Frobozz
Mar 24, 01:50 PM
This is HUGE, ginormous news. If Lion, or even later released of Snow Leopard, has this kind of support, ti would revitalize the Mac gaming scene. Even 3D artists would have more options, especially when you consider how well the high end consumer cards stack up against their FireGL competition.
Now all they need is complete 6900 series support-- yeah, I'm lookin' at you, 6990. ;-)
Now all they need is complete 6900 series support-- yeah, I'm lookin' at you, 6990. ;-)
LethalWolfe
Apr 12, 10:17 PM
You really are worried that Final Cut Pro will not be more complicated than iMovie??!
No, I'm worried that FCP could be dumbed down too much to properly do the job at hand.
Lethal
No, I'm worried that FCP could be dumbed down too much to properly do the job at hand.
Lethal
brianus
Sep 1, 02:59 PM
This basically confirms that Apple will release the "Mac".
Uh, no, it doesn't. If anything it does the exact opposite. Focus on the fact that they're upping the display size to just-below-pro territory and not that they're keeping a laptop processor and you'll see.
Apple has intentionally left this gap in its line.
...yes, for many, many years now. It has intentionally not filled the gap. All signs point to it continuing to intentionally not fill the gap.
It all seems pretty obvious.
...that it's what you want, not what Apple will do.
Apple used to have all-in-ones, consumer towers, pro towers, etc. Remember the PowerMac 6400? Too many products is too confusing for the consumer. If that means that a couple of people can't get the exact configuration they want, so be it.
Exactly. It's not like they can go get a more configurable Mac from another company, either. Plus, remember that Apple had all those overlapping products in the bad old days before you-know-who, Mr. consumer/pro/desktop/notebook grid came back on board.
Uh, no, it doesn't. If anything it does the exact opposite. Focus on the fact that they're upping the display size to just-below-pro territory and not that they're keeping a laptop processor and you'll see.
Apple has intentionally left this gap in its line.
...yes, for many, many years now. It has intentionally not filled the gap. All signs point to it continuing to intentionally not fill the gap.
It all seems pretty obvious.
...that it's what you want, not what Apple will do.
Apple used to have all-in-ones, consumer towers, pro towers, etc. Remember the PowerMac 6400? Too many products is too confusing for the consumer. If that means that a couple of people can't get the exact configuration they want, so be it.
Exactly. It's not like they can go get a more configurable Mac from another company, either. Plus, remember that Apple had all those overlapping products in the bad old days before you-know-who, Mr. consumer/pro/desktop/notebook grid came back on board.
Nameci
Apr 11, 01:41 AM
Easy for a stick shift... I can drive almost anything as long as it has 2 wheels or more...
econgeek
Apr 12, 10:07 PM
Not true. If you buy a Mac-app or iOS app all the updates for that version are free. A new version is a whole new program that must be bought again on both platforms.
What confuses you is that most iOS developers have decided to just keep updating their first version forever and not come out with a whole new version because they've decided that makes more sense on a smart phone than it does on a desktop machine.
But that's a business decision, not a technical one. A developer could do it either way on either platform.
Yes, that SKU will always be free for updates. They can create a separate SKU for a new major release and charge people again. Some did this when the iPad came out.
Apple is moving towards cheaper software, and has been from around 2000.
I think it would be pretty weird if each version of Final Cut was $299 now.
What confuses you is that most iOS developers have decided to just keep updating their first version forever and not come out with a whole new version because they've decided that makes more sense on a smart phone than it does on a desktop machine.
But that's a business decision, not a technical one. A developer could do it either way on either platform.
Yes, that SKU will always be free for updates. They can create a separate SKU for a new major release and charge people again. Some did this when the iPad came out.
Apple is moving towards cheaper software, and has been from around 2000.
I think it would be pretty weird if each version of Final Cut was $299 now.
steve2112
Feb 22, 09:25 PM
The vexing part of that is that the cost is largely artificial - i.e. taxes. Popular pickups like the Ford F-250 have been available in a diesel for years, and because they are trucks they are allowed to use diesel engines that are far more polluting and sooty than they need to be, and are tuned for torque rather than economy - meanwhile Volkswagen has to jump through flaming hoops in order to certify a diesel in its passenger cars, meeting stringent emmissions standards. And yet how many huge displacement V6/V8 diesel trucks are sold in the US each year vs diesel VWs? It's all about arbitrary regulatory nonsense.
