Amazing Iceman
Mar 23, 08:28 AM
And every new version of itunes requires a bigger and faster computer to run, your point? Hardware moves on , every companys takes advantage of that.
office 2010 runs fine on older hardware just like windows 7 does. I would suggest you tr it out yourself before making such statements. Office 2010 runs fine on my 5 year old computer my wife uses.
If you read my original post, you'll notice that I was referring to the fact that many programmers are careless about optimizing their code all because they can count on a large amount of resources, and because they get lazy.
That's why recently Microsoft made a big deal about some of their new software being either rewritten or optimized, when the case is that it was already expected from them to deploy optimized software.
Most Mac programmers are good at optimizing, while many Windows programmers are not.
I have seen Office for Windows run on several computers, as I provide IT support. I know how it works, not just because I see it, but because the users complain about it. Surely, it may run decent on a system with a large size of RAM, but if they didn't have that much RAM and the previous version ran fine with what they had, and now the new one runs slow while adding not enough functionality, then that's being a sloppy programmer.
I don't want to start a discussion about Office I don't really have a problem about it, plus it gets off topic.
office 2010 runs fine on older hardware just like windows 7 does. I would suggest you tr it out yourself before making such statements. Office 2010 runs fine on my 5 year old computer my wife uses.
If you read my original post, you'll notice that I was referring to the fact that many programmers are careless about optimizing their code all because they can count on a large amount of resources, and because they get lazy.
That's why recently Microsoft made a big deal about some of their new software being either rewritten or optimized, when the case is that it was already expected from them to deploy optimized software.
Most Mac programmers are good at optimizing, while many Windows programmers are not.
I have seen Office for Windows run on several computers, as I provide IT support. I know how it works, not just because I see it, but because the users complain about it. Surely, it may run decent on a system with a large size of RAM, but if they didn't have that much RAM and the previous version ran fine with what they had, and now the new one runs slow while adding not enough functionality, then that's being a sloppy programmer.
I don't want to start a discussion about Office I don't really have a problem about it, plus it gets off topic.
hayesk
Mar 26, 02:39 PM
Yet another unimpressive "major" update to an O/S that's showing it's age and irrelevance. (Hell it's already to most consumers nothing more than "That thing you gotta hook your iPad up to to make it work.) Compared to the iDevice world, the computer side of Apple has ground to a halt. Is it intentional I wonder...? ;)
Enough!! Combine MacOS and iOS already!!! The transition is so painfully slow, would someone else in tech get off their lazy ass and prod these guys to move a LITTLE quicker?!?
Consumers don't care about the OS at all, on a desktop or on an iOS device. They care about using their computer to do tasks. The more the OS becomes invisible to the user, the better.
I also have to laugh at the people complaining that Lion has nothing to offer at the same time they are complaining that it's turning into iOS. Do you want the OS to progress or stay the same? Make up your minds. What do these people want Lion to have. I'm guessing they can't imagine anything beyond including some third party utilities that they already use.
Enough!! Combine MacOS and iOS already!!! The transition is so painfully slow, would someone else in tech get off their lazy ass and prod these guys to move a LITTLE quicker?!?
Consumers don't care about the OS at all, on a desktop or on an iOS device. They care about using their computer to do tasks. The more the OS becomes invisible to the user, the better.
I also have to laugh at the people complaining that Lion has nothing to offer at the same time they are complaining that it's turning into iOS. Do you want the OS to progress or stay the same? Make up your minds. What do these people want Lion to have. I'm guessing they can't imagine anything beyond including some third party utilities that they already use.
ninjadex
Mar 31, 02:44 PM
What so many fail to realize is iOS was made for the iPad from the get-go. It's been mentioned many times that what became the iPad was in development longer than the original iPhone.
This goes to show that iOS conceptualization is light years ahead of Android. It's so obvious Google is scrambling, and seems to be making this stuff as they go along, without any sense of a master design guiding the way.
This goes to show that iOS conceptualization is light years ahead of Android. It's so obvious Google is scrambling, and seems to be making this stuff as they go along, without any sense of a master design guiding the way.
Lincoln
Aug 6, 02:17 PM
Was just trying to price out an IMac on the Apple store and the option of upgrade the keyboard/mouse to a wireless version was gone??
Something new in the offing to be announced tomorrow perhaps??
I think that the option disappeared when the wireless Mighty Mouse came out.
Something new in the offing to be announced tomorrow perhaps??
