aswitcher
Aug 27, 04:40 AM
This is great news. Looking forward to a revamp of half the Apple line over the next month or so.
Liske
Aug 17, 07:00 PM
Have you used cs2s or canon´s raw converters? How do they work?
What is the general feeling of yours how the new machine works in photog business?
I use CS2 for camera raw. Right now I am shooting with a fuji finepix S2 pro, but probably going to get the D200 soon. The Canon stuff is nice too, but I haven't tried the Canon raw converter. I love adobe camera raw - it just works for me. I have yet to try aperature but might try to get my hands on it. Camera Raw runs well on the Mac Pro, but like I said 10% faster on the Quad. It doesn't impact me much, and I get to boot windoze to cross test and develop items on a PC for web stuff :)
So you have 4hdds in total,with 2 of each in raid 0 or what?
Do you have the os on one pair and scratch on the other pair?
Yes I run one striped two disk raid for OSX ONLY. This disk is also the scratch disk. The other striped two disk raid is for my user data and apps. You can find info on the web about how to do this, there are alot of advantages.
This way I have seperate raid for user data & files, and a seperate raid for OSX / scratch. It seperates the OS and apps also so both have their own disks. Seperating the OS from my user data allows me to only back up the user data raid as the OS raid has base OSX on it only and if lost could just be reinstalled. I backup the main user data disk to the osx disk, as well as a slow NAT storage in a seperate building nightly. As far as RAID Once you go raid you get addicted, I could go nuts and get a 4 or 8 drive raid, which at some point I probably will do, but right now the 2 x 2 striped treat me very fine :). But the speed impovements in a raid, especially in a Mac Pro where it is so easy, is worth it. At this point the sweet spot in terms of dollars is probably going with a 300 or 400 x 4, the 500s are still pretty high, but if you need the space then so be it.
What is the general feeling of yours how the new machine works in photog business?
I use CS2 for camera raw. Right now I am shooting with a fuji finepix S2 pro, but probably going to get the D200 soon. The Canon stuff is nice too, but I haven't tried the Canon raw converter. I love adobe camera raw - it just works for me. I have yet to try aperature but might try to get my hands on it. Camera Raw runs well on the Mac Pro, but like I said 10% faster on the Quad. It doesn't impact me much, and I get to boot windoze to cross test and develop items on a PC for web stuff :)
So you have 4hdds in total,with 2 of each in raid 0 or what?
Do you have the os on one pair and scratch on the other pair?
Yes I run one striped two disk raid for OSX ONLY. This disk is also the scratch disk. The other striped two disk raid is for my user data and apps. You can find info on the web about how to do this, there are alot of advantages.
This way I have seperate raid for user data & files, and a seperate raid for OSX / scratch. It seperates the OS and apps also so both have their own disks. Seperating the OS from my user data allows me to only back up the user data raid as the OS raid has base OSX on it only and if lost could just be reinstalled. I backup the main user data disk to the osx disk, as well as a slow NAT storage in a seperate building nightly. As far as RAID Once you go raid you get addicted, I could go nuts and get a 4 or 8 drive raid, which at some point I probably will do, but right now the 2 x 2 striped treat me very fine :). But the speed impovements in a raid, especially in a Mac Pro where it is so easy, is worth it. At this point the sweet spot in terms of dollars is probably going with a 300 or 400 x 4, the 500s are still pretty high, but if you need the space then so be it.
Evangelion
Apr 8, 05:03 AM
[B]Until Apple can get more of its own stores it needs BB more than BB needs it. So I doubt Apple went all hurt or p.o.'d girlfriend on them.
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
wizz0bang
Jul 14, 05:29 PM
Here are my guesses/wishes:
Mac - New Mini tower case (2 HD, 2 CD bays)
Mac $1499
(Conroe) Core 2 Duo 2.4Ghz 4MB cache
1GB DDR2-800
ATI Radeon X1800 256MB
250GB HD
2x front USB, 1x front FW400
4x rear USB, 2x rear FW400, 1x rear FW800
Digital + analog audio I/O
Bluetooth and Airport extreme
Dual gb ethernet
Keyboard and mightymouse
Mac eXtreme $1999
Same as above, but with 2.93GHz Core 2 extreme (maybe overclocked to 3GHz+ so Steve can gloat)
Mac Pro: Similar case to previous G5 towers, all will be quad (dual dual).
Mac Pro $1999
2x Woodcrest 2.0Ghz
1GB DDR667
ATI Radeon X1800 256MB
2x250GB raid
ATI Radeon
Mac Pro $2499
2x Woodcrest 2.66Ghz
Mac Pro $3299
2x Woodcrest 3.0Ghz
More storage and more Ram
Look for same hot video upgrade options.