It's a small thing, but also in diesel's favor is the increased range you get from a tank of fuel. So while the cost savings isn't much because of the fuel tax, you still get to go farther.
The heavy duty pickups are generally exempt from light-duty emissions and noise standards, so that's how they get away with it. I agree that it is an unfair advantage. I'm not saying that heavy duty trucks should meet the same standards as cars or light duty trucks, but to have them largely exempt and not counted toward the manufacturer's CAFE standards is a bit extreme.
Anyway, here is my point on the diesel vs. hybrids: After a quick glance around the web, I see the Toyota Prius stats at $23,050 and is rated at 51/48 MPG. The 4 door Golf TDI starts at $23,885 and is rated at 42/30 for the auto. Given the differences in mileage and difference in fuel prices, it is really hard for the average buyer to justify buying a diesel. Yes, I have read all over the internet about people getting insane mileage out of the diesels, but most people are just going to look at the ratings and compare that.
It's a small thing, but also in diesel's favor is the increased range you get from a tank of fuel. So while the cost savings isn't much because of the fuel tax, you still get to go farther.
The heavy duty pickups are generally exempt from light-duty emissions and noise standards, so that's how they get away with it. I agree that it is an unfair advantage. I'm not saying that heavy duty trucks should meet the same standards as cars or light duty trucks, but to have them largely exempt and not counted toward the manufacturer's CAFE standards is a bit extreme.
Anyway, here is my point on the diesel vs. hybrids: After a quick glance around the web, I see the Toyota Prius stats at $23,050 and is rated at 51/48 MPG. The 4 door Golf TDI starts at $23,885 and is rated at 42/30 for the auto. Given the differences in mileage and difference in fuel prices, it is really hard for the average buyer to justify buying a diesel. Yes, I have read all over the internet about people getting insane mileage out of the diesels, but most people are just going to look at the ratings and compare that.
xAnthony
Mar 22, 10:04 AM
What has this world come too...
TheBobcat
Nov 28, 02:07 PM
MS did sell the Xbox at a loss. They were still losing money at $299 a pop and had to lower to $199 to keep up with Sony's unexpected price drop the spring after it came out. I seem to remember that the per-unit cost to make an Xbox was somewhere around 420-450 per unit.
However, MS did some things very well with the Xbox that caused it to succeed. First, they bought a lot of game developers to create games for it. They struck gold with Halo, and that alone caused a lot of people to buy it.
The second was the built-in hard drive, which allowed for expanded functionality in games as well as an end to costly memory cards being required.
The third, and biggest, was a true innovation in online play. Xbox Live was the first system to standardize online names, messages, and supported technologies across a whole set of games. MS was the only player that took online seriously, and they capitalized, big time. Nintendo still really doesn't care, and Sony has effectively copied MS's innovations for PS3. MS didn't invent online play, but they brought it to the masses in a way that was easy and fun. Slice it any way you want it, MS really innovated and executed Xbox Live.
Xbox relatively succeeded for those reasons. However, all of those things are virtual non-factors to the Zune. Zune (as of now) has no exclusive content, it has no revolutionary built-in feature, and has no real huge innovation to the way music is listened to, or a better execution thereof. All it really has is a stretched iPod-res screen, and very limited Wifi connectivity between Zunes.
However, MS did some things very well with the Xbox that caused it to succeed. First, they bought a lot of game developers to create games for it. They struck gold with Halo, and that alone caused a lot of people to buy it.
The second was the built-in hard drive, which allowed for expanded functionality in games as well as an end to costly memory cards being required.
The third, and biggest, was a true innovation in online play. Xbox Live was the first system to standardize online names, messages, and supported technologies across a whole set of games. MS was the only player that took online seriously, and they capitalized, big time. Nintendo still really doesn't care, and Sony has effectively copied MS's innovations for PS3. MS didn't invent online play, but they brought it to the masses in a way that was easy and fun. Slice it any way you want it, MS really innovated and executed Xbox Live.
