RebootD
Apr 10, 11:39 AM
Considering the number of shocking disappointments (Lion being more iOS, no FCS updates, glossy everything etc) as of late with Apple releases I'm still not holding my breath that they will release something to take me away from CS5. I would love to be surprised though.
sirgant
Nov 29, 02:44 AM
What on earth are these people at music studio's thinking!!! Did they get royalties for every stereo sold? NO, so neither should they get anything for iPod or any hardware sales. Only for the products THEY supply, should they get money, being the music and movies/ video's, in other words the content.
This is typical behaviour of music studio's and I sincerely hope that Apple will not budge, nor should any other company. Of course MS is eager to pay as they need their Zune to succeed, and Universal is riding along for a slice of the pie, but who will loose out in the end is the consumer, as these royalties are eventually going to get calculated such that we will pay them......
We should all start protesting all record companies to clean up their act, in the mean time, the general consumer should to, copying of music is stealing, the prices on iTunes are fair and reasonable, so lets be nice and buy them properly, and the record companies can then make sure there is more for us to buy (some real refreshing new music would be nice, instead of all this "X factor, American idol, etc etc manufactured stuff....) , and not just fill their pockets as they are trying to do all the time
It's not music studios, but record companies, they are not the same entities.
A couple of things to clarify. I am actually a producer, who has a pre-existing deal with MCA/Universal Music Publishers.
1. Doug Morris, Chairman of Universal is a greedy bastard, who I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw him.
2. Artists, Songwriters & Producers are already getting screwed by major labels, not accounting properly, holding millions of dollars, using creative accounting practices etc.
3. The percentage breakdown with ITMS and labels is basically 65/35 as it is rounded off to the 100 in favor of the labels.
4. The real culprit here is Microsoft, who is whoring out Zunes in order to get a foothold on the marketplace. Consumers can speak with their pocketbooks, don't buy the crappy Zune players, but support your artists & songwriters who make a living off of sales, by purchasing music.
Thanks
This is typical behaviour of music studio's and I sincerely hope that Apple will not budge, nor should any other company. Of course MS is eager to pay as they need their Zune to succeed, and Universal is riding along for a slice of the pie, but who will loose out in the end is the consumer, as these royalties are eventually going to get calculated such that we will pay them......
We should all start protesting all record companies to clean up their act, in the mean time, the general consumer should to, copying of music is stealing, the prices on iTunes are fair and reasonable, so lets be nice and buy them properly, and the record companies can then make sure there is more for us to buy (some real refreshing new music would be nice, instead of all this "X factor, American idol, etc etc manufactured stuff....) , and not just fill their pockets as they are trying to do all the time
It's not music studios, but record companies, they are not the same entities.
A couple of things to clarify. I am actually a producer, who has a pre-existing deal with MCA/Universal Music Publishers.
1. Doug Morris, Chairman of Universal is a greedy bastard, who I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw him.
2. Artists, Songwriters & Producers are already getting screwed by major labels, not accounting properly, holding millions of dollars, using creative accounting practices etc.
3. The percentage breakdown with ITMS and labels is basically 65/35 as it is rounded off to the 100 in favor of the labels.
4. The real culprit here is Microsoft, who is whoring out Zunes in order to get a foothold on the marketplace. Consumers can speak with their pocketbooks, don't buy the crappy Zune players, but support your artists & songwriters who make a living off of sales, by purchasing music.
Thanks
Zadillo
Aug 7, 03:35 PM
anyone else a little underwhelmed with today's WWDC? There isn't anything that really jumped out at me besides the Mac Pro.
I don't know what there is to be underwhelmed about; the rumor has basically been that the main things being covered here would be the Mac Pro (which exceeded my expectations) and the first real glimpse at Leopard (which looks very cool from what I've seen). I didn't find either the Mac Pro or Leopard to be underwhelming, so I don't see anything that would make me feel underwhelmed.
I guess I would be underwhelmed if I had mistaken WWDC for Macworld or something, and expected a bunch of major new product announcements.
