bmx433
Jan 12, 05:04 PM
just because they used Air in their banner doesn't mean its called MacBook Air.. Apple is not stupid.. its all about slim and light..
I'll be the one who'll tell you "I told you so" ;) .. enjoy the show!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4732961&postcount=94
or this..
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4733969&postcount=100
:apple:MacBook Lite:apple:
Feb 2008
that's a good point. i don't remember if they use key words in their teases. what was the tease for the ipod touch? did it have one and if so, was the word "touch" ever mentioned?
I'll be the one who'll tell you "I told you so" ;) .. enjoy the show!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4732961&postcount=94
or this..
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4733969&postcount=100
:apple:MacBook Lite:apple:
Feb 2008
that's a good point. i don't remember if they use key words in their teases. what was the tease for the ipod touch? did it have one and if so, was the word "touch" ever mentioned?
Baseline
Nov 15, 08:41 AM
seriously though, how hard is it to get a program to multi-thread? (if thats the right term; being a complete programming novice, i've no idea)
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
milo
Sep 6, 05:50 PM
Really confused as to why they just didn't skip to Core2.
Supply constraints, and intel is probably selling apple the yonahs cheaper than meroms.
Supply constraints, and intel is probably selling apple the yonahs cheaper than meroms.
iJawn108
Jul 19, 05:31 PM
:) I contributed to these stats I bought a shuffle... now apple hurry up and release leopard so i can give you more sales numbers in Q4.:cool:
aiqw9182
Apr 12, 08:37 PM
Supposedly the guy behind this new version is also the criminal that destroyed iMovie a few years back. God I hope FC8 isn't ANYTHING like iMovie. Old editors are too set in our ways to switch over to a iMovie/Sony Vegas style of editing. I need a preview window, and a Timeline Window. Just like when I edited on tape.
Thanks.
(AlsoPleaseAdd64Bit,dedicatedBackgroundTimeLineRenderingOnUserDefined#ofCores&fasterCodecExports..kkthxbye)
That 'criminal' was the same guy that worked on every iMovie version prior along with every Final Cut version. Read up on Randy Ubillos.
Thanks.
(AlsoPleaseAdd64Bit,dedicatedBackgroundTimeLineRenderingOnUserDefined#ofCores&fasterCodecExports..kkthxbye)
That 'criminal' was the same guy that worked on every iMovie version prior along with every Final Cut version. Read up on Randy Ubillos.
logandzwon
Apr 26, 02:15 PM
At the end of the day, I believe this is going to court.
I think the heart of the case will be hinged on proving if "app store" and/or "appstore" was in common use before apple applied for the TM. It does not matter in the least what "app" is short for, or what it means, or who used it for what. Only "appstore" or "app store."
If they were to concede it was unique, but argue that it is NOW generic, I'd think they'd lose, (because Amazon and Microsoft seem to be ones generalizing it.)
I think the heart of the case will be hinged on proving if "app store" and/or "appstore" was in common use before apple applied for the TM. It does not matter in the least what "app" is short for, or what it means, or who used it for what. Only "appstore" or "app store."
If they were to concede it was unique, but argue that it is NOW generic, I'd think they'd lose, (because Amazon and Microsoft seem to be ones generalizing it.)
AFPoster
Mar 22, 01:17 PM
His profile says he's the Director of IT. Who am I to question that?
It also says "If you could describe an instigator it would be me."
It also says "If you could describe an instigator it would be me."
reel2reel
Apr 12, 09:55 PM
Here's hoping too. :)
Yeah, very interested to see how color correction workflow changes (or stays the same).
Yeah, very interested to see how color correction workflow changes (or stays the same).
twoodcc
Apr 20, 11:15 AM
so i hit 5 million points on jan 27, and i hit 6 million points today. so that last million took me 49 days. not my best so far, but hopefully once i get back to my apartment next month i'll be back in business
so i hit 6 million on 17 mar, and today (20 apr) i hit 7 million! that's about 34 days. much better than my last million, but still not as good as it could be. hopefully i'll get everything worked out and going smoothly
so i hit 6 million on 17 mar, and today (20 apr) i hit 7 million! that's about 34 days. much better than my last million, but still not as good as it could be. hopefully i'll get everything worked out and going smoothly
HahaHaha321
Apr 2, 07:22 PM
Great concept, I love it. But it was poorly executed. Who picked the music for this ad? It's terrible. And the voiceover is on the verge of creepy.
I miss old Apple ads. Their advertising is going downhill while their products keep getting better.
I miss old Apple ads. Their advertising is going downhill while their products keep getting better.
PodHead
Dec 1, 10:22 PM
You know what I would like with iTV?
Live content.
