Liebo11
Aug 7, 07:49 PM
does upgrading to leopard cost money for tiger users?
Multimedia
Aug 22, 08:19 AM
This ComputerWorld Review is far less restrained than the ArsTechnica moderate take:
Hands on: The new Mac Pro is 'one screamer' (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9002545&pageNumber=4)
You could say they are gushing over it. Looks like a home run in the PC world. Gonna get a ton of switchers - even if they only ever run Windows XP on it. Next question will be "Oh you have a Mac Pro. What OS are you running on it?"
Answer: Whatever works for the job. :p
Hands on: The new Mac Pro is 'one screamer' (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9002545&pageNumber=4)
You could say they are gushing over it. Looks like a home run in the PC world. Gonna get a ton of switchers - even if they only ever run Windows XP on it. Next question will be "Oh you have a Mac Pro. What OS are you running on it?"
Answer: Whatever works for the job. :p
asdf542
Apr 10, 10:39 PM
This is kind of ironic. My brother works in the video editing field and I was just talking about this only 5 minutes ago. He was lucky enough to "NAB" a ticket (pun fully intended) literally seconds before they sold out, and he'll be there for the presentation. He was telling me about this radical new overhaul for FCP, and I thought it was kind of weird that I hadn't seen any mention of it seeing as how I check Apple rumor blogs almost daily, so I logged onto macrumors and sure enough, it was the first story listed.
I guess there's a lot of drama among the industry about Apple's refusal to release any kind of road map for FCP, not unlike their other products, and apparently a lot of people are starting to jump ship to Adobe's offerings. Everyone is pretty worried about this new overhaul because the guy who botched iMovie is the guy now in charge of FCP. I'm not into video editing, and I've never never used FCP or any product like it, but after hearing about all the drama and excitement surrounding this new overhaul I'm pretty stoked to see what happens.
My brother is a diehard Apple guy, but he, along with a lot of other people apparently, are basically giving Apple this final shot to fix a lot of FCP's limitations, or they're going to fully move over to Adobe's offering. (I can't remember the name of heir FCP equivalent, and I'm too lazy to look it up) Tuesday can't come soon enough!The guy who 'botched' iMovie is the same person that created Final Cut and continues to work on Final Cut. Randy Ubillos has been the head of Apple's video editing suites/applications for as long as I can remember.
I guess there's a lot of drama among the industry about Apple's refusal to release any kind of road map for FCP, not unlike their other products, and apparently a lot of people are starting to jump ship to Adobe's offerings. Everyone is pretty worried about this new overhaul because the guy who botched iMovie is the guy now in charge of FCP. I'm not into video editing, and I've never never used FCP or any product like it, but after hearing about all the drama and excitement surrounding this new overhaul I'm pretty stoked to see what happens.
My brother is a diehard Apple guy, but he, along with a lot of other people apparently, are basically giving Apple this final shot to fix a lot of FCP's limitations, or they're going to fully move over to Adobe's offering. (I can't remember the name of heir FCP equivalent, and I'm too lazy to look it up) Tuesday can't come soon enough!The guy who 'botched' iMovie is the same person that created Final Cut and continues to work on Final Cut. Randy Ubillos has been the head of Apple's video editing suites/applications for as long as I can remember.
aaronsullivan
Apr 11, 11:43 AM
To me this means 4G and Verizon/AT&T hardware convergence. Both, good news.
My biggest concern is the next iOS version. Will it be delayed to coincide with the hardware? With little info, I'd guess/hope no. If it's impressive enough it can fight competition using software enhanced iPhone 4 for awhile. Without the big iOS update seems a long stretch to 2012.
Either way, I'll personally be sticking with my iPhone 4 'til late June 2012 anyway for contract reasons.
How about this for the iPhone 5
5 4 3 2 1
iPhone 5, 4G (4 cameras), 3D, 2 carriers, 1 easy choice.
Yeah, that's why I'm not in marketing. :o/
My biggest concern is the next iOS version. Will it be delayed to coincide with the hardware? With little info, I'd guess/hope no. If it's impressive enough it can fight competition using software enhanced iPhone 4 for awhile. Without the big iOS update seems a long stretch to 2012.
Either way, I'll personally be sticking with my iPhone 4 'til late June 2012 anyway for contract reasons.
How about this for the iPhone 5
5 4 3 2 1
iPhone 5, 4G (4 cameras), 3D, 2 carriers, 1 easy choice.
Yeah, that's why I'm not in marketing. :o/
geerlingguy
Aug 16, 11:29 PM
That's great that Adobe apps runs well under Rosetta in the new Mac Pro.