I think that the option disappeared when the wireless Mighty Mouse came out.
KingYaba
Aug 17, 09:02 AM
Well the Quad is still the fastest when it comes to CS2. But man, once those are intel native that thing is going to fly at lightspeed.
Doctor Q
Jul 14, 03:07 PM
Power Supply at the top is REALLY stupid.Why? What are the advantages/disadvantages to having it higher or lower in the case? Does the weight distribution matter?
ryanx27
Aug 27, 11:01 AM
The current Yonah MacBook is more powerful than any G5 - even dual core G5's. So why would you even make a fake joke about a weak mobile G5 coming? It's a joke that was only briefly funny two years ago. :rolleyes:
It isn't the G5 part that's funny about it. The whole point of the joke is to make fun of the Rumor Article --> Wild Speculation --> Guessing the Specific Release Date cycle.
It isn't the G5 part that's funny about it. The whole point of the joke is to make fun of the Rumor Article --> Wild Speculation --> Guessing the Specific Release Date cycle.
skunk
Apr 27, 03:10 PM
I'd be fascinated to know exactly what you did to "discover" those layers, 5P. I have Photoshop and Illustrator too. Guess what? One layer. Nothing selectable. At least one of us is talking complete bollocks.
Porco
Nov 28, 10:41 PM
The full article is very funny.
"It would be a nice idea. We have a negotiation coming up not too far. I don't see why we wouldn't do that... but maybe not in the same way," he told the Reuters Media Summit, when asked if Universal would negotiate a royalty fee for the iPod that would be similar to Microsoft's Zune.
"The Zune (deal) was an amazingly interesting exercise, to end up with a piece of technology," he added.
"It would be a nice idea" if I got money for nothing too! And why am I tempted to read "an amazingly interesting exercise" as an amazingly interesting exercise ... he added, dollar signs flashing in his eyes like some real-life Scrooge McDuck' ?
And to end up with "a piece of technology"! Yes! wow! hahahahah, I bet Microsoft were astounded about that too.
As the various parodies of such behaviour online indicates, the whole thing would be hilarious if it wasn't so ... true.
Pirates will pirate unless you give them a compelling reason not to. Legitimate customers will stay that way unless they feel piracy is an action they are ethically comfortable with. This kind of garbage makes that happen.
So for every iPod that would possibly hold a good couple of hundred Universal tracks amongst the thousands on there, I'd guess this kind of thing completely turns us nerds towards piracy rather than CD purchases/legitimate downloads. Is that $1 per iPod really going to make them as much money as the $xx they have lost on CDs and downloads? I'd guess not. Even if only 1% of people buying iPods pirate Universal tracks instead of buying them because of this deal (if it happens), it would be a loser for Universal. And of course the only people not financially at a loss because of it will be people who buy tracks, not the pirates who are back in the black as soon as they soak up the $1 surcharge by illegally downloading a Universal album as soon as they get their iPod.
If Apple did have the misfortune to be made to accept this kind of thing (unlikely right now I'd think, but you never know after a couple of ad-laden Zune-ar years), they should add the $1 to the price of the iPod so people ask "why does it cost $201?" and they should tell people on their web-site exactly why as well, providing details of how to get in touch with Universal to express their thanks.
Sorry if I've repeated any points already made... it's a Universally idiotic idea.
"It would be a nice idea. We have a negotiation coming up not too far. I don't see why we wouldn't do that... but maybe not in the same way," he told the Reuters Media Summit, when asked if Universal would negotiate a royalty fee for the iPod that would be similar to Microsoft's Zune.
"The Zune (deal) was an amazingly interesting exercise, to end up with a piece of technology," he added.
"It would be a nice idea" if I got money for nothing too! And why am I tempted to read "an amazingly interesting exercise" as an amazingly interesting exercise ... he added, dollar signs flashing in his eyes like some real-life Scrooge McDuck' ?
And to end up with "a piece of technology"! Yes! wow! hahahahah, I bet Microsoft were astounded about that too.
As the various parodies of such behaviour online indicates, the whole thing would be hilarious if it wasn't so ... true.
Pirates will pirate unless you give them a compelling reason not to. Legitimate customers will stay that way unless they feel piracy is an action they are ethically comfortable with. This kind of garbage makes that happen.