Think about it for a moment. I think everyone hates how expensive cable TV is. I am paying $45 per month just for 50 channels or so, with maybe 10 of those I actually watch (the networks, MSNBC, NESN, FSNE, ESPN, and a few other random ones).
Apple has the TV Shows issue fixed, thanks to $1.99 per show on iTunes and season passes.
However, live content is the big issue. I would love to ditch my cable tv subscription and go soley iTV. But I like to watch sports, especially baseball and football. Also you need TV for news events, especially breaking news. iTV and iTunes does not (yet) allow you to watch live streaming content.
If Apple could somehow strike a deal to cover sports and other live content such as news...that just really opens the door. Major League Baseball already does it with MLB.TV, except it is browser based. Imagine the same thing, but on iTV!?!?
Do that, and I would seriously cancel my cable tv subscription and go a la carte with iTunes. I spend roughly $540 a year on my 50 channels of cable TV, of which I at most watch 10 channels. I would much rather spend say $270 (half of the $540) on the 5 or so shows I watch, plus season passes for my local baseball and football teams, and the news channel of my choice.
That is where iTV could become a real winner.
I'm in the same boat!! Except I live in Japan. I rely solely on iTunes to watch my favorite shows in the U.S. But...I usually have to wait an extra day (not including the day it takes to appear on iTunes) to watch them. By the time the Packers have won (being optimistic) I'm two, sometimes three days behind (or ahead depending how you look at it) the news. I would totally stay up til 3:00 am to watch them live from the states.:p
Live content.
Think about it for a moment. I think everyone hates how expensive cable TV is. I am paying $45 per month just for 50 channels or so, with maybe 10 of those I actually watch (the networks, MSNBC, NESN, FSNE, ESPN, and a few other random ones).
Apple has the TV Shows issue fixed, thanks to $1.99 per show on iTunes and season passes.
However, live content is the big issue. I would love to ditch my cable tv subscription and go soley iTV. But I like to watch sports, especially baseball and football. Also you need TV for news events, especially breaking news. iTV and iTunes does not (yet) allow you to watch live streaming content.
If Apple could somehow strike a deal to cover sports and other live content such as news...that just really opens the door. Major League Baseball already does it with MLB.TV, except it is browser based. Imagine the same thing, but on iTV!?!?
Do that, and I would seriously cancel my cable tv subscription and go a la carte with iTunes. I spend roughly $540 a year on my 50 channels of cable TV, of which I at most watch 10 channels. I would much rather spend say $270 (half of the $540) on the 5 or so shows I watch, plus season passes for my local baseball and football teams, and the news channel of my choice.
That is where iTV could become a real winner.
I'm in the same boat!! Except I live in Japan. I rely solely on iTunes to watch my favorite shows in the U.S. But...I usually have to wait an extra day (not including the day it takes to appear on iTunes) to watch them. By the time the Packers have won (being optimistic) I'm two, sometimes three days behind (or ahead depending how you look at it) the news. I would totally stay up til 3:00 am to watch them live from the states.:p
unlinked
Apr 3, 07:56 AM
I don't have one, however I did like this ad.
Curious if the same marketing company that does the current ip4 commercials does this one; as many have stated opinions of how terrible it is.
This ad has class, the "if you don't have an iPhone", not so much.
I like it a lot more than the "if you don't have an iPhone" ads but it still leaves me a little confused. The only phone/tablet ads I have ever noticed pushing thinness where iPhone ads (maybe I have poor ad retention or they never aired outside of the US). Making things thinner seemed like an Apple fetish that never overly interested me. I'm glad they agree with me a little bit now.
Curious if the same marketing company that does the current ip4 commercials does this one; as many have stated opinions of how terrible it is.
This ad has class, the "if you don't have an iPhone", not so much.
I like it a lot more than the "if you don't have an iPhone" ads but it still leaves me a little confused. The only phone/tablet ads I have ever noticed pushing thinness where iPhone ads (maybe I have poor ad retention or they never aired outside of the US). Making things thinner seemed like an Apple fetish that never overly interested me. I'm glad they agree with me a little bit now.
Indiana Mac
Mar 20, 10:23 PM
First is advertising. Sure Apple's commericals are cute and award winning. But for once can we show some hard hitting ads that are shown more than just occasionally? Apple needs to advertise, and more than just the chic oh, that was nice. What I want to see is ads showing how much easier it is to use a mac than a pc, or how less venerable macs are to virus and hacking, then show the things for goodness sakes!!
Second is quality control.
Considering the recent problems with the ibook's logic board (over a years worth of laptops sold before admitting a problem?), problems with the 15in powerbook (wait almost a year for memory problems and white spots?) problems with the 12in powerbook(warping cases), and the old windtunnels, I'd say that Apple's quality control is slipping. Are they crap, no, but for the premium that we all pay they deserve to be better.
