Cooknn
Aug 23, 12:51 PM
Let us continue to pray for a speedy death to the Macintosh PowerPC computer.I'd rather pray for the speedy development of Adobe Creative Suite 3 UB :cool:
skunk
Mar 1, 06:45 AM
Dr. Josiah B. Gould, the Plato scholar who taught me Ancient Philosophy, told us that, that although homosexuality was common among Greek aristocrats in ancient Greece, to them, sodomy was repugnant.Dr Simon Hornblower, the author of several books about ancient Greece and editor of the Oxford Classical Dictionary, a friend of mine, agrees with me that there is no way your teacher could know any such thing, and that homosexuality was not common only among aristocrats. The Greeks, and Romans for that matter, made little distinction between sexes or orifices when it came to getting their rocks off.
terkans
Jul 20, 11:56 AM
yes, its known as reverse hyper threading. AMD are working on it
http://www.dvhardware.net/article10901.html
um, no:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060713-7263.html
http://www.dvhardware.net/article10901.html
um, no:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060713-7263.html
*LTD*
Mar 26, 07:13 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
How does Rosetta hold back forward progress exactly? It's just small extension for the OS. It's not like it's Classic.
It's crap that is no longer needed.
Stuff that can be cut out but isn't, holds back progress. Progress = cutting and more cutting and then perfecting what's left over.
Rosetta isn't necessary to run today's apps (or even apps released over the past 2-3 years.) So it needs to go.
How does Rosetta hold back forward progress exactly? It's just small extension for the OS. It's not like it's Classic.
It's crap that is no longer needed.
Stuff that can be cut out but isn't, holds back progress. Progress = cutting and more cutting and then perfecting what's left over.
Rosetta isn't necessary to run today's apps (or even apps released over the past 2-3 years.) So it needs to go.
Hamish
Apr 11, 10:36 PM
Looking forward to the new final cut studio.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
CaoCao
Mar 4, 04:01 PM
The problem with your "logic" is that not everybody is gay. Homosexuality is nothing new, gay people have been around for a long time, and humanity is surviving.
Except I was responding to a post that suggested heterosexuals stop having sex...
Except I was responding to a post that suggested heterosexuals stop having sex...
zedsdead
Apr 12, 05:10 AM
http://www.avid.com/US/specialoffers/fcppromotion?intcmp=AV-HP-S3
Avid is holding a great promotion to switch over to Media Composer if you are an FCP user. I am considering it based on what Apple shows us today.
Avid is holding a great promotion to switch over to Media Composer if you are an FCP user. I am considering it based on what Apple shows us today.
Porco
Aug 5, 08:15 PM
Don't like it. I don't want a new keyboard - I just want FR. Besides, anyone with an older laptop would not be served by that. Just put a USB dongle in the case and sell it with the software!
I'd like a USB dongle too ideally, but I was responding to the specific Mac Pro /IR+FR issue really. I think the problem (from their perspective, and so for the likelihood of it happening) with Apple also doing a dongle would it could eat into the [presumably more profitable] IR keyboard sales.
A keyboard could still be used on any USB laptop, and if you were hooking it up to a TV or large monitor you wouldn't need the lid open - which would also mean the laptop's integrated keyboard would be inaccessible, if you did want to use it for any reason while hooked up to an external screen.
They might just do a dongle on a USB cable, but that doesn't seem very Apple to me.
I'd like a USB dongle too ideally, but I was responding to the specific Mac Pro /IR+FR issue really. I think the problem (from their perspective, and so for the likelihood of it happening) with Apple also doing a dongle would it could eat into the [presumably more profitable] IR keyboard sales.
A keyboard could still be used on any USB laptop, and if you were hooking it up to a TV or large monitor you wouldn't need the lid open - which would also mean the laptop's integrated keyboard would be inaccessible, if you did want to use it for any reason while hooked up to an external screen.
They might just do a dongle on a USB cable, but that doesn't seem very Apple to me.
mambodancer
Apr 25, 03:24 PM
This won't go very far as the plaintiffs and their attorneys clearly don't understand what the this data file is used for nor is the information being transmitted to Apple.