So for every iPod that would possibly hold a good couple of hundred Universal tracks amongst the thousands on there, I'd guess this kind of thing completely turns us nerds towards piracy rather than CD purchases/legitimate downloads. Is that $1 per iPod really going to make them as much money as the $xx they have lost on CDs and downloads? I'd guess not. Even if only 1% of people buying iPods pirate Universal tracks instead of buying them because of this deal (if it happens), it would be a loser for Universal. And of course the only people not financially at a loss because of it will be people who buy tracks, not the pirates who are back in the black as soon as they soak up the $1 surcharge by illegally downloading a Universal album as soon as they get their iPod.
If Apple did have the misfortune to be made to accept this kind of thing (unlikely right now I'd think, but you never know after a couple of ad-laden Zune-ar years), they should add the $1 to the price of the iPod so people ask "why does it cost $201?" and they should tell people on their web-site exactly why as well, providing details of how to get in touch with Universal to express their thanks.
Sorry if I've repeated any points already made... it's a Universally idiotic idea.
SteveRichardson
Jul 27, 11:04 AM
Me too. I'm just going to hang onto my aging iBook G4 until they come out. I really would kick myself if I bought a MacBook Pro now so close to them being updated. I'm just hoping I can order soon, and then they will arrive at the end of August... just in time for school. *crosses fingers*
Yeah same same. Haha I've had my iBook G4 for like 2 1/2 years now (can it be that long already?).
tiiimeee for an upgrade.
I wonder if they can ship it to my dorm in one piece if needed (as in if I need to wait that long before they become available....:( )
Yeah same same. Haha I've had my iBook G4 for like 2 1/2 years now (can it be that long already?).
tiiimeee for an upgrade.
I wonder if they can ship it to my dorm in one piece if needed (as in if I need to wait that long before they become available....:( )
toddybody
Mar 22, 02:57 PM
wait, theres other tablets out there? :rolleyes:
yoak
Apr 6, 07:31 AM
Yup I guess as we deliver full "uncompressed" HD via HDCAM SR mainly our needs a rather different. To me Blu-ray is the worst of all formats fairly big cumbersome files that are still to compressed to be useful to any one professionally, and not small enough to simply chuck around on thumb drives.....
We don�t even have to go to HDCAM SR for delivery anymore. On our latest project we just brought a hard drive with the masters (in ProRes) and did a transfer right at the broadcast facility. That was nice.
I do see your point on the blu-ray file size though.
But when the promo department at the same broadcaster wanted to look at the programs to plan the promotion of the series it would be nice to drop them a blu-ray, knowing they would be able to watch it on any player.
EDIT: I do have to say it�s not often I miss the need for blu-ray, but it certainly do happen
We don�t even have to go to HDCAM SR for delivery anymore. On our latest project we just brought a hard drive with the masters (in ProRes) and did a transfer right at the broadcast facility. That was nice.
I do see your point on the blu-ray file size though.
But when the promo department at the same broadcaster wanted to look at the programs to plan the promotion of the series it would be nice to drop them a blu-ray, knowing they would be able to watch it on any player.
EDIT: I do have to say it�s not often I miss the need for blu-ray, but it certainly do happen
Super Dave
Aug 6, 12:04 AM
P.S. How about seamless MSN/Yahoo! Messenger support in iChat?
I would LOVE if that happened, but there's no evidence of it other than that I daydream about it.
David :cool:
I would LOVE if that happened, but there's no evidence of it other than that I daydream about it.
David :cool:
iMikeT
Sep 19, 04:28 AM
I sure hope that the MacBook (regular) line is update at next week's conference. That way, the MacBook my girlfriend just bought can get a Core 2 Duo update.
Multimedia
Aug 21, 01:25 AM
Mac Pros will need 64bit Leopard to achieve their full multi-core potential. Expect all Core 2 based Macs to hold value well through the next release cycle of OSX Leopard.
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros! :rolleyes:Quad G5 is only $2799 on the SAVE refurb page. Refurbs are the same as new with a new warranty. But I think that would be a poor choice compared to a Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is not cheaper because you have to add more expensive RAM. But it is faster overall and Rosetta Photoshop performance isn't bad. Quad G5 will also benefit from Leopard don't forget. It's not like Leopard is going to not be written to take advantage of the 64-bit G5 as well.