It makes very tempting to buy one.
My only concern comes to any Rev.A of any hardware.
I'll wait and buy the next version of Mac Pro. I think then, even under Rosetta Adobe apps will fly in comparison to the Quad G5. Can't wait for the universal apps though.
Always a judicious choice. I know that my Dad had about 6 months of little gripes with his DP G5 (1st generation) because of fan and 'buzzing' problems. He was kind of a 'beta tester' of the new hardware until a firmware update fixed his main problems.
Plus, if the 1st generation turns out to be reliable, you could get a used 1st gen. machine for a nice deal once the 2nd gen. machines are released!
It makes very tempting to buy one.
My only concern comes to any Rev.A of any hardware.
I'll wait and buy the next version of Mac Pro. I think then, even under Rosetta Adobe apps will fly in comparison to the Quad G5. Can't wait for the universal apps though.
Always a judicious choice. I know that my Dad had about 6 months of little gripes with his DP G5 (1st generation) because of fan and 'buzzing' problems. He was kind of a 'beta tester' of the new hardware until a firmware update fixed his main problems.
Plus, if the 1st generation turns out to be reliable, you could get a used 1st gen. machine for a nice deal once the 2nd gen. machines are released!
nvbrit
Apr 25, 02:01 PM
What I don't understand is even if Apple is tracking us, why did Steve Jobs simply lie about the claims, thats whats fishy about all this..
he didn't lie, Apple isn't tracking people, because the information doesn't get sent to Apple so his response was correct and truthful.
he didn't lie, Apple isn't tracking people, because the information doesn't get sent to Apple so his response was correct and truthful.
ABernardoJr
Apr 8, 12:39 AM
When you are as HUGE as best buy, and you are selling a product as huge as the iPad, it makes sense to create a demand. People do this all the time. You can't get it now, so the second it becomes available to you, you buy it in fear that you might have to wait another month. This happens all the time with a lot of products.
How does that create demand? Instead of actually getting the sale, you deny a sale and hope it "creates demand" so that they'll come back and buy it in fear? Especially considering that they could have just purchased it in the first place and avoided the whole issue. Actually selling out the product and then having no more available in stock would create demand AND generate revenue. Doing what they did would generate SOME revenue and likely cause customers to look elsewhere for iPads.
Edit: This isn't to say that I don't recognize the concept of reaching quotas for the day and saving products for the next day's quota. That's a different argument. What I'm referring to is that this is likely not about demand but about selfishly wanting to meet quotas and turning away customers in the process. Not creating demand. It's immoral, but business/retail and morality don't always work so well together.
How does that create demand? Instead of actually getting the sale, you deny a sale and hope it "creates demand" so that they'll come back and buy it in fear? Especially considering that they could have just purchased it in the first place and avoided the whole issue. Actually selling out the product and then having no more available in stock would create demand AND generate revenue. Doing what they did would generate SOME revenue and likely cause customers to look elsewhere for iPads.
Edit: This isn't to say that I don't recognize the concept of reaching quotas for the day and saving products for the next day's quota. That's a different argument. What I'm referring to is that this is likely not about demand but about selfishly wanting to meet quotas and turning away customers in the process. Not creating demand. It's immoral, but business/retail and morality don't always work so well together.
xxBURT0Nxx
Apr 7, 09:54 AM
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
I know about the whole nvidia/intel lawsuit, but to say that intel forced apple to use the IGP is not correct imo. Yes they may have said if you want to use integrated graphics, they must be our integrated graphics on sandy bridge, but obviously apple could still have chosen to use discrete graphics as they did in some of the macbook pros, however seeing them absent on the airs and the 13" mbp shows that apple didn't have enough space to include discrete on top of the new processors. I see what you are saying, but the op said intel made apple use their graphics in a machine that costs this much!?!? not true apple could have easily added amd graphics if they wanted to, however due to cost/design/whatever they use integrated graphics in their smaller laptops!
