blackcrayon
Mar 22, 05:02 PM
I can assure that doubling the 256MB of the first iPad is not enough for people that need a lot of multitask, like me.
...
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I like products, not brands.
Question: does anyone know if the A5 design could've fit 1 GB of RAM, or if anyone else is packaging more than 512 MB of RAM inside of their SoC? Just wondering, it may actually be a limitation of the A5's design(or at least one with a huge cost increase to overcome), but the other side is faster, lower latency memory. I don't know if Samsung will be using a similar design, but I don't think the Tegra 2 tablets have their memory "sandwiched" on top of the CPU cores, so to speak. Or maybe it makes no difference in the real world, guess I need an engineer to explain :)
...
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I like products, not brands.
Question: does anyone know if the A5 design could've fit 1 GB of RAM, or if anyone else is packaging more than 512 MB of RAM inside of their SoC? Just wondering, it may actually be a limitation of the A5's design(or at least one with a huge cost increase to overcome), but the other side is faster, lower latency memory. I don't know if Samsung will be using a similar design, but I don't think the Tegra 2 tablets have their memory "sandwiched" on top of the CPU cores, so to speak. Or maybe it makes no difference in the real world, guess I need an engineer to explain :)
ECUpirate44
Apr 11, 11:27 AM
Makes my recent iPhone 4 purchase look like a good decision. Sorry for those who are waiting for the 5 :o
cloudnine
Jul 14, 04:08 PM
To charge $1800 for a system that only has 512MB is a real disappoitment. 1GB RAM oughta be standard, especially with Leopard being on the horizon.
Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.
I agree... my buddy got a macbook pro and it came standard with 512mb of ram. For the first 3 or 4 days, he thought he purchased a defective notebook, it ran so badly. Opening MS Office applications literally took minutes, and that was with nothing else open. He took it back into the Apple store and the rep told him that his problem was his ram, so he purchased another 1gb (1.5gb total), and now it runs perfectly. You'd think that with all of these intel machines being released and a huge selection of software not being Universal yet, that 1 gig of ram would be standard...
kinda a$$h0lish if you ask me. :mad:
Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.
I agree... my buddy got a macbook pro and it came standard with 512mb of ram. For the first 3 or 4 days, he thought he purchased a defective notebook, it ran so badly. Opening MS Office applications literally took minutes, and that was with nothing else open. He took it back into the Apple store and the rep told him that his problem was his ram, so he purchased another 1gb (1.5gb total), and now it runs perfectly. You'd think that with all of these intel machines being released and a huge selection of software not being Universal yet, that 1 gig of ram would be standard...
kinda a$$h0lish if you ask me. :mad:
mc68k
Dec 7, 12:47 AM
well i bought a delorean s2. hadn't seen it come up before in the used lot, and ive been checking pretty much every time. was at the bottom of the list and i had to sell a few of my cars before i could buy it. 517K! not even something i can win high HP races with, but damn cool :cool:
DeathChill
Mar 31, 10:55 PM
iPhone is sold as buy-one-get-one-free? In what country would that be?
Narnia.
Narnia.
Multimedia
Aug 19, 12:33 PM
And I'm not convinced this is only an application problem. When I run Handbrake on the Quad G5 alone it uses just over two cores 203% @ about 100fps analysis (1st Pass of 2) speed. If I add a Toast encode while that is happening, Handbrake takes a huge hit down to below 150% @ 70-80 fps analysis while Toast can only use about 130% instead of more alone. So the Tiger OS X seems to have difficulty managing more than one multicore application's core usage allocation up to its maximum capability - IE Tiger is not so MultiCore Enabeled as it could be IE Leopard probably will be much moreso - let's hope that is one of its TOP SECRETS.
When I ran tests on the Mac Pro at the Apple Store last Saturday between Toast and/or Handbrake, their use of more cores alone and together was much better. Handbrake alone can analyze up to around 134fps while writing at about 107 fps using about 1.5-1.75 cores. So while not yet fully optimized for Mac Pro yet, it's already outperforming the Quad G5 significantly. Handbrake would appear to analyze files about 33% faster while writing them about 15% faster while using 1.5 to 1.75 cores. Quad G5 does analysis @ about 100fps and writes about 93 fps (2nd Pass) using up to about 2.2 cores.