Come on Steve, I know you can do it!
Mac - New Mini tower case (2 HD, 2 CD bays)
Mac $1499
(Conroe) Core 2 Duo 2.4Ghz 4MB cache
1GB DDR2-800
ATI Radeon X1800 256MB
250GB HD
2x front USB, 1x front FW400
4x rear USB, 2x rear FW400, 1x rear FW800
Digital + analog audio I/O
Bluetooth and Airport extreme
Dual gb ethernet
Keyboard and mightymouse
Mac eXtreme $1999
Same as above, but with 2.93GHz Core 2 extreme (maybe overclocked to 3GHz+ so Steve can gloat)
Mac Pro: Similar case to previous G5 towers, all will be quad (dual dual).
Mac Pro $1999
2x Woodcrest 2.0Ghz
1GB DDR667
ATI Radeon X1800 256MB
2x250GB raid
ATI Radeon
Mac Pro $2499
2x Woodcrest 2.66Ghz
Mac Pro $3299
2x Woodcrest 3.0Ghz
More storage and more Ram
Look for same hot video upgrade options.
Come on Steve, I know you can do it!
Mr. Gates
Jun 8, 11:20 PM
You mean "The Shack"
They are pretty much ONLY a phone store now
They lost the Mojo
Boycott them
They are pretty much ONLY a phone store now
They lost the Mojo
Boycott them
charlituna
Apr 5, 10:34 PM
Problem is, its still Final Cut and will still suck at managing media.
Guess you want us to believe you are one of the folks blessed with an advance look
I'm not trolling, this is an honest question. But isn't a Final Cut pretty much worthless for commercial use without a way to put the results on Blu-Ray?
It's called 3rd party software and an external burner. Us big boys do it that way all the time.
Guess you want us to believe you are one of the folks blessed with an advance look
I'm not trolling, this is an honest question. But isn't a Final Cut pretty much worthless for commercial use without a way to put the results on Blu-Ray?
It's called 3rd party software and an external burner. Us big boys do it that way all the time.
tumblebird
Nov 29, 10:23 AM
Anyone interested in creating an Universal blacklist of albums then?
YES AND YES... oh, wait, I don't listen to any of their artists. But YES anyways. Has anyone bought a domain name yet?
YES AND YES... oh, wait, I don't listen to any of their artists. But YES anyways. Has anyone bought a domain name yet?
milo
Jul 27, 03:39 PM
It's always a little alarming when a post starts "sorry if I missed it but..."
This is a positively thoughtless remark. No one's cheering the MHz myth on, in fact, Intel itself has abandoned the concept. Until the 3Ghz woodies get dropped in a MacPro, the 2.7 GHZ G5 will still be the fastest chip ever put in a Macintosh. I have a dual core Pentium D in a bastard Mac at the house, it runs at 3.8 GHz. I'm pretty sure that even it is slower in a lot of areas than these Core 2's. So no, you're absolutely wrong, the MHz myth is all but dead.
The 2.7 G5 will be the highest clocked chip in a mac for a while, but probably not the fastest. In a number of benchmarks, Yonah has already beaten dual G5's, the conroes and woodrests will likely widen the gap even more.
This is a positively thoughtless remark. No one's cheering the MHz myth on, in fact, Intel itself has abandoned the concept. Until the 3Ghz woodies get dropped in a MacPro, the 2.7 GHZ G5 will still be the fastest chip ever put in a Macintosh. I have a dual core Pentium D in a bastard Mac at the house, it runs at 3.8 GHz. I'm pretty sure that even it is slower in a lot of areas than these Core 2's. So no, you're absolutely wrong, the MHz myth is all but dead.
The 2.7 G5 will be the highest clocked chip in a mac for a while, but probably not the fastest. In a number of benchmarks, Yonah has already beaten dual G5's, the conroes and woodrests will likely widen the gap even more.
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 13, 11:05 AM
and this got negative votes because...??????????
All the people that just coughed up $3k for a quad core MacPro.
All the people that just coughed up $3k for a quad core MacPro.
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 19, 02:25 PM
All that I get from that quote is that they are using older models, but that they will, obviously, be rendered in the new GT5 engine. So, the marketing team can say all they want, but actual screen shots of Standard™ cars do not show much improvement, if any at all, resolution increase notwithstanding.
Based on what, old gameplay footage? Game are often tested with old resources while the new models are being built. God of War used a stick man with a sword until they got Kratos done.
Look at this pic:
http://us.gran-turismo.com/c/binary/images/5294/gamescom2010_029a.jpg
That rx-7 looks tons better than anything GT4 ever had, but its still not as nice as the "premium" cars. I am assuming of course that this is live-rendered, and i believe it is due to the jaggies on the rear of the rx-7, which i can't imagine they would let slide on a pre-rendered shot.
