wescravn
Apr 10, 01:49 PM
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.
LOL, if you think final cut is from the 90's then Avid Media Composer is from the 50's. It's horrible GUI. I wouldn't learn it, if they paid me big bucks. Well I take that back, I would, but I would hate it. Avid Looks like a POS, the graphics designers at Avid have always been behind though. Look at Protools.
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.
LOL, if you think final cut is from the 90's then Avid Media Composer is from the 50's. It's horrible GUI. I wouldn't learn it, if they paid me big bucks. Well I take that back, I would, but I would hate it. Avid Looks like a POS, the graphics designers at Avid have always been behind though. Look at Protools.
DakotaGuy
Apr 27, 02:04 PM
Are you serious? I'm not even a huge fan of Obama, but seriously the man was born in Hawaii. Do you honestly think that if he wasn't the FBI or NSA would have not thrown up a flag way before he ever decided to run???
It is time for this silly issue to be done with. If you don't like his policies then fine... argue against those, but attempting to try and keep this birth certificate issue going on and on even after it has been released is not going to get you anywhere.
It was released... what else do you want?
It is time for this silly issue to be done with. If you don't like his policies then fine... argue against those, but attempting to try and keep this birth certificate issue going on and on even after it has been released is not going to get you anywhere.
It was released... what else do you want?
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.
Actarus
Apr 12, 02:45 PM
Just what do all you whiners NEED in a smartphone that you can't wait for a 3 month "delay" in release of a phone? Cracks me up.
And if any of you actually switch, I'll bet 2 months after the release of the iPhone 5 you'll be so jealous of its superiority over your current smartphone that you'll end up coming back to Apple. Apple knows this, which is why they laugh in your face.
Apple iPhones are everywhere. I think I saw a gal in line at the supermarket on food stamps whip out an iPhone.
And over 95% of iPhone owners are "dumb" users. They don't visit sites like this and if they are on iPhone 3G will probably upgrade to iPhone 4 if that is all that is available in June/July. And they will be happy. They will hear a little about iPhone 5 in Sept. but won't really care. That's the pulse of the American people. Geeks on this forum are in the minority.
Stop telling silly things. 3 months? you really know that? It could be much more. The lack of info will make me buy an Android with a 4" screen, and that's all. If you don't like my post don't read it. Really fed up of fanboys. The day you will realize that Apple won't never give you anything in exchange, what will you do?
And if any of you actually switch, I'll bet 2 months after the release of the iPhone 5 you'll be so jealous of its superiority over your current smartphone that you'll end up coming back to Apple. Apple knows this, which is why they laugh in your face.
Apple iPhones are everywhere. I think I saw a gal in line at the supermarket on food stamps whip out an iPhone.
And over 95% of iPhone owners are "dumb" users. They don't visit sites like this and if they are on iPhone 3G will probably upgrade to iPhone 4 if that is all that is available in June/July. And they will be happy. They will hear a little about iPhone 5 in Sept. but won't really care. That's the pulse of the American people. Geeks on this forum are in the minority.
Stop telling silly things. 3 months? you really know that? It could be much more. The lack of info will make me buy an Android with a 4" screen, and that's all. If you don't like my post don't read it. Really fed up of fanboys. The day you will realize that Apple won't never give you anything in exchange, what will you do?
EricNau
Aug 17, 09:51 AM
I think that these tests are poor regardless of the results. Testing is all based on evidence and I see none, just what they say are the results.
When you run a test you normally document the process for the test conditions. You don't just say Photoshop CS2 - MP aware actions, but which ones - why didn't they use the Photoshop test.
"For FCP 5, we rendered a 20 second HD clip we had imported and dropped into a sequence."
Does this mean they imported a 20 second clip into a sequence and had to render the clip before it would play with the rest of the sequence.
They basically used the render tools in the sequence menu. Why measure something like that.
