mobilehavoc
Apr 6, 04:27 PM
Isn't it amazing that so many of these XOOM owners also, coincidentally, "own" an iPad/iPad 2, or their spouse/mom/dog/significant other does?
Either there's a lot of exaggerating (astroturfing) going on, or someone's spouse/mom/dog/significant other has a lot more sense. ;)
Why, I own an iPad and a XOOM and a Galaxy Tab and that HP Windows 7 Slate thingy and a Nook and a prototype PlayBook and I can tell you from personal experience that the iPad is like 100x better than all of those! :rolleyes:
Don't hate. I have money and I can spend it however. Maybe I'll buy an ipad and leave it in the bathroom for people to use as they're taking care of business.
Either there's a lot of exaggerating (astroturfing) going on, or someone's spouse/mom/dog/significant other has a lot more sense. ;)
Why, I own an iPad and a XOOM and a Galaxy Tab and that HP Windows 7 Slate thingy and a Nook and a prototype PlayBook and I can tell you from personal experience that the iPad is like 100x better than all of those! :rolleyes:
Don't hate. I have money and I can spend it however. Maybe I'll buy an ipad and leave it in the bathroom for people to use as they're taking care of business.
emotion
Jul 20, 08:11 AM
WOW! Octo cores:eek:
We just need most software to support that efficiently now.
We just need most software to support that efficiently now.
RedTomato
Sep 14, 12:32 PM
i think they're coming up with 2 dual octo-core.......True That. But not until next summer 2007.
:eek: :eek:
What's planned after that? 16 cores on a chip? Seriously?? :confused: :confused:
:eek: :eek:
What's planned after that? 16 cores on a chip? Seriously?? :confused: :confused:
AppleScruff1
Apr 20, 02:13 AM
Why do you keep countering an argument that no one is actually making?
Straw man fail.
Not at all. I'm only showing where Apple has done what they don't like being done to them. Only a die hard defends them at all cost.
Straw man fail.
Not at all. I'm only showing where Apple has done what they don't like being done to them. Only a die hard defends them at all cost.
nostaws
Apr 10, 12:59 AM
Hey. But there is something to be said for familiarity. We all know how to use it. But I agree an update would be nice.
Hoping for some better multi-core support(although probably going to have to wait for Lion for the newer QuickTime engine) and a UI that isn't from the 90's:
http://www.candlerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/03_ambit_fullscreen-300x232.jpg
^ Final Cut on Mac OS 9
Final Cut on Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard:
http://adobe-discount.com/product_images/o/apple_final_cut_express_hd_4__90390.jpg
Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
Hoping for some better multi-core support(although probably going to have to wait for Lion for the newer QuickTime engine) and a UI that isn't from the 90's:
http://www.candlerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/03_ambit_fullscreen-300x232.jpg
^ Final Cut on Mac OS 9
Final Cut on Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard:
http://adobe-discount.com/product_images/o/apple_final_cut_express_hd_4__90390.jpg
Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
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.
SWC
Aug 7, 07:36 PM
This is interesting; how do they figure that they can get the service to a mobile phone?
Discuss!
Cheers.
Quicktime. they have had mobile phone support for a while. since h.264 i beleive.
Discuss!
Cheers.
Quicktime. they have had mobile phone support for a while. since h.264 i beleive.
tkingart
Mar 27, 03:54 AM
The only thing I don't like in Lion (based on screenshots I've seen) are the "flat gray scroll bars" adopted from iOS, this going back to 2d seems like back pedaling. I think something between flat and 3d would actually work, like get rid of the rounded center, flatten it but keep the edges soft and shaded, keeping the scroll bar wells the same. I suspect it's being flattened because of possible support for touch screens.
I understand the need for simplicity and streamlining, but where we lack tactile feedback, 3d helps with the illusion of depth, take that away and it will look like a devolving interface. Look at the OS X dock for instance, I was elated when it became three dimensional, now imagine if they made it flat again (permanently). I'm sure it may be a preferential thing, but I don't think I'm alone in preferring the 3d dock view.