But I would not recomend a G5 Quad to anyone at this point. I'm pondering a Mac Pro purchase myself. But I'm going to try and hold out for a refurb or even see if I can wait for Clovertown. But I'm likely to be one of the first to snag a Mac Pro refurb when they hit the SAVE page in November-December. By then I may even be thinking about waiting for the January 9th SteveNote. Quad G5 is no slouch. But Mac Pro is faster overall.And I thought you were married to your quad last week ......While I may be married to my Quad G5, we're not exclusive and she likes a threesome with the younger faster models as much as I do too. :p
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros! :rolleyes:Quad G5 is only $2799 on the SAVE refurb page. Refurbs are the same as new with a new warranty. But I think that would be a poor choice compared to a Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is not cheaper because you have to add more expensive RAM. But it is faster overall and Rosetta Photoshop performance isn't bad. Quad G5 will also benefit from Leopard don't forget. It's not like Leopard is going to not be written to take advantage of the 64-bit G5 as well.
But I would not recomend a G5 Quad to anyone at this point. I'm pondering a Mac Pro purchase myself. But I'm going to try and hold out for a refurb or even see if I can wait for Clovertown. But I'm likely to be one of the first to snag a Mac Pro refurb when they hit the SAVE page in November-December. By then I may even be thinking about waiting for the January 9th SteveNote. Quad G5 is no slouch. But Mac Pro is faster overall.And I thought you were married to your quad last week ......While I may be married to my Quad G5, we're not exclusive and she likes a threesome with the younger faster models as much as I do too. :p
bamerican
Apr 25, 03:23 PM
Where did this attorney go to law school...
If you want a free consultation, check him out here (http://www.mayerlawgroup.com/).
And one of the counts in the complaint doesn't even allege a civil claim.
He's in way over his head. Apple's lawyers are going to eat him alive.
This is going to be fun to watch.
If you want a free consultation, check him out here (http://www.mayerlawgroup.com/).
And one of the counts in the complaint doesn't even allege a civil claim.
He's in way over his head. Apple's lawyers are going to eat him alive.
This is going to be fun to watch.
skunk
Apr 28, 11:15 AM
Excellent, Raid. I'll use that in PRSI. :D
NAG
Apr 27, 08:50 AM
And here I thought that data wasn't sent to Apple? At least they encrypted it so that you can't tell what actually is sent.
Edit:
But really, they are doing the right thing by truncating the size, removing it from files being backuped, and encrypting the file.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the wasn't sent argument was short for wasn't sent to Apple to track you personally. You're always sending out some sort of location data whether it be your IP or the wifi data. This was announced as a feature back when they first showed of location tracking on the iPhone (so you can't say it was secret). I guess the assumption was that people would remember context of what was said before. The context was that we knew about the anonymous wifi data and people were claiming location database on the phone was being used by Apple to track people personally (the 3rd party local access as a reasonable concern although a bit unlikely). I guess we should have been more explicit in and hoped people try to understand context instead of only becoming irrationally angry at the words "location". Oh well.
Oh, and I like how people are claiming the non-encryption was said by Apple to be a bug and then acting incredulous. Yeah, that tends to happen when you make something up. The only thing that was a bug was the cache not getting culled over time or deleted completely when location services is off. Encryption is a new feature (that arguably should have been there to start) and the file being backed up was probably an oversight. I have no idea how Apple handles their audits but they should probably look into it since they messed up here and only addressed it after we got yet another "-gate" in the media. (Do they even have a fence at this point or is it just a bunch of gates? Maybe they should make a "-gate" for that.) Informing people is, of course, good. However hysterics and hyperbole don't really do a very good job of that.
Edit:
But really, they are doing the right thing by truncating the size, removing it from files being backuped, and encrypting the file.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the wasn't sent argument was short for wasn't sent to Apple to track you personally. You're always sending out some sort of location data whether it be your IP or the wifi data. This was announced as a feature back when they first showed of location tracking on the iPhone (so you can't say it was secret). I guess the assumption was that people would remember context of what was said before. The context was that we knew about the anonymous wifi data and people were claiming location database on the phone was being used by Apple to track people personally (the 3rd party local access as a reasonable concern although a bit unlikely). I guess we should have been more explicit in and hoped people try to understand context instead of only becoming irrationally angry at the words "location". Oh well.
Oh, and I like how people are claiming the non-encryption was said by Apple to be a bug and then acting incredulous. Yeah, that tends to happen when you make something up. The only thing that was a bug was the cache not getting culled over time or deleted completely when location services is off. Encryption is a new feature (that arguably should have been there to start) and the file being backed up was probably an oversight. I have no idea how Apple handles their audits but they should probably look into it since they messed up here and only addressed it after we got yet another "-gate" in the media. (Do they even have a fence at this point or is it just a bunch of gates? Maybe they should make a "-gate" for that.) Informing people is, of course, good. However hysterics and hyperbole don't really do a very good job of that.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 20, 12:57 PM
These ipad clone tablets made by samsung are not worth the price.