2011 WIZ KHALIFA INTERVIEW
Wiz Khalifa and Amber Rose
amber-rose-and-wiz-khalifa-rap
Wiz Khalifa and Amber Rose –
Wiz Khalifa amp; Amber Rose on
Wiz Khalifa and Amber Rose
Photo Of The Day: Amber Rose
wiz khalifa and amber rose
Amber Rose Wiz Khalifa
Amber Rose Finds Love With
Wiz Khalifa Coachella 2011
Photos: Wiz Khalifa amp; Amber
Wiz Khalifa and current
Amber Rose and Wiz Khalifa new
When you run a test you normally document the process for the test conditions. You don't just say Photoshop CS2 - MP aware actions, but which ones - why didn't they use the Photoshop test.
"For FCP 5, we rendered a 20 second HD clip we had imported and dropped into a sequence."
Does this mean they imported a 20 second clip into a sequence and had to render the clip before it would play with the rest of the sequence.
They basically used the render tools in the sequence menu. Why measure something like that.
Nuck81
Dec 8, 11:41 PM
I'm making the plunge and buying a real wheel.
Probably the DFGT
Probably the DFGT
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.
pale9
Nov 28, 08:10 PM
lets face it. at this point MS can't get anything right, except, maybe the xbox. vista is a joke, the tablet pc a failure, zune a real loser, on and on and on...
but now some of their insane actions will cause harm to others, like simply handing money to universal for every zune sold (which will turn out to be close to nothing anyway), as all labels will now expect to be paid off in this manner. i hope jobs will tell them to shove it if it gets to this point.
but now some of their insane actions will cause harm to others, like simply handing money to universal for every zune sold (which will turn out to be close to nothing anyway), as all labels will now expect to be paid off in this manner. i hope jobs will tell them to shove it if it gets to this point.
cmaier
Mar 31, 05:20 PM
It is crazy for people to pretend like Google makes Android to be benevolent and help the world. They have financial motives, and they have to protect their interests.
Agreed. But then Google should stop spouting off about how they have altruistic motives rooted in openness and puppies.
Agreed. But then Google should stop spouting off about how they have altruistic motives rooted in openness and puppies.
Jpoon
Jun 8, 08:30 PM
I would rather just order it online if I didn't want to drive to an Apple Store.
Seriously, RadioShack needs to die.
Seriously, RadioShack needs to die.
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 05:07 PM
Let's hope the "opposite of Hyperthreading" will come along (Leopard feature???).. So, instead of a "emulating" a Dual Core / CPU config (like on later Pentium 4's), emulate a Single CPU on multiple cores. :cool:
Then, you get 8 * 3 GHz = 1 * 24 GHz...!!!
I think Reverse Hyperthreading will have to be processor-bound, like Hyperthreading. Intel has its mitosis project, so let's hope that works out well!
Then, you get 8 * 3 GHz = 1 * 24 GHz...!!!
I think Reverse Hyperthreading will have to be processor-bound, like Hyperthreading. Intel has its mitosis project, so let's hope that works out well!
gnasher729
Mar 22, 01:38 PM
You are the funniest poster on here. Thanks for the entertainment. (Not sure if it's your intent, but thanks anyway.)
Here's what he doesn't realise: Every product has both a price, and a value. In case of the iPhone, Apple has left a lot of space for others to undercut it in price. And many people will go for something that is cheaper, even when it doesn't have quite the value. But as we can see now, Apple hasn't left any margin with the iPad for competitors to undercut it in price. If the iPad was starting at around $1000 as had been suggested originally, then Samsung would be able to sell lots and lots of tablets for $499. But the iPad starts at $499. Samsung could sell lots and lots of tablets for $249 or $299, but they can't build them for the price. The reason why none of these tablets are cheaper than the iPad is because they just can't build them cheaper.
For the same price, people are going to buy the original and not a cheap copy. So they will buy and continue buying the iPad. And the iPad is the one that you know will be around next year, unlike others.