Toast 7.1 UB uses Mac Pro cores much more than it does Quad cores - in the range of 280 - 310% IE about 3 cores compared to only about 1.5 cores on the Quad G5 as well as on the Dual Core G5. Unfortunately I didn't have encode times for each of the sample files I brought with me from the Quad so I don't know the real time how much faster that really amounts to. Running simultaneously on the Mac Pro, Toast would use over 2.5 cores while handbrake would use only one or less than one at best.
Together simultaneously on Mac Pro 2.66 it's
Toast/Handbrake
2.7 cores/1 core best
2.5 cores/.75 core worst
Handbrake during Toast is down to as few as 60fps but sometimes up to 100fps as well. Toast meanwhile is Still consuming up to almost 3 cores with Handbrake running at the same time. So Toast would appear to be much more optimized for the Mac Pro's MultiCores than it is for the Quad G5's Multicores. Same could be said for Handbrake - especially since it is not really fully Optimized for Mac Pro yet.
When I ran tests on the Mac Pro at the Apple Store last Saturday between Toast and/or Handbrake, their use of more cores alone and together was much better. Handbrake alone can analyze up to around 134fps while writing at about 107 fps using about 1.5-1.75 cores. So while not yet fully optimized for Mac Pro yet, it's already outperforming the Quad G5 significantly. Handbrake would appear to analyze files about 33% faster while writing them about 15% faster while using 1.5 to 1.75 cores. Quad G5 does analysis @ about 100fps and writes about 93 fps (2nd Pass) using up to about 2.2 cores.
Toast 7.1 UB uses Mac Pro cores much more than it does Quad cores - in the range of 280 - 310% IE about 3 cores compared to only about 1.5 cores on the Quad G5 as well as on the Dual Core G5. Unfortunately I didn't have encode times for each of the sample files I brought with me from the Quad so I don't know the real time how much faster that really amounts to. Running simultaneously on the Mac Pro, Toast would use over 2.5 cores while handbrake would use only one or less than one at best.
Together simultaneously on Mac Pro 2.66 it's
Toast/Handbrake
2.7 cores/1 core best
2.5 cores/.75 core worst
Handbrake during Toast is down to as few as 60fps but sometimes up to 100fps as well. Toast meanwhile is Still consuming up to almost 3 cores with Handbrake running at the same time. So Toast would appear to be much more optimized for the Mac Pro's MultiCores than it is for the Quad G5's Multicores. Same could be said for Handbrake - especially since it is not really fully Optimized for Mac Pro yet.
janstett
Sep 13, 01:37 PM
The OS takes advantage of the extra 4 cores already therefore its ahead of the technology curve, correct? Gee, no innovation here...please move along folks. :rolleyes:
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support; I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores. You think those fools (the same idiots who came up with Genuine Advantage) actually optimized their OS to run in an 8 core setup? Please pass along what you're smoking. :rolleyes:
Sorry to burst your reality distortion field, but see my previous post. I ran a dual processor Pentium II NT setup ten years ago and Windows handled it just fine THEN -- back when Apple barely supported it with a hack to its cooperatively-multitasked OS and required specially written applications with special library support.
BTW my 2 year old Smithfield handles 4 processors fine (Dual Core Pentium Extreme with hyperthreading = 4 cores).
The only limit with Windows is they keep the low end XP home to 2 processors on the same die. There is probably an architectural limit on both OSX and XP and if it's not 8 it's 16. It's probably 8.
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support; I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores. You think those fools (the same idiots who came up with Genuine Advantage) actually optimized their OS to run in an 8 core setup? Please pass along what you're smoking. :rolleyes:
Sorry to burst your reality distortion field, but see my previous post. I ran a dual processor Pentium II NT setup ten years ago and Windows handled it just fine THEN -- back when Apple barely supported it with a hack to its cooperatively-multitasked OS and required specially written applications with special library support.
BTW my 2 year old Smithfield handles 4 processors fine (Dual Core Pentium Extreme with hyperthreading = 4 cores).
