AppleJustWorks
Aug 26, 09:56 AM
California, it's replies like this that pisses switchers off, even seasones mac users get upset with these replies. What the hell is Rev A?. What idiot argument is this?. That's it ok for apple to make a ****ed-up product cause it's the first version?. What?.. apple just started making computers that they don't know how to make quality products until they already made the first version?. Apple should be horrified at your suggestion. Imagine if no one bought Rev A (whatever the **** that means) machines from Apple. APPLE WOULD GO BROKE!!. There's always Rev A machines when it comes to computers dude. The next mac pro upgrade will use a new processor, faster, new video, more ram, newer harddrive and becomes rev A cause THEY ARE THE FIRST APPLE PRODUCTS TO USE THE NEW UPGRADED PROCESSOR, NEW HARDDIVE, ETC. Really, stop with this nonsense. You are like the 10th idiotic apple fan I have read using this dumb argument.
Right on. I made the same argument to someone on a different forum, and it's just amazing how fanboy mac users concoct these elaborate theories of why apple screwing up is acceptable.
The point is, by simple logic, yes, the following revisions of a product tend to be more reliable because they've had time to address issues, but no, that doesn't mean (anyone) shouldn't buy a machine purely because of it's revision number. If that was the case, then Apple would be out of business. Period.
Right on. I made the same argument to someone on a different forum, and it's just amazing how fanboy mac users concoct these elaborate theories of why apple screwing up is acceptable.
The point is, by simple logic, yes, the following revisions of a product tend to be more reliable because they've had time to address issues, but no, that doesn't mean (anyone) shouldn't buy a machine purely because of it's revision number. If that was the case, then Apple would be out of business. Period.
Benjamins
Mar 31, 02:53 PM
What the heck are you talking about. Google is building upon the technology. Apple did a great job advancing the technology which pushed everyone else to do the same. Its called competition its been happening for years and in every industry.
so what Apple FAD are you talking about?
It's technology when it's Google.
It's a FAD when it's Apple?
What the **** are you talking about?
so what Apple FAD are you talking about?
It's technology when it's Google.
It's a FAD when it's Apple?
What the **** are you talking about?
Zadillo
Aug 7, 09:35 PM
This preview of Leopard seemed really like a glaze over of some "fun" little advancements, it did not look polished at all...to all those dissapointed in what leopard has to offer, not to be punny, but steve has barely let the cat out of the bag
tonne more to come
I don't know, I thought Spaces and Time Machine looked very polished, personally. Spaces in particular is one of those things that I actually think will be genuinely useful (like Expose before it), and I like that it seems to be an even more useful implementation of the virtual desktops concept than what I've seen in Linux.
tonne more to come
I don't know, I thought Spaces and Time Machine looked very polished, personally. Spaces in particular is one of those things that I actually think will be genuinely useful (like Expose before it), and I like that it seems to be an even more useful implementation of the virtual desktops concept than what I've seen in Linux.
faroZ06
Apr 27, 08:43 AM
And once again people give Apple a pass for something that is clearly an issue.
You mean to tell me that Apple, a company that seems to release fairly solid software, "neglected" to test that when disabling an option called LOCATION SERVICES, that it actually disabled location checking properly? Are some of you really so Jobsian?
Call a spade a spade. There's no possible chance this was a mistake. They got caught. They should not be given a pass over it. If a user opts to disable Location Services, they were working under the false impression that their location was no longer being tracked. Seems mighty shifty to me. Doesn't matter how much data might have been user-identifiable. This sounds like something Google would do, not Apple.
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.
You mean to tell me that Apple, a company that seems to release fairly solid software, "neglected" to test that when disabling an option called LOCATION SERVICES, that it actually disabled location checking properly? Are some of you really so Jobsian?
Call a spade a spade. There's no possible chance this was a mistake. They got caught. They should not be given a pass over it. If a user opts to disable Location Services, they were working under the false impression that their location was no longer being tracked. Seems mighty shifty to me. Doesn't matter how much data might have been user-identifiable. This sounds like something Google would do, not Apple.
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.
ergle2
Sep 18, 11:57 PM
Key word being DESKTOPS.
MP machines were server based long before they were included in desktops. I'd like to see where people had dual Xeon based DESKTOPS 'cause I've never seen it. It's not impossible but it's also not a good cost-based answer either. :p
I've known many people with multi-processor machines on their desktop, with a variety of processor families -- including Intel -- going way back over the best part of a decade. If your requirements include applications that can make use of it, it can make sense. Time is money and all that.