I don't know what there is to be underwhelmed about; the rumor has basically been that the main things being covered here would be the Mac Pro (which exceeded my expectations) and the first real glimpse at Leopard (which looks very cool from what I've seen). I didn't find either the Mac Pro or Leopard to be underwhelming, so I don't see anything that would make me feel underwhelmed.
I guess I would be underwhelmed if I had mistaken WWDC for Macworld or something, and expected a bunch of major new product announcements.
hyperpasta
Aug 5, 04:50 PM
I'd be willing to bet that there will be at least two major surprises on Monday, one to do with some fab capability in Leopard that Apple has succeeded in keeping us in the dark about, and one fab piece of consumer hardware. By the second, I don't mean something we all expect like Mac Pros or Meroms in the MBPs. I mean something radical. Something that will make some real headlines.
They can't do things according to their old schedules now that they are on with Intel. Get used to new patterns. Apple is coming out of the shadows now, with sales and mindshare building at a strong pace. Waiting until January to annouce big new consumer pushes because WWDC is for developers won't do anymore. Welcome to the new Apple.
Think big. It's okay. Apple won't disappoint.
I will remember you said that when the announcements are dissapointing :)
Maybe they will and maybe they won't. But in the mean time, it's best to be conservative and hope we might be surprised.
They can't do things according to their old schedules now that they are on with Intel. Get used to new patterns. Apple is coming out of the shadows now, with sales and mindshare building at a strong pace. Waiting until January to annouce big new consumer pushes because WWDC is for developers won't do anymore. Welcome to the new Apple.
Think big. It's okay. Apple won't disappoint.
I will remember you said that when the announcements are dissapointing :)
Maybe they will and maybe they won't. But in the mean time, it's best to be conservative and hope we might be surprised.
epitaphic
Aug 18, 11:46 PM
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
bedifferent
Apr 27, 08:39 AM
There's a nuclear disaster in Japan and treacherous weather throughout, people are jobless and homeless and the dollar's in the sh***er and our Supreme Court ruled that companies can give unlimited financial aid to any politician putting business interests in our government and people are worried about Apple possibly tracking them on their iDevice?
Let 'em, my life is BORING, they wouldn't be interested :p
Let 'em, my life is BORING, they wouldn't be interested :p
RHutch
Sep 13, 09:21 AM
and this got negative votes because...??????????
Yeesh!
I was wondering the same thing. How can people not be pleased with this? The fact that the processors can be swapped, the fact that the OS recognizes all 8 cores, and that it was so difficult to use all of the processing power. What is there to complain about?
Yeesh!
I was wondering the same thing. How can people not be pleased with this? The fact that the processors can be swapped, the fact that the OS recognizes all 8 cores, and that it was so difficult to use all of the processing power. What is there to complain about?
logandzwon
Apr 19, 02:51 PM
The First Commercial GUI
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/5659/star1vg.gif
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7892/leopardpreviewdesktop4.jpghttp://img714.imageshack.us/img714/5733/xerox8010star.gif
-The Star was not a commercial product. Xerox didn't sell them. (Well eventually they did, but not as PCs. they were to be similar to what we'd call a terminal today.)
-the middle image is actually of an Apple Lisa. I think you were just showing as a comparison, but some people might think your saying it's a Star. It's not. It's a Lisa.
-Apple compensated Xerox for the ideas borrowed from the Star. SJ and the mac team were already working on the GUI before any of them ever saw the Star though. Also, Macintosh 1 wasn't a copy of the Star. In fact a lot of the stables of a modern GUI today were innovated by Apple for the Macintosh.
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/5659/star1vg.gif
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7892/leopardpreviewdesktop4.jpghttp://img714.imageshack.us/img714/5733/xerox8010star.gif
-The Star was not a commercial product. Xerox didn't sell them. (Well eventually they did, but not as PCs. they were to be similar to what we'd call a terminal today.)
-the middle image is actually of an Apple Lisa. I think you were just showing as a comparison, but some people might think your saying it's a Star. It's not. It's a Lisa.
-Apple compensated Xerox for the ideas borrowed from the Star. SJ and the mac team were already working on the GUI before any of them ever saw the Star though. Also, Macintosh 1 wasn't a copy of the Star. In fact a lot of the stables of a modern GUI today were innovated by Apple for the Macintosh.
aricher
Sep 13, 12:44 PM
I think we can all read at normal size. Besides, how do you know the IT dude typed that vs. the poster just typing what he said?