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
I know about the whole nvidia/intel lawsuit, but to say that intel forced apple to use the IGP is not correct imo. Yes they may have said if you want to use integrated graphics, they must be our integrated graphics on sandy bridge, but obviously apple could still have chosen to use discrete graphics as they did in some of the macbook pros, however seeing them absent on the airs and the 13" mbp shows that apple didn't have enough space to include discrete on top of the new processors. I see what you are saying, but the op said intel made apple use their graphics in a machine that costs this much!?!? not true apple could have easily added amd graphics if they wanted to, however due to cost/design/whatever they use integrated graphics in their smaller laptops!
twoodcc
Jul 27, 10:59 PM
Could Shadowfax or Shawnce or someone else who knows describe a little more about the implications of the upgrade from Yonah to Merom? I'm trying to decide whether to get a Macbook or wait, I'm not that worried about the minor speed boost, but I am more concerned about longer term compatibility (say with mac OS or Windows). If there's going to be a point in a couple of years where the difference between Yonah and Merom is the difference between running the latest version of the OS or not, then I might wait. But if it's only speed and heat, I'll probably go for the Yonah (after WWDC) and live with not having the speed and lower heat that the upgrade brings.
i want to know the exact same thing
i want to know the exact same thing
KnightWRX
Apr 7, 09:36 AM
You make it seem like intel told apple they can't use the sb chips unless they use the IGP, which is obviously false.
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
Doctor Q
Jul 14, 04:02 PM
top heavy is just idiotic.Case designers aren't perfect, but they aren't idiots either. Some PCs have power supplies on top, despite the top heaviness and the extra path for the power cable. What's the reason? There must be some tradeoff involved or they'd never build them that way.
iJawn108
Jul 20, 04:55 PM
New MacPro rev2.
8 cores = 24Ghz
(with Free fire extinguisher and ear plugs) :p
I really laughed out loud at that. :p
8 cores = 24Ghz
(with Free fire extinguisher and ear plugs) :p
I really laughed out loud at that. :p
bretm
Apr 11, 09:51 AM
Then that just begs the question, "why haven't these people left already?" FCP has been fairly stagnant for years. There are plenty of other alternatives, so doesn't that kinda make them fanboyish too for sticking it out when up to this point Apple has given zero hints about when or how it will take FCP to the next level?
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
I'm an independent corporate video editor. Work out of the house. I've been doing NLE since 1993. I started with VideoCube, then Media 100, then Avid, and then FCP in 2001. Avid had to get really behind (and threaten to leave the mac platform) before post houses made the switch. They really screwed that up at NAB that year. They had been languishing on the mac apps and releasing certain products- Symphony, DS, etc. on Windows only for a few years and at NAB one sales guy said to someone that they would essentially be phasing out the mac platform. They denied it later, but it was probably their plan. Then FCP came out and for the corporate folks that didn't need to spend 70,000 on an Avid system, it was wonderful. In the years that followed it closed the gap immensely and Avid fought back with cheaper products and options. It became a either or situation, with FCP being the slightly cheaper option. But with the new tech in the last 2 years, Apple has to leap frog again.
But still, it's so much more than just the app. Which is why Adobe (which has all the features everyone wants in FCP) is having such a hard time getting anyone but hacks to use it. There is an installed user base and an entire generation of people trained on FCP & Avid. And it was just the above fluke that gave FCP an in. It's one thing for an individual like me to switch, but for a company that uses contractors and other companies and rely on compatibility and workflows and such, it's a nightmare. I work with independent producers, and their clients are usually large companies. All 3 of us are using FCP. If I switch, I make life hard on the producer who is cutting together rough ideas on her laptop. When we deliver product, we deliver a product and the FCP project and files so that the big company, who has editing facilites of their own, can make changes without our help in an emergency. It's part of why they feel comfortable going out of house.
It's the smaller turnkey shops that do it all in house that can afford to keep totally cutting edge and buy every upgrade. But truth is, most good editing should rely on cuts and dissolves. You need anything fancier audio or graphic wise, you should be hiring an audio professional or a graphics professional.
I have the Adobe Master collection myself because I dabble in AE, PS, Flash and Dreamweaver. But the web authoring has just gone crazy. I can't keep up with all that. And AE is starting to get that way too. For me, I would just like FCP to upgrade and/or reinvent itself so I can integrate new tech simpler. Better authoring for Blu-Ray and DVD. Better web options. Importing file formats without log and transfer BS. And lets tune it up to make it use all the processors and be a ridiculous powerhouse. High end features rivaling Avid, and the touch and elegance of Apple. Plus a few neat tricks like offline editing on iPad or using the iPad as a controller, etc. would be cool and welcome.