One market I'm aware of is the fluid dynamics market, which pretty much eats all the processor time you can throw at it.
I even had an x86 dual CPU machine at home back in 1999... I still have it, it's just not that fast any more...
Of course, these days everyone and his dog has dual-core, pretty much...
Edit: 2nd para clarified
MP machines were server based long before they were included in desktops. I'd like to see where people had dual Xeon based DESKTOPS 'cause I've never seen it. It's not impossible but it's also not a good cost-based answer either. :p
I've known many people with multi-processor machines on their desktop, with a variety of processor families -- including Intel -- going way back over the best part of a decade. If your requirements include applications that can make use of it, it can make sense. Time is money and all that.
One market I'm aware of is the fluid dynamics market, which pretty much eats all the processor time you can throw at it.
I even had an x86 dual CPU machine at home back in 1999... I still have it, it's just not that fast any more...
Of course, these days everyone and his dog has dual-core, pretty much...
Edit: 2nd para clarified
Peace
Aug 5, 05:49 PM
snippet:
Finally, I think if there's any support for Front Row in the Mac Pros or Xserves, then the displays must have built-in iSight.
Why is Front Row dependent on iSight ?
Finally, I think if there's any support for Front Row in the Mac Pros or Xserves, then the displays must have built-in iSight.
Why is Front Row dependent on iSight ?
jrhone
Aug 17, 01:20 AM
I AM SOOOO HAPPY I ORDERED THIS MACHINE!!! Ordered it yesterday, custom with 2gb RAM, got shipping confirmation today, I'll have it tomorrow!!! If its ALMOST as fast as a quad G5, it will be MUCH faster than my Rev A dual 2.0 G5....
cult hero
Mar 26, 07:02 PM
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
There's no reason you can't do the exact same thing on a Mac. There are no shortage of virtual machine apps and no room to complain either seeing as VirtualBox is free (and Parallels is almost always available through some cheap MacUpdate bundle). Virtualize.
Rosetta needs to go away. Backward compatibility very often holds back forward progress (just look at how badly web technologies have been stifled by IE 6 even today). Widespread use of virtualization is making it more convenient to move forward and the average computer user simply doesn't need/use software that's a decade old.
There's no reason you can't do the exact same thing on a Mac. There are no shortage of virtual machine apps and no room to complain either seeing as VirtualBox is free (and Parallels is almost always available through some cheap MacUpdate bundle). Virtualize.
Rosetta needs to go away. Backward compatibility very often holds back forward progress (just look at how badly web technologies have been stifled by IE 6 even today). Widespread use of virtualization is making it more convenient to move forward and the average computer user simply doesn't need/use software that's a decade old.
satty
Jul 20, 08:38 AM
Not that I wouldn't mind more processing power :D ...
but to me it doesn't make much sense for the majority of tasks/applications.
There might be rare exceptions in the professinal area and of course it makes lots of sense for a server, but for a single user machine?
Whatever, bring them on... in this case I like to be proven wrong.
but to me it doesn't make much sense for the majority of tasks/applications.
There might be rare exceptions in the professinal area and of course it makes lots of sense for a server, but for a single user machine?
Whatever, bring them on... in this case I like to be proven wrong.
skunk
Apr 28, 04:41 PM
Obama's too smart. :)
63dot
Apr 25, 02:21 PM
Prove it.
It may be hard to prove and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, but the mere appearance of the technology allowing the possibility to be tracked is enough for the feds to get something out of Apple.
It may be hard to prove and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, but the mere appearance of the technology allowing the possibility to be tracked is enough for the feds to get something out of Apple.
~Shard~
Jul 14, 02:32 PM
My intention: to wait for 3Ghz+ Xeon, which sounds like it should only be a few months later. That's also time for a few little tweaks to be made if necessary, giving me something between a version A and version B machine.
That's a really good plan. Wait a few months, let the bugs get ironed out of the new Intel PowerMacs, and then buy something for the same price with better technology.
That's a really good plan. Wait a few months, let the bugs get ironed out of the new Intel PowerMacs, and then buy something for the same price with better technology.
ChickenSwartz
Aug 5, 08:24 PM
My bad :p Never trust random world clock websites ;)
US Pacific Time is GMT-8:00. So if you are one hour a head of "standard" time as the US is (daylight savings) then 6pm is correct.