Time will tell, of course, but i'm certain they didnt just import models from GT4. What the hell would they have been doing for the past 5 years?
Based on what, old gameplay footage? Game are often tested with old resources while the new models are being built. God of War used a stick man with a sword until they got Kratos done.
Look at this pic:
http://us.gran-turismo.com/c/binary/images/5294/gamescom2010_029a.jpg
That rx-7 looks tons better than anything GT4 ever had, but its still not as nice as the "premium" cars. I am assuming of course that this is live-rendered, and i believe it is due to the jaggies on the rear of the rx-7, which i can't imagine they would let slide on a pre-rendered shot.
Time will tell, of course, but i'm certain they didnt just import models from GT4. What the hell would they have been doing for the past 5 years?
Rt&Dzine
Apr 27, 03:14 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.
He didn't discover anything, he just bought in to the reactionary right wing propaganda spreading like wildfire on the internet.
He didn't discover anything, he just bought in to the reactionary right wing propaganda spreading like wildfire on the internet.
Azdel
Jun 14, 06:55 PM
I just got off the phone with my local RadioShack. I was told that the PIN would not guarantee you a phone on launch day, but that the chances of getting one are VERY VERY good. I know the manager very well, and trust that whoever told him said the same thing. I'm assuming the calls were done on a regional, if not district level, as opposed to company wide to give people a chance to ask questions, so it seems that most likely personal interpretations came into play, causing the original message, whatever it may have been to get screwed up.
nerveosu
Aug 7, 04:31 PM
The star field background for Spaces was Tacky.
jpw
Apr 25, 02:27 PM
Regardless of how acurate the info is and how far it is from any given cell tower or whatever, can someone just explain why this information is stored on the device as well as the backup in the first place?
I mean what is the purpose of this data?
"Background location - Navigation apps can now continue to guide users who are listening to their iPods, or using other apps. iOS 4 also provides a new and battery-efficient way to monitor location when users move between cell towers. This is a great way for your social networking apps to keep track of users and their friends' locations." right from apple's site, this is part of the answer to your why question.
The file is in the �User Data Partition� on the device. This is a logical filesystem that maintains non-system level privileges and where most of the data is stored. When you perform an iOS Backup through iTunes, it is backing up this partition. And that is the answer to your how question.
I mean what is the purpose of this data?
"Background location - Navigation apps can now continue to guide users who are listening to their iPods, or using other apps. iOS 4 also provides a new and battery-efficient way to monitor location when users move between cell towers. This is a great way for your social networking apps to keep track of users and their friends' locations." right from apple's site, this is part of the answer to your why question.
The file is in the �User Data Partition� on the device. This is a logical filesystem that maintains non-system level privileges and where most of the data is stored. When you perform an iOS Backup through iTunes, it is backing up this partition. And that is the answer to your how question.
shamino
Jul 14, 05:26 PM
Kind of odd/funny how we seem to be going backwards in processor speeds. Instead of 3.6 GHz Pentiums, we are looking at 2.x GHz Intel Cores. It would be interesting to see how well a single Core processor matches up to PowerPC, or a Pentium, or AMD.
It just means that Intel has finally publicly recognized the validity of the MHz Myth.
Raw clock speed is meaningless. You can get better performance at a slower clock speed if you can increase parallelism. This includes features like superscalar architecture (where multiple instructions are executed per clock), deep pipelining, hyperthreading, SIMD instructions, and multi-core chips.
However, I am finding one of my predicitions finally happen...it appears that a ceiling has been currently met on how fast the current line of processors can go, and now we are relying on multiple cores/processors to distribute work, instead of relying on just one fast chip.
That's a part of the equation, but not all of it.
Higher clock speeds are possible, but it's not worth the effort. Pumping up the clock speed creates serious problems in terms of power consumption and heat dissipation. Leaving the clock speed lower, but increasing parallelism will also boost performance, and keeps the power curve down at manageable levels.
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
(FWIW, Intel is looking to Sun as a rival here. Sun's latest chip - the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) - currently ships in an 8-core configuration, with each core capable of running four threads at a time, and only consuming 72W of power. Even at 1.2GHz - the top speed they're currently shipping at - this makes for a very nice server.)
It just means that Intel has finally publicly recognized the validity of the MHz Myth.
Raw clock speed is meaningless. You can get better performance at a slower clock speed if you can increase parallelism. This includes features like superscalar architecture (where multiple instructions are executed per clock), deep pipelining, hyperthreading, SIMD instructions, and multi-core chips.
However, I am finding one of my predicitions finally happen...it appears that a ceiling has been currently met on how fast the current line of processors can go, and now we are relying on multiple cores/processors to distribute work, instead of relying on just one fast chip.