Here's what he doesn't realise: Every product has both a price, and a value. In case of the iPhone, Apple has left a lot of space for others to undercut it in price. And many people will go for something that is cheaper, even when it doesn't have quite the value. But as we can see now, Apple hasn't left any margin with the iPad for competitors to undercut it in price. If the iPad was starting at around $1000 as had been suggested originally, then Samsung would be able to sell lots and lots of tablets for $499. But the iPad starts at $499. Samsung could sell lots and lots of tablets for $249 or $299, but they can't build them for the price. The reason why none of these tablets are cheaper than the iPad is because they just can't build them cheaper.
For the same price, people are going to buy the original and not a cheap copy. So they will buy and continue buying the iPad. And the iPad is the one that you know will be around next year, unlike others.
ergle2
Sep 21, 03:17 PM
I had the pleasure of meeting Jef Raskin at his home in Pacifica a year before he passed away. He loved to play musical instruments and performed a short recital on his piano. Later that evening, after showing his Apple I in a wooden box, he encouraged me to read his book The Humane Interface and let him know what I thought about it. Sadly, I wasn't able to do that in time. But the conversation we had made it clear that he was not a fan of Steve Jobs. They both had strong opinions on various aspects of UI design. Even though I rather like OS X, Raskin politely argued against the inefficiencies of that design.
It was some time ago and I don't remember all the details from that night, but Raskin, I think, was more scientific in his approach. He preferred to study user response rates, time-to-decision, amount of eye movement, amount of pointer movement, number of mouse clicks, and various other factors that might contribute to 'dead' or wasted time.
It doesn't surprise me he was no fan of Jobs, especially given the history of the original Mac. From people I know who've worked with Jobs, he's not always easy to get along with.
From what I've read, the Mac was fundamentally quite different from Raskin's original vision after Jobs took over the project, though some of his ideas were obviously incorporated into it. (I believe Raskin wanted to go with the cheaper but obviously slower 6809).
His book's been one I've meant to track down for some time now. You know how it is, so many things to do/see...
The Archy interface modelled on his concepts is quite interesting, too.
I was sorry when we lost Jef, I feel he was one of those people striving to make the world a better place.
What did you think of The Humane Design?
It was some time ago and I don't remember all the details from that night, but Raskin, I think, was more scientific in his approach. He preferred to study user response rates, time-to-decision, amount of eye movement, amount of pointer movement, number of mouse clicks, and various other factors that might contribute to 'dead' or wasted time.
It doesn't surprise me he was no fan of Jobs, especially given the history of the original Mac. From people I know who've worked with Jobs, he's not always easy to get along with.
From what I've read, the Mac was fundamentally quite different from Raskin's original vision after Jobs took over the project, though some of his ideas were obviously incorporated into it. (I believe Raskin wanted to go with the cheaper but obviously slower 6809).
His book's been one I've meant to track down for some time now. You know how it is, so many things to do/see...
The Archy interface modelled on his concepts is quite interesting, too.
I was sorry when we lost Jef, I feel he was one of those people striving to make the world a better place.
What did you think of The Humane Design?
HyperZboy
Apr 8, 01:22 AM
I also don't think brick and mortar stores are dying, just certain types that are easy to purchase same product online like movies, toys, known products that don't need to be checked out.
The average person buying a computer is still not that computer bright like the average Macrumors member.
And there will always be people looking to check out and play with new technology in person.
When Amazon can pull that rabbit out of a hat then I'll admit brick & mortar is done. So far brick and mortar is only done for content sales which can be checked out online and various new ways.
I don't think anybody's going to be buying a lawn tractor or big screen TV on Amazon anytime soon.
Hell, even my success rate buying computers on Ebay has always been sketchy even. About 30% of the time, the items showed up damaged in shipping due to poor packaging. That's why I believe most general consumers will always go brick and mortar for more expensive things that could easily be damaged in shipping.
The average person buying a computer is still not that computer bright like the average Macrumors member.
And there will always be people looking to check out and play with new technology in person.
When Amazon can pull that rabbit out of a hat then I'll admit brick & mortar is done. So far brick and mortar is only done for content sales which can be checked out online and various new ways.
I don't think anybody's going to be buying a lawn tractor or big screen TV on Amazon anytime soon.