We need to keep pushing forward with three dimensions in UI designs. It would be really cool to see some forward thinking UI changes like the ability to "push" running applications into the inside quad of a cylindrical shape that can be rotated with gestures.
The flat scroll bar belongs in Folder > Grid views and preview, looks alright there. :)
I understand the need for simplicity and streamlining, but where we lack tactile feedback, 3d helps with the illusion of depth, take that away and it will look like a devolving interface. Look at the OS X dock for instance, I was elated when it became three dimensional, now imagine if they made it flat again (permanently). I'm sure it may be a preferential thing, but I don't think I'm alone in preferring the 3d dock view.
We need to keep pushing forward with three dimensions in UI designs. It would be really cool to see some forward thinking UI changes like the ability to "push" running applications into the inside quad of a cylindrical shape that can be rotated with gestures.
The flat scroll bar belongs in Folder > Grid views and preview, looks alright there. :)
Nuck81
Dec 23, 07:39 PM
well im a little stuck. my zonda r isnt fast enough for a lot of the top races, and the newly appointed online dealership has nice cars, but it doesnt rotate between them. so im really waiting for a nice car to come up in the used garage. either that or ill have to save up like 4M for a dealership car
Zonda R is one of the better cars in the game. It will win any race you enter with it if you are able to drive. Add some downforce and lower the throttle sensitivity and it's a little easier to handle.
Zonda R is one of the better cars in the game. It will win any race you enter with it if you are able to drive. Add some downforce and lower the throttle sensitivity and it's a little easier to handle.
*LTD*
Apr 27, 10:49 AM
And once again people give Apple a pass for something that is clearly an issue.
If you're a criminal or a paranoid psycho, then yeah . . . it might be an issue. Even then, its rather useless to actually pinpoint someone's location.
Damn. some of you guys are *really* reaching here.
If you're a criminal or a paranoid psycho, then yeah . . . it might be an issue. Even then, its rather useless to actually pinpoint someone's location.
Damn. some of you guys are *really* reaching here.
G5power
Jul 27, 09:48 AM
Assuming August 7 as an announcement date of new systems, the waiting is killer.
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.
Digital Skunk
Mar 22, 12:55 PM
Assuming this gets out of vaporware status, it looks pretty good. The custom interface also looks good. Apple better have some improvements to the UI (ahem, notifications) in iOS 5
Sorry, completely forgot about that.
iOS rocks in apps, but it does suck *** in terms of notifications and true multitasking.
Apple should've been the ones to buy Palm.
Sorry, completely forgot about that.
iOS rocks in apps, but it does suck *** in terms of notifications and true multitasking.
Apple should've been the ones to buy Palm.
chimerical
Nov 28, 07:42 PM
(Did the music companies ask for money for every CD player or Tape Recorder sold? Nope)
Actually, yes. I believe that CD-R/CD-RW blank discs and recorders have had some type of royalties fee added to the price, which gets passed down to us consumers. It's frustrating.
Actually, yes. I believe that CD-R/CD-RW blank discs and recorders have had some type of royalties fee added to the price, which gets passed down to us consumers. It's frustrating.
iJohnHenry
Mar 23, 11:46 AM
Some called them 'the coalition of the billing' because so many members were paid off in some way.
For the Brits, that would be 'the coalition of the shilling'. :p
For the Brits, that would be 'the coalition of the shilling'. :p
blahblah100
Apr 6, 02:52 PM
:apple:
That's all I have to say.
Really? Are sales numbers what dictates one product is better than the other?
I'm not saying the Xoom is better (I haven't used one) but a reading of the posts on this thread would suggest that sales number indicate that one product is better than the other.
That's all I have to say.
Really? Are sales numbers what dictates one product is better than the other?
I'm not saying the Xoom is better (I haven't used one) but a reading of the posts on this thread would suggest that sales number indicate that one product is better than the other.
balamw
Apr 6, 04:22 PM
He's still using that 2,000,000 Tabs "shipped", adding it to iPads sold in the same period, and finding the Tab's number is 30% of the total. Very..."smooth", could I say?
These would be the very same Tabs I see pallets of at Costco, while everyone else is sold out of iPad 2s. Got it.