That's a part of the equation, but not all of it.
Higher clock speeds are possible, but it's not worth the effort. Pumping up the clock speed creates serious problems in terms of power consumption and heat dissipation. Leaving the clock speed lower, but increasing parallelism will also boost performance, and keeps the power curve down at manageable levels.
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
(FWIW, Intel is looking to Sun as a rival here. Sun's latest chip - the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) - currently ships in an 8-core configuration, with each core capable of running four threads at a time, and only consuming 72W of power. Even at 1.2GHz - the top speed they're currently shipping at - this makes for a very nice server.)
BeefUK
Aug 27, 05:40 AM
Just looked at the shpping dates for the Core 2 Duo's listed on the dell site. There's an estimated shipping date of 11th September, so maybe the 5th is a more releastic release date for Apple's merom upgrade, whatever form it may come in.
Recently Apple's made new products avaliable to buy immediately they are announced. So looks like a little more waiting.
I'm hoping for a Macbook with Core 2 Duo 2GHz!!
Recently Apple's made new products avaliable to buy immediately they are announced. So looks like a little more waiting.
I'm hoping for a Macbook with Core 2 Duo 2GHz!!
k995
Apr 20, 05:56 PM
No, it wasn't shown before the iPhone, the F700 had a different interface when it was shown.
I am talking about lg prada among others if you bothered to read my post you would see that .
I am talking about lg prada among others if you bothered to read my post you would see that .
gorgeousninja
Mar 26, 07:09 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) Mobile/8G4)
Bullsh|t. If Apple is really done with Lion, then they should only be charging $29 for it (if that), like 10.6. More confusing scrollbars, tiny window controls and a better graphics/OGL support stack...add in the touch-screen readiness and you might have a quick $29 update.
I suppose, following the iOS model, Apple will likely stop charging anything for Mac OS; the OS features will revolve around new hardware features and/or gimmicks.
Posts like yours are the most depressing to read... expressing anger because Apple are entering the final stages of a future product release!...
I mean, is that really something to be getting het up about??
As always if you don't like it then no-one is going to make you buy it...
and in the mean time, try and work through whatever it is that is making you so unhappy inside.
Bullsh|t. If Apple is really done with Lion, then they should only be charging $29 for it (if that), like 10.6. More confusing scrollbars, tiny window controls and a better graphics/OGL support stack...add in the touch-screen readiness and you might have a quick $29 update.
I suppose, following the iOS model, Apple will likely stop charging anything for Mac OS; the OS features will revolve around new hardware features and/or gimmicks.
Posts like yours are the most depressing to read... expressing anger because Apple are entering the final stages of a future product release!...
I mean, is that really something to be getting het up about??
As always if you don't like it then no-one is going to make you buy it...
and in the mean time, try and work through whatever it is that is making you so unhappy inside.
EscobarFilms
Mar 26, 02:46 PM
do you guys think that new macs will launch along side with lion? like imac? that would be awsome :D :apple:
wmmk
Jul 14, 06:07 PM
the question still remains--will the powermacs be able to use standard, off the shelf, pc video cards?
i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.
what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.
think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.
that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.
oh, btw, i did some of my own investigations and found this site:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html
which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.
i'v actually heard that with a normal PC, you can make almost any NVIDIA card compatible with mac, but it takes a bit of geekery and hackery.
i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.
what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.
think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.
that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.
oh, btw, i did some of my own investigations and found this site:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html
which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.
i'v actually heard that with a normal PC, you can make almost any NVIDIA card compatible with mac, but it takes a bit of geekery and hackery.
SkyStudios
Apr 25, 04:41 PM
|
Reacent Post
MovieCutter
Aug 15, 11:52 AM
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...
I did...:D
DIE POWER PC...DIE!!!
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...
I did...:D
DIE POWER PC...DIE!!!
DwightSchrute
Aug 27, 01:03 PM
Then for some reason it was bumped to a new ship date of august 31st, just enough time to drop a new merom processor in it!
That is interesting because I ordered a Macbook on Tuesday (the 22nd) and mine is also scheduled to ship on the 31st. It is suspiciously strange and hopefully it means that we'll get Meroms because I was waiting for the Merom MBP when I decided to just order a Yonah MB.
That is interesting because I ordered a Macbook on Tuesday (the 22nd) and mine is also scheduled to ship on the 31st. It is suspiciously strange and hopefully it means that we'll get Meroms because I was waiting for the Merom MBP when I decided to just order a Yonah MB.
Halebopp
Apr 25, 03:23 PM
good luck with the lawsuit, sounds like a gigantic waste of time, money and resources.....pathetic
0 comments:
Post a Comment