Hell, even my success rate buying computers on Ebay has always been sketchy even. About 30% of the time, the items showed up damaged in shipping due to poor packaging. That's why I believe most general consumers will always go brick and mortar for more expensive things that could easily be damaged in shipping.
Luph67
Apr 6, 10:59 AM
It's ****ing great option while working at night in bed.
eh, I don't see how it's significant for anything other than aesthetic purposes. If you're working in the dark the display itself is going to provide enough illumination as it is. Just seems like a waste.
eh, I don't see how it's significant for anything other than aesthetic purposes. If you're working in the dark the display itself is going to provide enough illumination as it is. Just seems like a waste.
xsnightclub
Aug 6, 04:34 PM
Mike - I'm sure Apple had their IP counsel do a IP search prior to deciding on any names and filing for registration. That is the first and most basic step and is not going going to escape the experienced folks at whatever large firm Apple is using for IP these days. A TM approval from the USPTO doesn't take long at all, 10 to 18 months. Are you operating under the impression that Apple's registration hasn't already been approved? Did you protest the trademark during the time provided for the filing of protests during the trademark registration process? If you've registered mac-pro in the past, did you follow all the guidelines (e.g. providing notice that you were using the term within 6 months of your approval to the USPTO or request a six month extension with USPTO, etc.) have you renewed the registration? If you did file, had it approved, provided the notices of use to the the USPTO, and protested and lost on Apple's application, a bid for a TRO will be interesting as - assuming that last list of events - there are no rights being infringed. Of course, I'm not an IP att'y and there's a long list of assumptions here, and I'm sure if you did have an issue, a post on the MR forum wouldn't be your means of pursuing it.
I think the only assumption that matters with this matter, is that the poster actually is who he says he is. Which is highly doubtful.
This information is all easily found under corporate registration searches and USPTO filings.
This all seems like a child trying to copy the Tiger Direct fiasco.
Anyway, Bring on the new Mac Pros!
I think the only assumption that matters with this matter, is that the poster actually is who he says he is. Which is highly doubtful.
This information is all easily found under corporate registration searches and USPTO filings.
This all seems like a child trying to copy the Tiger Direct fiasco.
Anyway, Bring on the new Mac Pros!
dave420
Apr 25, 01:39 PM
but I really do not like the fact that the iPhone has a breadcrumbs database of my travels for the last 3 years!
This type of thing should not happen without users' knowledge... and it was. Or else this file would not be news!
I too don't like the idea of a device saving my location. On the other hand when I am using the Maps app for driving directions which sends my current location to Google, I would be naive to think that information isn't being stored somewhere.
This type of thing should not happen without users' knowledge... and it was. Or else this file would not be news!
I too don't like the idea of a device saving my location. On the other hand when I am using the Maps app for driving directions which sends my current location to Google, I would be naive to think that information isn't being stored somewhere.
JakeM.
Aug 7, 06:59 PM
Did anyone else think it was odd that many of the features seemed so poorly presented. We didn't actually get to see anything new in Spotlight. And no new features of the actual Dashboard were even discussed.
It just doesn't seem that Leopard is as far along as Tiger was when previewed even though Leopard is suppose to ship in the spring just as Tiger did.
It just doesn't seem that Leopard is as far along as Tiger was when previewed even though Leopard is suppose to ship in the spring just as Tiger did.
e�Studios
Dec 9, 05:12 PM
I love racing my VW Bus. I also love racing the Vauxhall Tigra, which has about 96hp iirc. If all you want to do it buy an F1 and drive as quickly as possible dont even bother looking in GT5's direction. I get bored when i get to the faster races because you get stuck with the same dull cars every game. Woohoo, lets all buy a 458 Italia, F1, or Murcielago... :rolleyes:
I like the early races where i can tune up a Cappucino and get at most 200hp out of it.
GT5 is a game for people who love cars. Not people who only love fast cars. People who love all cars.
I'm sure you'd be happy if everyone started with a Zonda in their garage, but for people who like to drive something fresh and fun the exhaustive list in GT5 is perfect.