Xbox relatively succeeded for those reasons. However, all of those things are virtual non-factors to the Zune. Zune (as of now) has no exclusive content, it has no revolutionary built-in feature, and has no real huge innovation to the way music is listened to, or a better execution thereof. All it really has is a stretched iPod-res screen, and very limited Wifi connectivity between Zunes.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 05:31 PM
People on this board claim "app store" is generic and so the trademark is invalid. Yet the trademark application process proceeded to the point that Apple was approved to begin using it.
If the people claiming "app store" cannot be trademarked for the same reasons they claim "pet store" cannot be trademarked were to be believed, then this is a cut and dry case. Yet if it were as simple as they claim, apple's application process would not have made it this far.
So take their words with a grain of salt.
In the end, Apple may lose the trademark. But considering the fact that placing the word "the" in front of a seemingly generic name appears to make a difference, perhaps apple should apply for "the app store" now.
As for Amazon, I don't think Apple will win this case. The name of Amazon's store is "Amazon Appstore".
If the people claiming "app store" cannot be trademarked for the same reasons they claim "pet store" cannot be trademarked were to be believed, then this is a cut and dry case. Yet if it were as simple as they claim, apple's application process would not have made it this far.
So take their words with a grain of salt.
In the end, Apple may lose the trademark. But considering the fact that placing the word "the" in front of a seemingly generic name appears to make a difference, perhaps apple should apply for "the app store" now.
As for Amazon, I don't think Apple will win this case. The name of Amazon's store is "Amazon Appstore".
jdbr
Apr 3, 09:58 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Just wish they had stock
Just wish they had stock
mrblack927
Mar 31, 07:06 AM
I haven't noticed too many aesthetic differences (besides iCal of course) but it does feel overall smoother than DP1 to me. You can tell Apple is working hard to get this ready for prime time.
apb3
Aug 16, 11:47 AM
Not hard for Apple to stop this with something like a digital signature allowing your pod to only sync with your library
Oh great! more DRM....I don't think that's the way to go from a PR standpoint as far as Apple is concerned and in terms of what makes iTunes and the iPod sell so well ... and not as easy as you make it seem. Also, I think this may iimpact one of the features I use most, Lib sharing at home.
Agreed but this feature could be used for you to listen to your friends ipod music if they have a song they want you to hear OR in the work place. You should be in range for at least 8 hrs of the day :p
Shared music libs already address this. And again, the cost/benefit analysis of what we need to expend to do this power-wise, price-wise, PR-wise, etc... (in my opinion) just don't cut it.
Oh great! more DRM....I don't think that's the way to go from a PR standpoint as far as Apple is concerned and in terms of what makes iTunes and the iPod sell so well ... and not as easy as you make it seem. Also, I think this may iimpact one of the features I use most, Lib sharing at home.
Agreed but this feature could be used for you to listen to your friends ipod music if they have a song they want you to hear OR in the work place. You should be in range for at least 8 hrs of the day :p
Shared music libs already address this. And again, the cost/benefit analysis of what we need to expend to do this power-wise, price-wise, PR-wise, etc... (in my opinion) just don't cut it.
Hunabku
Apr 13, 01:50 AM
+1 here. Every time I've tried to use iMovie for a "quick" edit it always ends in disasters like this. In my case, I was trying to move some music around and time my edits with the music. It was really infuriating trying to do this in iMovie compared to how fast I could have done it in FCP. I guess we'll have wait till Apple posts more info or we get it in our hands to really tell if it can be run like the current FCP.
Yes i agree we have to get our hands on it to know. Which in a way negates everything you said previously. Just because the UI borrows some of the visuals from imovie does not mean that running the program and editing will be like iMovie.
This is typical of people -apple releases something radically new in a given category and everyone proclaims the sky is falling and the product is a flop. Only after time we discover that there was deep thought given to the users' experience and the end result is booming sales.
Randy has definined the vanguard of video editing software - from writing/architecting Premiere, Final Cut, iMovie and now Final Cut X. He knows how to make software for video pros so please reserve judgment until using it and respect the depth of experience here.
PS i really think that apple is powerfully positioning themselves by selling final cut so cheap. Now you can justify paying more for a Mac box because the software is so much less than the competition. Brilliant if you ask me - make software cheap, sell more macs and cost kick your competition out of the market.
Yes i agree we have to get our hands on it to know. Which in a way negates everything you said previously. Just because the UI borrows some of the visuals from imovie does not mean that running the program and editing will be like iMovie.