I did a direct copy-paste from my IT guy's email. What a knucklehead - him not you.
I did a direct copy-paste from my IT guy's email. What a knucklehead - him not you.
ahuman7341
Aug 5, 05:57 PM
BitTorrent seems very NO!
The main reson I don't like the idea of it is the security issues. I Also think Apple will be aware of the security issues so I doubt that software update will use BitTorrent. Although Apple may have a client that comes with leopard or in iTunes.
The main reson I don't like the idea of it is the security issues. I Also think Apple will be aware of the security issues so I doubt that software update will use BitTorrent. Although Apple may have a client that comes with leopard or in iTunes.
Multimedia
Sep 13, 09:18 PM
Hey everybody the Big News is
NBC Today Show went High Definition today!The Today show is an embarrassment. The US major tv networks do not have any real morning news programs. How to trim your dog's ears and an inside look into American Idol contestants is NOT NEWS. It is an entertainment talk show.My post of this news has nothing to do with content. It is a historic moment in the evolution of television. If you don't think so, then you are paying way too much attention to the content and not enough to the process by which they are conveying that content.
NBC Today Show went High Definition today!The Today show is an embarrassment. The US major tv networks do not have any real morning news programs. How to trim your dog's ears and an inside look into American Idol contestants is NOT NEWS. It is an entertainment talk show.My post of this news has nothing to do with content. It is a historic moment in the evolution of television. If you don't think so, then you are paying way too much attention to the content and not enough to the process by which they are conveying that content.
TrollToddington
Apr 6, 03:17 PM
Both machines would be fine, though the 13"/15" MacBook Pro is more fully-featured of a machine than the Air, and frankly at that cost, why pay for an incomplete system?
With a 13" or 15" MacBook Pro, there's little practical use for a MacBook Air unless you have a problem lifting the two extra pounds, and really, if you do, either exercise or invest in physical therapy.
Disagree, the Air is a niche product, and there is a noticeable difference in weight. 2KG 13" Pro is exactly 50% heavier than 1.3KG Air, and if you lug the laptop around all day long such weight difference is noticeable. It might be added that most Air users are never gonna need the extra computing power of the MBP. If your work requires a MBP you're never going to get an Air anyway.
I am going even further - I like the featherweight of the 11" and the fact that after the update it is going to be a very serious machine is not to be neglected.
Last but not least, those 2 pounds you're talking about can be crucial when deciding what to take in your hand luggage when traveling by plane. I've been up to such a decision when I had to take my 2.8kg PC laptop. That's where I guess the name of the computer comes from - Macbook Air, designed for use on an Airplane.
With a 13" or 15" MacBook Pro, there's little practical use for a MacBook Air unless you have a problem lifting the two extra pounds, and really, if you do, either exercise or invest in physical therapy.
Disagree, the Air is a niche product, and there is a noticeable difference in weight. 2KG 13" Pro is exactly 50% heavier than 1.3KG Air, and if you lug the laptop around all day long such weight difference is noticeable. It might be added that most Air users are never gonna need the extra computing power of the MBP. If your work requires a MBP you're never going to get an Air anyway.
I am going even further - I like the featherweight of the 11" and the fact that after the update it is going to be a very serious machine is not to be neglected.
Last but not least, those 2 pounds you're talking about can be crucial when deciding what to take in your hand luggage when traveling by plane. I've been up to such a decision when I had to take my 2.8kg PC laptop. That's where I guess the name of the computer comes from - Macbook Air, designed for use on an Airplane.
4God
Jul 14, 02:30 PM
Dual optical drive slots are a must....<snip>.....
Maybe one of the drives will be Blu-Ray.
Maybe one of the drives will be Blu-Ray.
miketcool
Aug 11, 06:38 PM
You all must realize now that the touch screen scroll wheel is for the iPhone, not, the iPod. You wont watch video's on your phone, but youll listen to audio, dial numbers and store info. The Video player will be a spin off and be video oriented, this will be mobile oriented. $399, I'd still buy a mobile hub with music and phone capabilities.