Porco
Aug 5, 07:19 PM
Well iSight or no, there needs to be an update anyway. The Mac Pro will have Front Row, and how will you control it by remote if you're meant to keep it under your desk? The new Cinema Displays need an IR "extender".
Besides, I still think Apple WOULD love to include an iSight in their displays.
Yes, but just my opinion, Apple needs to get over this 'Only new computers get FrontRow' crap and provide a USB repeater. ....
To me the answer to the whole IR/Mac Pro/Front Row thing is obvious - put an integrated IR receiver into the keyboard. The keyboard would come with the Mac Pro (unlike the display) and is rarely under the desk. :)
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
Besides, I still think Apple WOULD love to include an iSight in their displays.
Yes, but just my opinion, Apple needs to get over this 'Only new computers get FrontRow' crap and provide a USB repeater. ....
To me the answer to the whole IR/Mac Pro/Front Row thing is obvious - put an integrated IR receiver into the keyboard. The keyboard would come with the Mac Pro (unlike the display) and is rarely under the desk. :)
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
Reach9
Apr 11, 02:35 PM
Why would you when android has at the moment passed apple on every standard out there?
Android hasn't passed Apple on every standard. Please give me an example of that.
But, Android phones are better smartphones than the iPhone, imo.
Android hasn't passed Apple on every standard. Please give me an example of that.
But, Android phones are better smartphones than the iPhone, imo.
iJohnHenry
Apr 27, 04:39 PM
The difference between me and you is that I'd want an explanation in either account. ;)
Get Dr. Gilbert "Gil" Grissom, (Ph.D.), on the case.
I'm sure he could match the keystrokes to a late 50's/early 60's typewriter.
Get Dr. Gilbert "Gil" Grissom, (Ph.D.), on the case.
I'm sure he could match the keystrokes to a late 50's/early 60's typewriter.
nagromme
Mar 22, 01:01 PM
Widescreen is great for movie watching, and the spec-lover in me is all over that... but it’s not very flexible for portrait use. (Which is how you hold a tablet one-handed, and is how you see the most content on a web page or scrolling document.)
A 10.1” 1280x800 screen is actually almost exactly the same screen area as an iPad: the iPad is 45.2 sq. in., and the 10.1 is 45.8 sq. in.
Held in portrait mode, the 10.1 is .75” taller... but .5” narrower than an iPad. I don’t think I’d care for that. (But with 1280x800 you do gain 32 pixels of width, and 256 pixels of height. Still not great for portrait use.)
The 8.9 display, though—which seems to save a few bucks—is an interesting option for dropping the price floor on “real” tablets. (Not that I’d settle for Android’s failings. As pointed out: specs alone don’t make a good car, nor a good computer, nor a good tablet!)
I hope these catch on enough that I can actually buy an iPad.
Ha ha :D Good thinking!
A 10.1” 1280x800 screen is actually almost exactly the same screen area as an iPad: the iPad is 45.2 sq. in., and the 10.1 is 45.8 sq. in.
Held in portrait mode, the 10.1 is .75” taller... but .5” narrower than an iPad. I don’t think I’d care for that. (But with 1280x800 you do gain 32 pixels of width, and 256 pixels of height. Still not great for portrait use.)
The 8.9 display, though—which seems to save a few bucks—is an interesting option for dropping the price floor on “real” tablets. (Not that I’d settle for Android’s failings. As pointed out: specs alone don’t make a good car, nor a good computer, nor a good tablet!)
I hope these catch on enough that I can actually buy an iPad.
Ha ha :D Good thinking!
blahblah100
Apr 27, 09:46 AM
There aren't any concerns, but since the media hyped this up so much, they had to address it. Now they have. Should be the end of the story. But it won't be since there are anti-Apple folks who will push to keep this story alive as long as they can until the next Apple-gate story gets created.
And I'm sure when the next Apple-gate story gets created, the blind fanbois will jump to their defense. :rolleyes:
And I'm sure when the next Apple-gate story gets created, the blind fanbois will jump to their defense. :rolleyes:
0 comments:
Post a Comment