I do not mind a 500 dollar computer dying on me, but a 1700 laptop less than a year old? Yes I most certainly do. Having to pay $300 dollars to cover it? yes i do. Knowing a guy who sent in a 15in Albook three times for the screen? yes I do. A friend who owns a 12in whose case is warping, yes i do.
Price is not as much of an issue. Many of the people who buy 500 dollar computers would not take the time to learn about why a mac is better, they are too dollar concious(the Wal-Mart mentality, if its cheaper its better.)
Do I think Apple is dying, no. But we have an opportunity to regain market share if apple plays hardball.
Second is quality control.
Considering the recent problems with the ibook's logic board (over a years worth of laptops sold before admitting a problem?), problems with the 15in powerbook (wait almost a year for memory problems and white spots?) problems with the 12in powerbook(warping cases), and the old windtunnels, I'd say that Apple's quality control is slipping. Are they crap, no, but for the premium that we all pay they deserve to be better.
I do not mind a 500 dollar computer dying on me, but a 1700 laptop less than a year old? Yes I most certainly do. Having to pay $300 dollars to cover it? yes i do. Knowing a guy who sent in a 15in Albook three times for the screen? yes I do. A friend who owns a 12in whose case is warping, yes i do.
Price is not as much of an issue. Many of the people who buy 500 dollar computers would not take the time to learn about why a mac is better, they are too dollar concious(the Wal-Mart mentality, if its cheaper its better.)
Do I think Apple is dying, no. But we have an opportunity to regain market share if apple plays hardball.
ciTiger
Apr 21, 12:21 PM
Apple has to get used to these kind of things now that it is growing more and more...
Mattlike
Jan 21, 09:33 PM
http://homepage.mac.com/mattlike/Chally.jpg
2009 Challenger R/T
2009 Challenger R/T
MacVault
Aug 7, 06:25 AM
I'm hoping that Leopard is more of an increment than the last couple of OS X releases were. I'd still rather use Tiger than any other OS, but Apple really needs to address its UI inconsistencies and usability issues. For example, I think that printing and font management in OS X are much more complicated than they need to be...
In addition to printing and font management, how bout adding to the list networking access. The way one accesses networks in Windows seems much more straight forward, consistent, clean and intuitive in Windows XP than it does in OS X. That's my oppinion anyway. Maybe that's just me. Anyone else agree???
In addition to printing and font management, how bout adding to the list networking access. The way one accesses networks in Windows seems much more straight forward, consistent, clean and intuitive in Windows XP than it does in OS X. That's my oppinion anyway. Maybe that's just me. Anyone else agree???
dougjnr
Jun 23, 06:10 PM
OK....this is how its going to work. Latest Mac Mini, HDMI, $600, hooked into your big LCD, persistant interent of course.
Now here is the killer part....launch an iPhone/iPad/iPod app which in turn starts iOS on the Mac Mini and BOOM, you are hooked into the whole Apple app store eco system, a whole new world of games....WHICH, I might add, can tap ino the dramatically more powerful hardware of the Mini's CPU and GPU.
So... state of the art bluetooth control, iPhone 4 running custom joypad controller app, latest Mac Mini and its hardware benifits, instant access to the app store, latest games on demand....think about it. All this could be ours within 2 - 3 months. PS3, Nintendo etc look out!
Also
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/...strike-source-for-mac-os-x/
Now here is the killer part....launch an iPhone/iPad/iPod app which in turn starts iOS on the Mac Mini and BOOM, you are hooked into the whole Apple app store eco system, a whole new world of games....WHICH, I might add, can tap ino the dramatically more powerful hardware of the Mini's CPU and GPU.
So... state of the art bluetooth control, iPhone 4 running custom joypad controller app, latest Mac Mini and its hardware benifits, instant access to the app store, latest games on demand....think about it. All this could be ours within 2 - 3 months. PS3, Nintendo etc look out!
Also
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/...strike-source-for-mac-os-x/
Troll
Apr 21, 04:41 PM
Why would Apple release an iMac refresh a couple of months before a new OS debuts? Also, this would be the FASTEST REFRESH IN APPLE HISTORY at 9 months.
You all fell for the hype and made Bri@n T0ng (eat that SEO) and Sea-NET advertising revenue. :rolleyes:
You all fell for the hype and made Bri@n T0ng (eat that SEO) and Sea-NET advertising revenue. :rolleyes:
RebootD
Apr 12, 09:28 PM
"People are gasping at this demo" looks like the early hints weren't lies. Apple is delivering the goods. (from @fcpsupermeet twitter)
popelife
Jan 5, 05:27 AM
Otherwise a 14�� long battery life would be nice.