For an excellent overview of the subject and what the data file is used for, this link provided by Steve Sande from TUAW is a great read:
http://geothought.blogspot.com/2011/04/scoop-apples-iphone-is-not-storing-your.html
For an excellent overview of the subject and what the data file is used for, this link provided by Steve Sande from TUAW is a great read:
http://geothought.blogspot.com/2011/04/scoop-apples-iphone-is-not-storing-your.html
gugy
Aug 11, 03:51 PM
i just want a cell phone that works.
all these phones today(by all these phones i mean the motorolas i have had, so mayby motorola's jsut suck) have this ridiculous amount of latency when you are navigating the menus. cause they have to have all this fancy crap flyin around. its like phones are using the same technology from 5 years ago but they are just piling these features into them so they dog down. overall phones today seem to suck just a bit. my nokia 8260 was the best phone i ever had and it was monochrome with no camera or video or stupid crap like that...
plus it seems that my phones ability to get reception when inside a building has gotten worse over time too. i used to get good reception inside my work, but now i don't. and its the same building.
so all in all, just give me a phone that works and functions well and i'll be happy.
I agree simplicity is everything!
Knowing Apple, I hope the Iphone will be simple and slick. That's all we really need.
all these phones today(by all these phones i mean the motorolas i have had, so mayby motorola's jsut suck) have this ridiculous amount of latency when you are navigating the menus. cause they have to have all this fancy crap flyin around. its like phones are using the same technology from 5 years ago but they are just piling these features into them so they dog down. overall phones today seem to suck just a bit. my nokia 8260 was the best phone i ever had and it was monochrome with no camera or video or stupid crap like that...
plus it seems that my phones ability to get reception when inside a building has gotten worse over time too. i used to get good reception inside my work, but now i don't. and its the same building.
so all in all, just give me a phone that works and functions well and i'll be happy.
I agree simplicity is everything!
Knowing Apple, I hope the Iphone will be simple and slick. That's all we really need.
Nuck81
Aug 13, 12:21 AM
It's refreshing that I don't have to go to gamespot forums to see a pointless immature fanboy pissing match :rolleyes:
Blue Fox
Apr 25, 01:35 PM
Only Apple? The Android system does the same thing, AND sends the information off to Google. The iPhone/iPad just logs the data to a file. Seems a bit unfair to me, but we'll see.
jackc
Aug 7, 08:02 PM
great . . . i just get a new macbook with tiger now i'm gonna have to get leopard . . . how much will this put me back?
We're talking about at least 6 months before Leopard, it'll cost you $129 I think without an edu discount.
We're talking about at least 6 months before Leopard, it'll cost you $129 I think without an edu discount.
Huhn
Mar 22, 02:53 PM
According to the hate, Apple Fanboys are giving those new competitors....it seems like it is the first real competition. Get out of your homes guys and girls and compare.... I own an iPhone 4 and a MBP, but came from and Android phone and guess what? The UI is way better than those ugly millions of square buttons that you see on the iPhone. I still prefer it...because of other reasons like battery and the built in ipod.
Samsung now has the thinnest Tablet with a dual core, plus still better camera and a much nicer UI. I would rather buy that one than the iPad, just because....uhm well i don�t have to send my files (all type of files) by email to myself to transfer them? and maybe i wanna exchange files with workmates without using an adapter the whole time. Maybe i really wanna use and work with that thing than playing games and watching movies or browsing (guess thats what 95% do with their iPad).
Hairstyles For Prom 2011 Updos
prom hairstyles 2011 updos for
prom hairstyles 2011 updos for
prom hairstyles 2011 updos.
2011 prom updos for medium
Samsung now has the thinnest Tablet with a dual core, plus still better camera and a much nicer UI. I would rather buy that one than the iPad, just because....uhm well i don�t have to send my files (all type of files) by email to myself to transfer them? and maybe i wanna exchange files with workmates without using an adapter the whole time. Maybe i really wanna use and work with that thing than playing games and watching movies or browsing (guess thats what 95% do with their iPad).
LegendKillerUK
Apr 6, 02:34 PM
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first.
As Jobs explained, there was a simple UI demo done on a touch device originally designed to be a keyboard input prototype. That demo gave him the idea to go all touch on the iPhone. That's what he meant by "the tablet came first".
Since we know that during summer/fall the first iPhone UI concepts were done using iPods with wheels, his touch "eureka" moment probably came in late with the UI demo almost certainly done under OSX.
According to all known histories, the actual creation of iOS didn't begin until 2006. Prior to that, some at Apple were still proposing using Linux for the phone OS.
But he then said after how well it would work on the phone, they put the tablet project on the shelf and focused on the phone as it was more important. Which means it was a tablet and no just a touch screen device in the beginning.
iOS was developed for the phone first.
As Jobs explained, there was a simple UI demo done on a touch device originally designed to be a keyboard input prototype. That demo gave him the idea to go all touch on the iPhone. That's what he meant by "the tablet came first".
Since we know that during summer/fall the first iPhone UI concepts were done using iPods with wheels, his touch "eureka" moment probably came in late with the UI demo almost certainly done under OSX.