US Pacific Time is GMT-8:00. So if you are one hour a head of "standard" time as the US is (daylight savings) then 6pm is correct.
Bern
Aug 8, 03:31 AM
Well I'm excited about Leopard and look forward to it's release. Rightly so should Apple keep hushed about what ever new features are to be added. Those nay sayers out there to Leopard should wait until they use it before they begin crucifying it, after all what hand did they have in the development of OS X??
Only thing that plays on my mind is whether some new features will be limited to Pro line Macs. I recall when Dashboard first came about iBooks couldn't display the ripple effect for example whereas Powerbooks could. I certainly hope we MacBook owners won't suffer the same fate with things like the new iChat, Mail or what ever.
Only thing that plays on my mind is whether some new features will be limited to Pro line Macs. I recall when Dashboard first came about iBooks couldn't display the ripple effect for example whereas Powerbooks could. I certainly hope we MacBook owners won't suffer the same fate with things like the new iChat, Mail or what ever.
DoFoT9
Aug 17, 10:48 PM
I drive a Focus, so... no :D
:rolleyes: thats ok i drive a lancer ;)
Most people will never be able to afford a ford GT, but most people would be able to save up and buy a WRX and put a little work into it (even if it does take a few years of saving extra money), so i just find it more fun to push a WRX to its limits instead of a GT.
im a Subie boy at heart. ill eventually get an STi and play around with it.
:rolleyes: thats ok i drive a lancer ;)
Most people will never be able to afford a ford GT, but most people would be able to save up and buy a WRX and put a little work into it (even if it does take a few years of saving extra money), so i just find it more fun to push a WRX to its limits instead of a GT.
im a Subie boy at heart. ill eventually get an STi and play around with it.
Roto3180
Mar 31, 04:45 PM
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)
I also kind of thought that Google would close things off after awhile. Android is what Wonblows was in the 90s. Every Tom, Dick and Harry wrote software for it, most of it was crap but gave the belief it was superior to the Mac OS. Microshaft cracked down and eased out the bad software developers and the same thing will happen to Android. Especially since rouge developers have came about.
I also kind of thought that Google would close things off after awhile. Android is what Wonblows was in the 90s. Every Tom, Dick and Harry wrote software for it, most of it was crap but gave the belief it was superior to the Mac OS. Microshaft cracked down and eased out the bad software developers and the same thing will happen to Android. Especially since rouge developers have came about.
GFLPraxis
Mar 31, 02:23 PM
John Gruber's take:
So here�s the Android bait-and-switch laid bare. Android was �open� only until it became popular and handset makers dependent upon it. Now that Google has the handset makers by the balls, Android is no longer open and Google starts asserting control.
Andy Rubin, Vic Gundotra, Eric Schmidt: shameless, lying hypocrites, all of them.
Can't say I disagree.
So here�s the Android bait-and-switch laid bare. Android was �open� only until it became popular and handset makers dependent upon it. Now that Google has the handset makers by the balls, Android is no longer open and Google starts asserting control.
Andy Rubin, Vic Gundotra, Eric Schmidt: shameless, lying hypocrites, all of them.
Can't say I disagree.
relimw
Sep 12, 11:15 AM
Very cool. Now to find apps (os10.5 direct blind support?) that can make use of all those cores. :cool:
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 10:14 AM
At some point your going to have deminished returns. Sure multimedia apps can take advantage of a few more cores, but I dont see Mail running faster on 4 cores, nevermind 2!
How fast do you want mail to go? The main reasons you need good processors is not for browsing, e-mail, text, and such and such. I highly doubt someone who does all these things on a five year old computer will be much slower than someone on a 16 GB RAM top of the line Powermac
Why don't they just call it: Big Mac.
I think that's the best name I've heard in this thread (sorry, Chundles)
How fast do you want mail to go? The main reasons you need good processors is not for browsing, e-mail, text, and such and such. I highly doubt someone who does all these things on a five year old computer will be much slower than someone on a 16 GB RAM top of the line Powermac
Why don't they just call it: Big Mac.
I think that's the best name I've heard in this thread (sorry, Chundles)
PhantomPumpkin
Apr 27, 10:49 AM
Apple identified it? No. Check your history. It was brought TO Apple's attention over a year ago.
It was again brought TO Apple's attention via various reports and articles.