Battery life is currently restricted a bit by the power requirements of Core 2 Duo. It may have kick-ass performance, but you pay with typically 3-hours battery life - a bit short of the four hours or so I can squeeze out of my iBook.
That should change a bit this year. Apple could produce a notebook based on the new L-series low voltage Meroms e.g. a smaller lighter MacBook with longer battery life (but slower performance - 1.5 or 1.6GHz). Possibility of something like this being shown at MWSF? Pretty remote.
Towards the end of the first 45nm Penryn chips should be out, which will have the performance of Merom, but with lower power consumption. Maybe Apple will wait until then to produce a really small notebook.
There may also be other power savings, from flash-enhanced HDs, lower-power displays, better battery technology, etc.
Problem is, there's always something better coming in nine months time. You could wait forever.
Battery life is currently restricted a bit by the power requirements of Core 2 Duo. It may have kick-ass performance, but you pay with typically 3-hours battery life - a bit short of the four hours or so I can squeeze out of my iBook.
That should change a bit this year. Apple could produce a notebook based on the new L-series low voltage Meroms e.g. a smaller lighter MacBook with longer battery life (but slower performance - 1.5 or 1.6GHz). Possibility of something like this being shown at MWSF? Pretty remote.
Towards the end of the first 45nm Penryn chips should be out, which will have the performance of Merom, but with lower power consumption. Maybe Apple will wait until then to produce a really small notebook.
There may also be other power savings, from flash-enhanced HDs, lower-power displays, better battery technology, etc.
Problem is, there's always something better coming in nine months time. You could wait forever.
Reach9
Mar 22, 03:58 PM
I wish i had that many songs that i listen to :(
Riemann Zeta
Apr 1, 11:49 PM
Thus far, stability-wise, it is not too bad for a beta. A lot of the UI rendering errors from beta 1 have been ironed out. My bet would be that this will be a $29 upgrade, as it doesn't add much but rather refines what 10.6 started.
bryanc
Sep 7, 07:10 AM
but I just don't see how this is going to work.
Either the files will be *enormous* (even with H.264), requiring many hours to download even with high speed connections, and therefore costing a lot in terms of bandwidth, or they'll be crappy resolution. Either way, I don't see how it can compete with a 5 minute trip to your local video place to rent/buy a DVD.
The only way I can see this as a win is if they have some amazing catalogue of old/foreign/indi films that you can't get at your local blockbuster.
Unlike music, which most people listen to many times, most people don't watch the same movie more than two or three times, so there's no point in investing $15, many megabit-hours of bandwidth, and the blank media to burn it after you've finally downloaded it.
99 cents and a 1 minute download is a good deal, and well within the impulse-range for most people, but $15 and several hours of downloading is not.
On the other hand, Steve Jobs is a multi-billionare, and I'm just some guy with an opinion, so maybe he knows what he's doing.
We'll see soon enough.
Cheers
Either the files will be *enormous* (even with H.264), requiring many hours to download even with high speed connections, and therefore costing a lot in terms of bandwidth, or they'll be crappy resolution. Either way, I don't see how it can compete with a 5 minute trip to your local video place to rent/buy a DVD.
The only way I can see this as a win is if they have some amazing catalogue of old/foreign/indi films that you can't get at your local blockbuster.
Unlike music, which most people listen to many times, most people don't watch the same movie more than two or three times, so there's no point in investing $15, many megabit-hours of bandwidth, and the blank media to burn it after you've finally downloaded it.
99 cents and a 1 minute download is a good deal, and well within the impulse-range for most people, but $15 and several hours of downloading is not.
On the other hand, Steve Jobs is a multi-billionare, and I'm just some guy with an opinion, so maybe he knows what he's doing.
We'll see soon enough.
Cheers
KnightWRX
Apr 26, 02:22 PM
At the end of the day, I believe this is going to court.
I think the heart of the case will be hinged on proving if "app store" and/or "appstore" was in common use before apple applied for the TM. It does not matter in the least what "app" is short for, or what it means, or who used it for what. Only "appstore" or "app store."
If they were to concede it was unique, but argue that it is NOW generic, I'd think they'd lose, (because Amazon and Microsoft seem to be ones generalizing it.)
Microsoft already made their opposition known in the USPTO's opposition phase for Apple's trademark application. This will go to court sooner than Amazon/Apple does.
I think the heart of the case will be hinged on proving if "app store" and/or "appstore" was in common use before apple applied for the TM. It does not matter in the least what "app" is short for, or what it means, or who used it for what. Only "appstore" or "app store."
If they were to concede it was unique, but argue that it is NOW generic, I'd think they'd lose, (because Amazon and Microsoft seem to be ones generalizing it.)
Microsoft already made their opposition known in the USPTO's opposition phase for Apple's trademark application. This will go to court sooner than Amazon/Apple does.
No comments:
Post a Comment