According to all known histories, the actual creation of iOS didn't begin until 2006. Prior to that, some at Apple were still proposing using Linux for the phone OS.
But he then said after how well it would work on the phone, they put the tablet project on the shelf and focused on the phone as it was more important. Which means it was a tablet and no just a touch screen device in the beginning.
Butters
Aug 11, 10:29 AM
I don't really want an iphone, I'd rather have an ipod with ichat/isight tbh
VanNess
Aug 5, 06:28 PM
I have my money on 06.
Show me the money! (lol)
In addition to the aforementioned reasons why it won't see the light of day until 07, Apple will gauge reaction to Leopard (both public and developer) and use the remainder of 06 to further tweak, well, whatever is going to be in Leopard. That takes us to Macworld in January, and another major, prime time opportunity to hype/showboat Leopard to the masses and further tease anxious Macheads to the point where sales will go through the roof when it hits the stores.
Recall that Tiger features saw significant UI overhauls (Dashboard, Spotlight, Automator) from the original Tiger demos at WWDC until it's reshowing at Macworld. Apple has no reason to rush this out after WWDC.
You can bank on 07. First Half. No sooner than April.
Show me the money! (lol)
In addition to the aforementioned reasons why it won't see the light of day until 07, Apple will gauge reaction to Leopard (both public and developer) and use the remainder of 06 to further tweak, well, whatever is going to be in Leopard. That takes us to Macworld in January, and another major, prime time opportunity to hype/showboat Leopard to the masses and further tease anxious Macheads to the point where sales will go through the roof when it hits the stores.
Recall that Tiger features saw significant UI overhauls (Dashboard, Spotlight, Automator) from the original Tiger demos at WWDC until it's reshowing at Macworld. Apple has no reason to rush this out after WWDC.
You can bank on 07. First Half. No sooner than April.
wovel
Apr 19, 04:20 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/19/analysis-of-apples-lawsuit-against-samsung-includes-ios-device-sales-numbers/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/19/142014-apple_samsung_lawsuit.jpg
Former Engadget editor Nilay Patel lays out a thorough analysis (http://thisismynext.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-samsung-analysis/) of Apple's newly-filed lawsuit targeting Samsung (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/18/apple-targets-samsung-with-new-lawsuit-over-galaxy-line/) for allegedly copying the "look and feel" of iOS devices with its "Galaxy" line of smartphones and tablets. Patel offers an excellent look at the overall lawsuit, as well as a claim-by-claim analysis of each of Apple's sixteen claims against Samsung.The entire report is a solid read for those looking to understand more about how Apple is approaching the issue.
Interestingly, the background portion of the lawsuit also provides total sales numbers for various iOS devices "as of March 2011". Comparing those numbers to known sales as of the end of asymco's Horace Dediu has calculated minimum unit shipments (http://www.asymco.com/2011/04/19/review-of-apples-unit-numbers-released-in-legal-filing-prior-to-earnings/) for the various devices during the first quarter of 2011.
In the lawsuit, Apple variously notes that either "as of" or "by" March Apple had sold more than 108 million iPhones, over 60 million iPod touches, and over 19 million iPads.The question becomes whether the implied level of 4.2 million iPads sold during the first quarter of 2011 is an accurate number, in which case Apple's performance would have fallen well below expectations, or simply an understatement by the company.
Apple is set to announce official figures for the quarter at its earnings release (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/18/apple-to-announce-q2-2011-financial-results-on-april-20th/) tomorrow. The release should include specific sales figures for the iPhone and iPad, but Apple generally does not issue specific numbers for the iPod touch, instead reporting total sales for all iPod models and then sometimes breaking out a rough share for the iPod touch or stating the device's growth as a means of highlighting its performance on the earnings conference call.
Article Link: Analysis of Apple's Lawsuit Against Samsung, Includes iOS Device Sales Numbers (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/19/analysis-of-apples-lawsuit-against-samsung-includes-ios-device-sales-numbers/)
Why is it so hard for people to read English. Nowhere does it indicate those are numbers for the first quarter. In fact it is pretty clear it does not actually include the month of March..
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/19/142014-apple_samsung_lawsuit.jpg
Former Engadget editor Nilay Patel lays out a thorough analysis (http://thisismynext.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-samsung-analysis/) of Apple's newly-filed lawsuit targeting Samsung (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/18/apple-targets-samsung-with-new-lawsuit-over-galaxy-line/) for allegedly copying the "look and feel" of iOS devices with its "Galaxy" line of smartphones and tablets. Patel offers an excellent look at the overall lawsuit, as well as a claim-by-claim analysis of each of Apple's sixteen claims against Samsung.The entire report is a solid read for those looking to understand more about how Apple is approaching the issue.