This is typical of people -apple releases something radically new in a given category and everyone proclaims the sky is falling and the product is a flop. Only after time we discover that there was deep thought given to the users' experience and the end result is booming sales.
Randy has definined the vanguard of video editing software - from writing/architecting Premiere, Final Cut, iMovie and now Final Cut X. He knows how to make software for video pros so please reserve judgment until using it and respect the depth of experience here.
PS i really think that apple is powerfully positioning themselves by selling final cut so cheap. Now you can justify paying more for a Mac box because the software is so much less than the competition. Brilliant if you ask me - make software cheap, sell more macs and cost kick your competition out of the market.
SMM
Nov 15, 08:47 AM
How can this get negative votes? In fact, how do a lot of perfectly benign threads get negative votes? Are there just members out there who vote negative on everything?
Apple OC
Apr 23, 10:46 AM
Not just wrong but probably illegal in several countries.
My own country belgium for example its illegal to store such data without consent of the person itself.
No iPhones in Belgium?
My own country belgium for example its illegal to store such data without consent of the person itself.
No iPhones in Belgium?
DStaal
Sep 7, 11:34 AM
On the rental vs. purchase argument...
I'm not going to touch which one is 'better' for videos at the moment. I have opinions, but nevermind.
Let's work on the technolocial aspects for a moment, shall we?
Rental requires working DRM. Period. Absolutely. Otherwise there is no way for it to be just rental: you have the file, you can watch it whenever.
Purchase doesn't. You get the file, you can use forever, because you own it.
There is no unbreakable DRM scheme. It doesn't exist today, it probably never will. This is because you, the consumer, are required to be able to decrypt the files sometimes but not others. Which means you have all the info needed to decrypt it. Which means, sooner or later, that someone will figure out how to access that info when they want to, not when the software wants to.
So, Apple requiring a purchase model is just recognizing the limitations of the technology. They have nothing they can 'take back' at the end of a rental period, and it is no cheaper (it's actually more expensive) for them to rent something to you.
There is an apparent temporary advantage to the rental model to the movie studios, since they can charge you multiple times for the same movie. It costs Apple just as much to 'rent' you a movie or sell it to you, so Apple has no advantage, and you get the same file either way.
If you don't want to keep it, just throw it out. Same difference. The rest is pricing games.
I'm not going to touch which one is 'better' for videos at the moment. I have opinions, but nevermind.
Let's work on the technolocial aspects for a moment, shall we?
Rental requires working DRM. Period. Absolutely. Otherwise there is no way for it to be just rental: you have the file, you can watch it whenever.
Purchase doesn't. You get the file, you can use forever, because you own it.
There is no unbreakable DRM scheme. It doesn't exist today, it probably never will. This is because you, the consumer, are required to be able to decrypt the files sometimes but not others. Which means you have all the info needed to decrypt it. Which means, sooner or later, that someone will figure out how to access that info when they want to, not when the software wants to.
So, Apple requiring a purchase model is just recognizing the limitations of the technology. They have nothing they can 'take back' at the end of a rental period, and it is no cheaper (it's actually more expensive) for them to rent something to you.
There is an apparent temporary advantage to the rental model to the movie studios, since they can charge you multiple times for the same movie. It costs Apple just as much to 'rent' you a movie or sell it to you, so Apple has no advantage, and you get the same file either way.
If you don't want to keep it, just throw it out. Same difference. The rest is pricing games.
Multimedia
Nov 15, 09:34 PM
No. The number of core in the system does not imply you need more memory however it does imply you may need more memory bandwidth (depends on what you plan to use the cores for).
Running many applications, especially memory hungry ones, concurrently is what could require additional memory to run efficiently (depends on working set of the applications you plan to run).
With that said ... to get the most memory bandwidth potential in a Mac Pro you need fully populate peer banks with DIMMs. For example in the following graphic you would want to populate slots A1, A2, B1 and B2 before any other slots to get the widest data path to memory.