The only limit with Windows is they keep the low end XP home to 2 processors on the same die. There is probably an architectural limit on both OSX and XP and if it's not 8 it's 16. It's probably 8.
maverick18x
Aug 5, 03:43 PM
I heard a rumour somewhere of an all metallic ipod nano, can anyone else tell me if they have heard anything similar.
The rumor that we'd see new nanos at WWDC was first written about by ThinkSecret. They've recently gone back on their claim and suggestted a Setember timeframe.
Personally, I highly doubt we'll see ANY iPod/iTunes updates here... WWDC is historically a developer/pro event and not a consumer event. Plus, Apple is still clearing inventory by giving away nanos to college students who purchase a Mac (ends October 16th). I feel like any new iPods will get their own special event, in the October to November timeframe.
My Predictions for WWDC
Headliners:
- Leopard Preview (VMware Demo?)
- Mac Pro (Quad-core Xenon?)
- Cinema Display Updates (iSight? +30"?)
- "One More Thing..." (Something Unexpected)
Without much fanfare:
- Core 2 Duo Updates (MacBook Pro? iMac?)
- Xserve Updates (Quad-core Xenon?)
The rumor that we'd see new nanos at WWDC was first written about by ThinkSecret. They've recently gone back on their claim and suggestted a Setember timeframe.
Personally, I highly doubt we'll see ANY iPod/iTunes updates here... WWDC is historically a developer/pro event and not a consumer event. Plus, Apple is still clearing inventory by giving away nanos to college students who purchase a Mac (ends October 16th). I feel like any new iPods will get their own special event, in the October to November timeframe.
My Predictions for WWDC
Headliners:
- Leopard Preview (VMware Demo?)
- Mac Pro (Quad-core Xenon?)
- Cinema Display Updates (iSight? +30"?)
- "One More Thing..." (Something Unexpected)
Without much fanfare:
- Core 2 Duo Updates (MacBook Pro? iMac?)
- Xserve Updates (Quad-core Xenon?)
manu chao
Apr 25, 01:49 PM
Ah, the perfect storm! A (probable) bug that does not clip the data the way Google does it,
Natually this leads to stupid lawsuits. This is America, dammit!
And Google occasionally stores random data from any unsecured WiFi network its StreetView cars come by.
I now there were rumblings about government investigations into Google's data grab (which was transmitted and stored onto Google's computers) but was there also a lawsuit?
Not that Apple should not have fixed this presumed bug when it first was reported last year. Either nobody at Apple was really paying attention to what other people managed to extract in terms of 'forensic information' or they were not organised (or motivated) enough to get fix done. I cannot help myself but thinking that a scenario in which Apple knew about this but decided to fix it only with iOS 5 is not that unlikely.
Natually this leads to stupid lawsuits. This is America, dammit!
And Google occasionally stores random data from any unsecured WiFi network its StreetView cars come by.
I now there were rumblings about government investigations into Google's data grab (which was transmitted and stored onto Google's computers) but was there also a lawsuit?
Not that Apple should not have fixed this presumed bug when it first was reported last year. Either nobody at Apple was really paying attention to what other people managed to extract in terms of 'forensic information' or they were not organised (or motivated) enough to get fix done. I cannot help myself but thinking that a scenario in which Apple knew about this but decided to fix it only with iOS 5 is not that unlikely.
appleguy123
Feb 28, 06:42 PM
Got me on "ignore", have you? :p
I could never ignore you. :D
I actually had something typed up to refute it, but it wasn't consistent with what I actually believe or do on the PRSI(and didn't want it used for quote mining against me :) ), so I deleted it. Then I saw that more people were quoting that, so I had to officially resign the point.
I could never ignore you. :D
I actually had something typed up to refute it, but it wasn't consistent with what I actually believe or do on the PRSI(and didn't want it used for quote mining against me :) ), so I deleted it. Then I saw that more people were quoting that, so I had to officially resign the point.
jaxstate
Jul 15, 07:59 AM
A real mess? That's one fine looking machine. IMO
well, that looks a real mess.. but I suppose it's a good idea since heated air tends to rise.. :-)
well, that looks a real mess.. but I suppose it's a good idea since heated air tends to rise.. :-)
shawnce
Aug 27, 07:27 PM
Now. But how much have iMac prices changed since release? I don't think they have. They released the iMac and MBP lines around the same time Yonah was intro'ed, and the iMacs did not see any speed bumps or price changes that I know of. Therefore they should be able to implement similar pricing with Conroe @ 2.4GHz, just with a profit margin closer to the iMac release amounts. Apple new future pricing plans looong before we did... they likely picked the price point with that in mind.