B
These would be the very same Tabs I see pallets of at Costco, while everyone else is sold out of iPad 2s. Got it.
B
boncellis
Jul 20, 09:19 AM
Remember Apple will be privvy to a lot more information that we as consumers are. They are probably on a level playing field at least with Intel compared with other PC vendors. They may even have a special relationship with Intel to get stuff slightly before people like Lenovo and Dell.
That's a good point, I'm sure Intel gives them a heads-up because they are such a major vendor. My larger point though is whether Apple's modus operandi will have to change to accomodate, or take advantage rather, such an increase in availability of new technology.
Before I would look forward to a new form factor or case or structure--now I tend to think their designs will remain a little longer.
That's a good point, I'm sure Intel gives them a heads-up because they are such a major vendor. My larger point though is whether Apple's modus operandi will have to change to accomodate, or take advantage rather, such an increase in availability of new technology.
Before I would look forward to a new form factor or case or structure--now I tend to think their designs will remain a little longer.
killr_b
Apr 25, 02:06 PM
As a consumer, why should I be subjected to this risk which doesn't benefit me in the slightest? And why should this data be "backed up," secretly, to my computer?
The Wall Street Journal has found, however, that this newly-publicized database is constructed even when location services are turned off entirely.
From the front page of macrumors, for all those who've said to turn off location services.
This IS the type of thing that should be ruled on before a real problem develops.
The Wall Street Journal has found, however, that this newly-publicized database is constructed even when location services are turned off entirely.
From the front page of macrumors, for all those who've said to turn off location services.
This IS the type of thing that should be ruled on before a real problem develops.
Half Glass
Aug 18, 11:29 PM
"Quad Core Ready" - that would make a nice bullet on a software package wouldn't it?
Better yet: "MultiCore Ready".
So the webpages at Apple.com suggest the improvement of Xeon vs Quad G5 in FCP of 1.3- 1.4 times as fast as the Quad G5.
However, notice that it is footnoted that these results were obtained using a Beta version of FCP:
Better yet: "MultiCore Ready".
So the webpages at Apple.com suggest the improvement of Xeon vs Quad G5 in FCP of 1.3- 1.4 times as fast as the Quad G5.
However, notice that it is footnoted that these results were obtained using a Beta version of FCP:
frunkis54
Apr 27, 09:29 AM
It is not surprising (http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf) (pdf).
yep 4b says it all. saying if we don't want to be tracked if we don't want to by not using any app that tracks. seriously?. or by turning off location on the iphone. well we know that doesn't make a difference for this.
yep 4b says it all. saying if we don't want to be tracked if we don't want to by not using any app that tracks. seriously?. or by turning off location on the iphone. well we know that doesn't make a difference for this.
Multimedia
Aug 27, 08:57 AM
I want to see:
Iconoclysm
Apr 19, 08:24 PM
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
Actually, you're WRONG!!!! to say he's wrong. You're trying to say that every GUI element was created at Xerox? EVERY one of them? Sorry, but your argument here is akin to something Fox News would air.
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
Actually, you're WRONG!!!! to say he's wrong. You're trying to say that every GUI element was created at Xerox? EVERY one of them? Sorry, but your argument here is akin to something Fox News would air.
Danksi
Aug 15, 12:58 PM
Amazing.
However the FCP benchmark is disapointing, but I suppose that it may rise when the x1900 is installed and tested. Still, that photoshop test? I don't think ANYONE expected results that good from a non-UB program. At least I didn't...
My main interest is in FCP the FCP results.
On a fixed budget, does anyone know the advantage/disadvantage of going for the 2.0Ghz with 1900XT over 2.6Ghz with the std video card?
However the FCP benchmark is disapointing, but I suppose that it may rise when the x1900 is installed and tested. Still, that photoshop test? I don't think ANYONE expected results that good from a non-UB program. At least I didn't...
My main interest is in FCP the FCP results.
On a fixed budget, does anyone know the advantage/disadvantage of going for the 2.0Ghz with 1900XT over 2.6Ghz with the std video card?