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/HardwareDrivers/Conceptual/HWTech_RAM/Art/060634001312_05.jpg
For more details on Mac Pro memory review Mac Pro RAM Expansion Details (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/HardwareDrivers/Conceptual/HWTech_RAM/Articles/RAM_implementation.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40003899-DontLinkElementID_3) or the simpler to read Mac Pro Memory Guide (pdf) (http://manuals.info.apple.com/en/MacPro_MemoryDIMM_DIY.pdf)One question about 512MB vs 1 & 2 GB mod bandwidth. If the Mac comes with two 512MB mods installed in Riser A and I buy two 2GB modules to put into Riser B - total 5GB, will the slower bandwidth (or whatever it's called) of the two 512MB mods slowing down the faster 2GB mods be offset by having RAM installed in both risers rather than pulling the 512's and only having two 2GB mods installed in Riser A only - total 4GB? The difference of 1GB of RAM doesn't seem like that part would matter if the 512 mods slow everything down.
Running many applications, especially memory hungry ones, concurrently is what could require additional memory to run efficiently (depends on working set of the applications you plan to run).
With that said ... to get the most memory bandwidth potential in a Mac Pro you need fully populate peer banks with DIMMs. For example in the following graphic you would want to populate slots A1, A2, B1 and B2 before any other slots to get the widest data path to memory.
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/HardwareDrivers/Conceptual/HWTech_RAM/Art/060634001312_05.jpg
For more details on Mac Pro memory review Mac Pro RAM Expansion Details (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/HardwareDrivers/Conceptual/HWTech_RAM/Articles/RAM_implementation.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40003899-DontLinkElementID_3) or the simpler to read Mac Pro Memory Guide (pdf) (http://manuals.info.apple.com/en/MacPro_MemoryDIMM_DIY.pdf)One question about 512MB vs 1 & 2 GB mod bandwidth. If the Mac comes with two 512MB mods installed in Riser A and I buy two 2GB modules to put into Riser B - total 5GB, will the slower bandwidth (or whatever it's called) of the two 512MB mods slowing down the faster 2GB mods be offset by having RAM installed in both risers rather than pulling the 512's and only having two 2GB mods installed in Riser A only - total 4GB? The difference of 1GB of RAM doesn't seem like that part would matter if the 512 mods slow everything down.
LKir
Jun 24, 05:29 AM
We hope, Jobs said - many different iOS products later this year...
lordonuthin
Dec 13, 04:22 PM
congrats to whiterabbit for 4 million points!
Thanks.
I was over at kakaostats and saw there is someone new this week "elena" (http://kakaostats.com/usum.php?u=1604130), up only since tuesday and they already have over 4M points! Must be an institution with a wicked fast cluster? Some serious players out there...
Thanks.
I was over at kakaostats and saw there is someone new this week "elena" (http://kakaostats.com/usum.php?u=1604130), up only since tuesday and they already have over 4M points! Must be an institution with a wicked fast cluster? Some serious players out there...
digitaldean
Feb 26, 10:54 PM
I currently have a 4.7L V8 Dodge Dakota. I'd buy a diesel version of it in a heartbeat. I could still get the power/hauling ability needed but have the mileage to justify having the pickup.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
Had the truck for over 5 years, but it may get too cost prohibitive to keep.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
Had the truck for over 5 years, but it may get too cost prohibitive to keep.
toddybody
Mar 24, 01:15 PM
Even then though...I dont think this means anything special for non-MacPro owners. Everything else gets the mGPU treatment:(
roland.g
Aug 30, 12:42 PM
$100 off from $949 down to $849
IMO, not worth it.
IMO, not worth it.
jav6454
Mar 24, 03:39 PM
Can anyone explain the nVidia hate?
Because they suck, and have put up subpar product offerings. Also, those products need a NUCLEAR REACTOR to power and burn houses quicker than gas does.
Because they suck, and have put up subpar product offerings. Also, those products need a NUCLEAR REACTOR to power and burn houses quicker than gas does.
cube
Mar 24, 03:02 PM
OpenCL /DirectCompute are COMPUTE tasks that are hardly anything currently supports(both of which support hardware before DX11, completely eradicating the point of even bringing that up in the first place). You do not have a better CPU. In theory and vaporware tests you could outperform Sandy Bridge by itself. But Sandy Bridge with a discrete GPU will smoke Llano with a discrete GPU any day of the week.
I'm not talking about using a discrete GPU, but about what you can do with just the CPU (or should I call it "APU"?).
I'm not talking about using a discrete GPU, but about what you can do with just the CPU (or should I call it "APU"?).