Kabeyun
Mar 22, 01:03 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
...and last, at least as far as the spec war argument goes. You're grafting a computer-shopping mentality onto a tablet market, and people don't think of tablets as computers. People don't buy tablets based on specs, and the spec difference between current or impending offerings it not what will define the user experience.
...and last, at least as far as the spec war argument goes. You're grafting a computer-shopping mentality onto a tablet market, and people don't think of tablets as computers. People don't buy tablets based on specs, and the spec difference between current or impending offerings it not what will define the user experience.
THX1139
Aug 21, 02:09 AM
I stopped by the Apple store tonight to play with a Macpro. I'm getting ready to buy and thought I'd get some hands on experience to see how it performed with Finalcut Pro. I was especially interested in how it handles playback of uncompressed footage.
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.
anomie
Apr 11, 02:19 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; de-de) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
Lol, Power of Hardware? Then where is the android Retina Display device?
I Don't Care about dual Core mobile processors. And neither do the 90% Not-Nerd-customers.
Lol, Power of Hardware? Then where is the android Retina Display device?
I Don't Care about dual Core mobile processors. And neither do the 90% Not-Nerd-customers.
akm3
Apr 5, 10:17 PM
About time. FCP is aging poorly. The engine is still Carbon and based around the old QT, which means that a lot of functions only use two cores at the most. I think we'll finally see Apple seriously leveraging GCD, OpenCL, etc here, although don't expect video compression to use OpenCL if the lousy quality of CUDA encodes is any indicator. Maybe Apple will add support for QuickSync on Sandy Bridge.
Also, Compressor is a damned joke. When your "Pro" software encoder gives you less options and lower quality with longer render times than free alternatives, you really need to go back to the drawing board. Yes, a lot of folks use hardware encoders, but really, if you're going to include a software encoder, at least make it as good as free software...
Is for example Handbrake better than compressor? i.e. higher quality h.264 files and/or smaller file sizes and/or faster encodes?
Also, Compressor is a damned joke. When your "Pro" software encoder gives you less options and lower quality with longer render times than free alternatives, you really need to go back to the drawing board. Yes, a lot of folks use hardware encoders, but really, if you're going to include a software encoder, at least make it as good as free software...
Is for example Handbrake better than compressor? i.e. higher quality h.264 files and/or smaller file sizes and/or faster encodes?
Eidorian
Sep 13, 08:17 AM
DAMN :eek:
so 2-3 years from now are people going to be asking "why am I stuck with dual core in my macbook?" oh yeah I'll mostly be surfing the web and maybe editing a photo once and a while" :rolleyes:Fixed
so 2-3 years from now are people going to be asking "why am I stuck with dual core in my macbook?" oh yeah I'll mostly be surfing the web and maybe editing a photo once and a while" :rolleyes:Fixed
jmgregory1
Mar 22, 01:16 PM
+1
'lets make a tablet for our business users, to get serious workloads done. we can call it the playbook'.
i didn't know charlie sheen was in charge of their team?
If you watch and listen to Rim's co-leaders, you see the resemblance to Charlie Sheen. I'm all for company's fluffing their feathers and believing in the products they market and sell, but these guys come off as being sooo Charlie Sheen. Their grasp of reality is lacking to the point of making them sound ridiculous. I'm surprised investors don't punish them more for this - but of course many Wall Streeters still use BB's, so it makes sense.
Change is tough for lots of people and companies - which keeps Rim going and will at the same time be the death of them.
'lets make a tablet for our business users, to get serious workloads done. we can call it the playbook'.
i didn't know charlie sheen was in charge of their team?
If you watch and listen to Rim's co-leaders, you see the resemblance to Charlie Sheen. I'm all for company's fluffing their feathers and believing in the products they market and sell, but these guys come off as being sooo Charlie Sheen. Their grasp of reality is lacking to the point of making them sound ridiculous. I'm surprised investors don't punish them more for this - but of course many Wall Streeters still use BB's, so it makes sense.