Interestingly, the background portion of the lawsuit also provides total sales numbers for various iOS devices "as of March 2011". Comparing those numbers to known sales as of the end of asymco's Horace Dediu has calculated minimum unit shipments (http://www.asymco.com/2011/04/19/review-of-apples-unit-numbers-released-in-legal-filing-prior-to-earnings/) for the various devices during the first quarter of 2011.
In the lawsuit, Apple variously notes that either "as of" or "by" March Apple had sold more than 108 million iPhones, over 60 million iPod touches, and over 19 million iPads.The question becomes whether the implied level of 4.2 million iPads sold during the first quarter of 2011 is an accurate number, in which case Apple's performance would have fallen well below expectations, or simply an understatement by the company.
Apple is set to announce official figures for the quarter at its earnings release (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/18/apple-to-announce-q2-2011-financial-results-on-april-20th/) tomorrow. The release should include specific sales figures for the iPhone and iPad, but Apple generally does not issue specific numbers for the iPod touch, instead reporting total sales for all iPod models and then sometimes breaking out a rough share for the iPod touch or stating the device's growth as a means of highlighting its performance on the earnings conference call.
Article Link: Analysis of Apple's Lawsuit Against Samsung, Includes iOS Device Sales Numbers (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/19/analysis-of-apples-lawsuit-against-samsung-includes-ios-device-sales-numbers/)
Why is it so hard for people to read English. Nowhere does it indicate those are numbers for the first quarter. In fact it is pretty clear it does not actually include the month of March..
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
WillMak
Aug 7, 05:36 PM
Will those of us with 32 bit Yonah processors not have access to 100% of leopards features?
gauriemma
Nov 29, 10:34 AM
Sounds like Universal is realizing that their anticipated cash influx they were hoping to see from Zune sales isn't going to materialize, so they're looking to leech off a player that will actually be AROUND in 2007.
spazzcat
Mar 22, 01:40 PM
This is just a preview of the future, Android based tablets will clean the iPads clock. Apple made the so-called iPad 2 as a 1.5. Low res camera, not enough RAM, and low res screen. It's going to be a verrrry long 2012 for Apple. Sure it's selling like hot cakes now, but when buyers see tablets that they don't have to stand inline for, that have better equipment and are cheaper ... Apples house of cards will come crashing down around them.
The only strength that Apple has is the app ecosystem; which is why they are going after Amazon for spiting on the sidewalk. They know the world of hurt coming their way.
You said it best. They are selling like hot cakes... People want the iPad, just like they wanted the iPod...
The only strength that Apple has is the app ecosystem; which is why they are going after Amazon for spiting on the sidewalk. They know the world of hurt coming their way.
You said it best. They are selling like hot cakes... People want the iPad, just like they wanted the iPod...
Thunderhawks
Mar 22, 03:31 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Thank you.
Getting in line tomorrow morning 4:30 a.m. with all the other people in front of Best Buy.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Thank you.
Getting in line tomorrow morning 4:30 a.m. with all the other people in front of Best Buy.
ATD
Sep 13, 03:20 PM
A lot of 3d programs will use as many cores as are available when rendering.
And I would say that the next versions of many programs will be better suited for multiple core processors.* They are way too common for software developers to ignore them any longer.
Yep. Not all of the software I use taps all the cores but the 3D renders I do shallow every inch of the CPUs. I have Maya with Mental Ray hooked to 2 computers, a quad and a dual. When I hit render the CPU usage hits 100% on all 6 processors. While having all these processors working is great I have noticed that my quad has lots of pauses in the finder doing simple things, even if nothing is running. Everyone else I know that has a quad has the same issue. I have to believe that there is a trade off for having all these processors, it seems they trip over each other on the small stuff. I hope the next version of OSX will take a look at this, in light of the fact we will be jumping to 8 or more processors.
And I would say that the next versions of many programs will be better suited for multiple core processors.* They are way too common for software developers to ignore them any longer.
Yep. Not all of the software I use taps all the cores but the 3D renders I do shallow every inch of the CPUs. I have Maya with Mental Ray hooked to 2 computers, a quad and a dual. When I hit render the CPU usage hits 100% on all 6 processors. While having all these processors working is great I have noticed that my quad has lots of pauses in the finder doing simple things, even if nothing is running. Everyone else I know that has a quad has the same issue. I have to believe that there is a trade off for having all these processors, it seems they trip over each other on the small stuff. I hope the next version of OSX will take a look at this, in light of the fact we will be jumping to 8 or more processors.