It Cometh.
It Cometh.
63dot
Aug 18, 10:52 AM
damn and i wanted asia... ahh but europe wont be too bad. damn it i am 5'7 so i might end up with the short end of the stick.
we are the same height...we can call ourselves the "toxic twins"
we are the same height...we can call ourselves the "toxic twins"
kresh
Nov 28, 10:47 PM
If this went into effect, I would have a defense in court when I downloaded the entire Universal Label Catalog (All Their Music) off the net. I would no longer buy anything from iTS that is Universal!
Wow, is the Music label the same as the Movie label. I could get all the movies too (to play on my iPod)!
I mean if the royalties are paid when the device is manufactured, there is no need for them to double dip and collect royalties again when I pay for content right? I think it would hold in court!
Wow, is the Music label the same as the Movie label. I could get all the movies too (to play on my iPod)!
I mean if the royalties are paid when the device is manufactured, there is no need for them to double dip and collect royalties again when I pay for content right? I think it would hold in court!
prady16
Sep 13, 07:11 AM
thats a killer system!
Kinda like supercomputers for small businesses!
Kinda like supercomputers for small businesses!
illegalprelude
Aug 25, 03:15 PM
Call it what you want but these new MacBooks are crap. Yea there is people who are enjoying theirs without a hitch but look at all the reports of problems. Not once on this forum have we had a flood of problems with a single unit. Apple dropped the ball on this one. Poorly made unit
jclardy
Mar 22, 01:27 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Yeah sure, a business tablet with a screen too small to type on. Rim's marketing for this thing seems to be all over the place, they say business tablet, but the picture shows Need For Speed?
Out of the 7" tablets the playbook looks the best, but it is still a 7" tablet. Combined with it's wider display the keyboard will be way to small. If they come out with some kind of awesome keyboard accessory then it may stand a chance. BB's success had a lot to do with its comfortable keyboard.
Samsung's new tablets might do well, as long as they do some decent marketing.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Yeah sure, a business tablet with a screen too small to type on. Rim's marketing for this thing seems to be all over the place, they say business tablet, but the picture shows Need For Speed?
Out of the 7" tablets the playbook looks the best, but it is still a 7" tablet. Combined with it's wider display the keyboard will be way to small. If they come out with some kind of awesome keyboard accessory then it may stand a chance. BB's success had a lot to do with its comfortable keyboard.
Samsung's new tablets might do well, as long as they do some decent marketing.
ugp
Jun 11, 12:22 PM
Anyone know if I place a preorder on the 19th what the chances are I'll be able to make a reservation for the 24th?
I would Pre-Order ASAP. The longer you wait the less your chances get. Being their are 4 Retailers confirmed to launch I am sure Apple has a big Inventory on these but how much will each Company be receiving is the question. I can see Wal-Mart getting the least from anyone.
I would Pre-Order ASAP. The longer you wait the less your chances get. Being their are 4 Retailers confirmed to launch I am sure Apple has a big Inventory on these but how much will each Company be receiving is the question. I can see Wal-Mart getting the least from anyone.
bigandy
Jul 27, 09:42 AM
this makes me happy. jumping up and down for wwdc...
:) :) :)
:) :) :)
damienvfx
Jul 28, 03:01 AM
I am waiting until the new MBP is released with merom. I don't care if it's now or in January.
My question is: What's the fastest way to get the new MBP into my hands? Is ordering it online after it's announcement the fastest, or going to an apple store?
I live within 3 stores. So I can play the call and place one on hold bit.
My question is: What's the fastest way to get the new MBP into my hands? Is ordering it online after it's announcement the fastest, or going to an apple store?
I live within 3 stores. So I can play the call and place one on hold bit.
bazaarsoft
Mar 31, 02:30 PM
At least, that's what the Fandroids wanted us to believe when Android fragmentation started being tossed around as a problem. Where are those guys now that Google is actually acknowledging that it's a problem? :eek:
caspersoong
Apr 13, 04:53 AM
The longer the wait, the less likely for my family to buy it.