prefer the taller narrower one, though.
Big is the new small.
http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/3350/macminidblwidepk4.jpg
Eeek. Not so sure I like that.
Hmmm... maybe with just one slot?
http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/4436/macminidblwideunislotvr9.jpg
A little better. I personally prefer the taller narrower one, though.
Big is the new small.