Change is tough for lots of people and companies - which keeps Rim going and will at the same time be the death of them.
11thIndian
Apr 9, 08:24 PM
Glad you realize it was wrong to put those words in my mouth "lots of professionals I know".
Uh, no. I do think that's what you meant. That's just not what you said.
Just because lots of people you know, plus a couple of people on these forums say that they've switched, you can't generalize that into a broad statement that covers everyone everywhere. It might be a localized trend in your area. Just like I can't say that just because none of my clients has switched platforms, that there's NO migration off FCP to AVID or Premier.
Uh, no. I do think that's what you meant. That's just not what you said.
Just because lots of people you know, plus a couple of people on these forums say that they've switched, you can't generalize that into a broad statement that covers everyone everywhere. It might be a localized trend in your area. Just like I can't say that just because none of my clients has switched platforms, that there's NO migration off FCP to AVID or Premier.
kdarling
Apr 6, 02:32 PM
As was pointed out by a previous poster, iOS was developed for tablet use.
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first, although its idea of using a touch UI was not.
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.
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first, although its idea of using a touch UI was not.
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.
mkrishnan
Aug 7, 04:22 PM
If Apple had had that feature for years and MS would include it into Vista now, you'd call it copying, no !? ;)
*shrug* I don't think TM is a copy of System Restore. But I think how much that feature has caught on with Win users is also not unrelated to the presence of TM in Leopard. All's fair in love, war, and operating systems. :)
*shrug* I don't think TM is a copy of System Restore. But I think how much that feature has caught on with Win users is also not unrelated to the presence of TM in Leopard. All's fair in love, war, and operating systems. :)
0815
Apr 6, 02:34 PM
This can't be right. MR posters have assured me that the Xoom is better than the iPad. I mean, if you can't trust MR posters, whom can you trust?
Ballmer?
As someone who likes his Apple products, part of me laughs seeing numbers like this for the Xoom, but the other part thinks the same thing you post above--that Apple needs to have a successful competitor in the space to keep Apple's progress from stagnating. More competition will make them take bigger steps more quickly.
As long as SJ has some say he (and Apple) will follow his vision, not the competition (and this is a good thing) - the competition will follow Apple [Remember how Android Phone Prototypes looked like before the iPhone was out - just a copy of BlackBerry phones]
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first, although its idea of using a touch UI was not.
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.
Maybe it should be put in these words: iOS was designed for the iPhone with a tablet in mind ....
I didn't know the "proposing Linux" part, very interesting - do you have any links on this so that I can read up on it?
Ballmer?
As someone who likes his Apple products, part of me laughs seeing numbers like this for the Xoom, but the other part thinks the same thing you post above--that Apple needs to have a successful competitor in the space to keep Apple's progress from stagnating. More competition will make them take bigger steps more quickly.
As long as SJ has some say he (and Apple) will follow his vision, not the competition (and this is a good thing) - the competition will follow Apple [Remember how Android Phone Prototypes looked like before the iPhone was out - just a copy of BlackBerry phones]
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first, although its idea of using a touch UI was not.
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.
Maybe it should be put in these words: iOS was designed for the iPhone with a tablet in mind ....
I didn't know the "proposing Linux" part, very interesting - do you have any links on this so that I can read up on it?
eb6
Sep 19, 10:10 AM
30 days on refurbs might mean something actually...
Any ideas?
Could be that they are expecting a flood of returns after they introduce the new MB and MBP. And they are waiting so they can send out fresh referbs. Just a though.
Any ideas?
Could be that they are expecting a flood of returns after they introduce the new MB and MBP. And they are waiting so they can send out fresh referbs. Just a though.
evil89
Mar 31, 04:32 PM
That's ridiculous.. If It was for HTC, my Hero would have it's support blocked in a 2.1 buggish system with a daylong battery life.. Thanks to "cooked" rom I've 2.3 Gingerbread with an overclocked phone, terminal access and 5 day of battery...
Stupid.. stupid move indeed...
Stupid.. stupid move indeed...