+1, as a car enthusiast I love GT and how its laid out. If all I wanted were the fastest cars I would play an arcade racer, its the fun in getting a car and tuning it the way you want it tuned and for how you drive it that appeals to me in GT. The car list comes secondary in my opinion, while yes it does matter to a certain degree its not the end all be all to a simulation game.
I am having a great time with GT5, overall its the game I expected and the game I have loved for so many years. The only one gripe I have is they took away the brake mods. You can fine tune the brake balance controller which is great, but it would have been nice to have upgrades in that category.
I like the early races where i can tune up a Cappucino and get at most 200hp out of it.
GT5 is a game for people who love cars. Not people who only love fast cars. People who love all cars.
I'm sure you'd be happy if everyone started with a Zonda in their garage, but for people who like to drive something fresh and fun the exhaustive list in GT5 is perfect.
+1, as a car enthusiast I love GT and how its laid out. If all I wanted were the fastest cars I would play an arcade racer, its the fun in getting a car and tuning it the way you want it tuned and for how you drive it that appeals to me in GT. The car list comes secondary in my opinion, while yes it does matter to a certain degree its not the end all be all to a simulation game.
I am having a great time with GT5, overall its the game I expected and the game I have loved for so many years. The only one gripe I have is they took away the brake mods. You can fine tune the brake balance controller which is great, but it would have been nice to have upgrades in that category.
MacRumors
Apr 6, 10:03 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/intel-launching-next-generation-macbook-air-processors/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/02/11/094654-mba.jpg
Reacent Post
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/02/11/094654-mba.jpg
Eidorian
Jul 14, 09:47 PM
How would you burn two DVDs at once Eldorian? I don't know of any software that lets you do this do you? :confused:
I agree it would be nice. But I can't imagine how.Uh, you can use Finder if you wanted to. Just put in two discs, drag the files on, and hit burn. I'm talking data. I should have tried burning to images last night using Disk Utility. Well, I could have but one at x2 and the other at x16. :D
I agree it would be nice. But I can't imagine how.Uh, you can use Finder if you wanted to. Just put in two discs, drag the files on, and hit burn. I'm talking data. I should have tried burning to images last night using Disk Utility. Well, I could have but one at x2 and the other at x16. :D
robwormald
Mar 22, 02:18 PM
What I'm looking forward to the most is playing with the web browsers on these machines. Our internal business applications run either in a JRE or in a web browser - on iPads we run them as full screen web apps. Works great.
Unfortunately Apple saw fit not to allow full screen web-apps to use the Nitro JS engine, so we're not seeing the same performance bumps there.
I demo'ed a Xoom for a few days - the web app support is frankly atrocious and was basically unusable - unfortunate as we're a Google Apps shop and the integration would have been nice. I don't hold out much hope for the other Honeycomb based tablets.
However, the reviews on the Playbook and WebOS tablets have been pretty stellar about the web browser - so I'm excited to see how webapps work on these (especially WebOS!)
Unfortunately Apple saw fit not to allow full screen web-apps to use the Nitro JS engine, so we're not seeing the same performance bumps there.
I demo'ed a Xoom for a few days - the web app support is frankly atrocious and was basically unusable - unfortunate as we're a Google Apps shop and the integration would have been nice. I don't hold out much hope for the other Honeycomb based tablets.
However, the reviews on the Playbook and WebOS tablets have been pretty stellar about the web browser - so I'm excited to see how webapps work on these (especially WebOS!)
layte
Mar 31, 03:04 PM
From now on, companies hoping to receive early access to Google's most up-to-date software will need approval of their plans.
Emphasis on the important bit for those who didn't bother to actually read the article. If you want to wait a bit, you can get the code and do whatever you want. Well that's my reading of it anyway, but please, don't let get in the way of giving the new enemy number one a good kicking.
Emphasis on the important bit for those who didn't bother to actually read the article. If you want to wait a bit, you can get the code and do whatever you want. Well that's my reading of it anyway, but please, don't let get in the way of giving the new enemy number one a good kicking.
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?
0 comments:
Post a Comment