THEN Apple looked into the matter.
I commend Apple for taking action (now).
But let's not rewrite history, shall we?
You're just misinterpreting what I was saying. They identified it as a potential issue, instead of saying "there's nothing wrong, we're not going to do a darned thing." I wasn't saying the brought it up to the media's attention on their own.
Nitpicking, is well, nitpicky?
It was again brought TO Apple's attention via various reports and articles.
THEN Apple looked into the matter.
I commend Apple for taking action (now).
But let's not rewrite history, shall we?
You're just misinterpreting what I was saying. They identified it as a potential issue, instead of saying "there's nothing wrong, we're not going to do a darned thing." I wasn't saying the brought it up to the media's attention on their own.
Nitpicking, is well, nitpicky?
Gugulino
Apr 12, 05:14 PM
What's the UK time?
There's an app for that! :D
There's an app for that! :D
SgtPepper12
Apr 27, 08:13 AM
Oh my god I knew it! Apple collects the data and does evil things with it! I can't imagine what kind of evil things they are going to do with it!
No, seriously, I really don't. Printing out huge posters with a map of your latest locations saying "LOOK AT WHERE THIS GUY WAS. HE WAS AT THE SUPERMARKET LATELY. HE SURELY BOUGHT SOME THINGS THERE, LIKE TOMATOES. YEAH THIS KIND OF THINGS." maybe.
Strange people.
No, seriously, I really don't. Printing out huge posters with a map of your latest locations saying "LOOK AT WHERE THIS GUY WAS. HE WAS AT THE SUPERMARKET LATELY. HE SURELY BOUGHT SOME THINGS THERE, LIKE TOMATOES. YEAH THIS KIND OF THINGS." maybe.
Strange people.
balamw
Apr 6, 04:40 PM
I should say that I do own an Android device. I own an original Nook, and will probably pick up a 4-7" device at some point to play with in a generation or two.
B
B
KindredMAC
Jul 14, 03:20 PM
A new Mac Pro for $1799? Not bad people!!!! In essence Apple is cutting the price of the current Dual Core 2 GHz G5 PowerMac by $200..... The same price as it is on the EDU store.
If you want something cheaper, buy an iMac for Christ's sake! That's why Apple has made them as powerful as they are now. They are meant as a bridge between the "Con-sumer" and the "Pro-sumer". PowerMacs have been and always will be for PROFESSIONALS!!!! Not the weekend warrior who "dabbles" in Photoshop. That's what the iMac is for people!!!
In my opinion and thoughts there will be no difference between these and the current G5 PowerMacs in performance.
As for Dual Optical Drives? AMEN! It is a hassle and waste of HD space when you need to copy a disc, especially Application Discs that you might want to keep in a safe place but have a copy always handy. I'm contemplating buying an external DVD Burner to hook up to my Dual Core G5 PM for these very reasons. I might wait though for a Blu Ray Disc Burner first though.
The thing that perplexes me is the relocation of the Power Supply to the top. This is either bogus info or they know something they aren't letting on about all the Liquid Cooling problems that have been arising lately in the repair world.
Plus would this not put a strain on the power cord since the cord would have its own weight hanging down on it instead of how it currently comes out of the back of the tower and immediately lays on the floor or desk surface? Something's fishy about this.
If you want something cheaper, buy an iMac for Christ's sake! That's why Apple has made them as powerful as they are now. They are meant as a bridge between the "Con-sumer" and the "Pro-sumer". PowerMacs have been and always will be for PROFESSIONALS!!!! Not the weekend warrior who "dabbles" in Photoshop. That's what the iMac is for people!!!
In my opinion and thoughts there will be no difference between these and the current G5 PowerMacs in performance.
As for Dual Optical Drives? AMEN! It is a hassle and waste of HD space when you need to copy a disc, especially Application Discs that you might want to keep in a safe place but have a copy always handy. I'm contemplating buying an external DVD Burner to hook up to my Dual Core G5 PM for these very reasons. I might wait though for a Blu Ray Disc Burner first though.
The thing that perplexes me is the relocation of the Power Supply to the top. This is either bogus info or they know something they aren't letting on about all the Liquid Cooling problems that have been arising lately in the repair world.
Plus would this not put a strain on the power cord since the cord would have its own weight hanging down on it instead of how it currently comes out of the back of the tower and immediately lays on the floor or desk surface? Something's fishy about this.