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
I'm an independent corporate video editor. Work out of the house. I've been doing NLE since 1993. I started with VideoCube, then Media 100, then Avid, and then FCP in 2001. Avid had to get really behind (and threaten to leave the mac platform) before post houses made the switch. They really screwed that up at NAB that year. They had been languishing on the mac apps and releasing certain products- Symphony, DS, etc. on Windows only for a few years and at NAB one sales guy said to someone that they would essentially be phasing out the mac platform. They denied it later, but it was probably their plan. Then FCP came out and for the corporate folks that didn't need to spend 70,000 on an Avid system, it was wonderful. In the years that followed it closed the gap immensely and Avid fought back with cheaper products and options. It became a either or situation, with FCP being the slightly cheaper option. But with the new tech in the last 2 years, Apple has to leap frog again.
But still, it's so much more than just the app. Which is why Adobe (which has all the features everyone wants in FCP) is having such a hard time getting anyone but hacks to use it. There is an installed user base and an entire generation of people trained on FCP & Avid. And it was just the above fluke that gave FCP an in. It's one thing for an individual like me to switch, but for a company that uses contractors and other companies and rely on compatibility and workflows and such, it's a nightmare. I work with independent producers, and their clients are usually large companies. All 3 of us are using FCP. If I switch, I make life hard on the producer who is cutting together rough ideas on her laptop. When we deliver product, we deliver a product and the FCP project and files so that the big company, who has editing facilites of their own, can make changes without our help in an emergency. It's part of why they feel comfortable going out of house.
It's the smaller turnkey shops that do it all in house that can afford to keep totally cutting edge and buy every upgrade. But truth is, most good editing should rely on cuts and dissolves. You need anything fancier audio or graphic wise, you should be hiring an audio professional or a graphics professional.
I have the Adobe Master collection myself because I dabble in AE, PS, Flash and Dreamweaver. But the web authoring has just gone crazy. I can't keep up with all that. And AE is starting to get that way too. For me, I would just like FCP to upgrade and/or reinvent itself so I can integrate new tech simpler. Better authoring for Blu-Ray and DVD. Better web options. Importing file formats without log and transfer BS. And lets tune it up to make it use all the processors and be a ridiculous powerhouse. High end features rivaling Avid, and the touch and elegance of Apple. Plus a few neat tricks like offline editing on iPad or using the iPad as a controller, etc. would be cool and welcome.
shamino
Jul 20, 09:32 AM
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
Actually, this is well documented.
There are serious electrical and physical problems with jacking up clock speeds much further than they are now. Intel managed to push their chips to 3.4GHz, but the power consumed was tremendous.
When you can't ramp up the clock speed, your next best alternative is to go for as much parallelism as you can - increase the number of instructions you can execute in a single clock.
Chip makers achieve this in a wide variety of ways, including multiple CPU packages on a motherboard, multiple cores per CPU package, multiple threads per core, and multiple functional units per thread.
And yes, a single CPU at 3GHz can easily consume more power than two CPUs (or two cores) at 1.5GHz.
As for your theoretical 24GHz processor, such a thing is simply not possible with today's technology. (Well, there were some university experiments that hit insanely fast speeds, but don't expect commercial products any time soon.) Given the heat/power curves of today's chips, I wouldn't want to think about the cooling requirements of a 24GHz chip if you could somehow manage to build one.
Of course, breakthroughs do happen, and higher clock speeds might become practical in the future. But multi-core tech isn't going away - we'll simply end up with multiple cores at higher clock speeds.
Actually, this is well documented.
There are serious electrical and physical problems with jacking up clock speeds much further than they are now. Intel managed to push their chips to 3.4GHz, but the power consumed was tremendous.
When you can't ramp up the clock speed, your next best alternative is to go for as much parallelism as you can - increase the number of instructions you can execute in a single clock.
Chip makers achieve this in a wide variety of ways, including multiple CPU packages on a motherboard, multiple cores per CPU package, multiple threads per core, and multiple functional units per thread.
And yes, a single CPU at 3GHz can easily consume more power than two CPUs (or two cores) at 1.5GHz.
As for your theoretical 24GHz processor, such a thing is simply not possible with today's technology. (Well, there were some university experiments that hit insanely fast speeds, but don't expect commercial products any time soon.) Given the heat/power curves of today's chips, I wouldn't want to think about the cooling requirements of a 24GHz chip if you could somehow manage to build one.
Of course, breakthroughs do happen, and higher clock speeds might become practical in the future. But multi-core tech isn't going away - we'll simply end up with multiple cores at higher clock speeds.
leekohler
Apr 27, 03:38 PM
Yes, I think Obama is a horrible president. That doesn't mean he was born in Kenya. Enough with the overly dramatic defense mechanisms. Just because you love the guy doesn't mean you get to live in a fairlytale world where he has no flaws, or he can't be questioned or criticized in the least. Why not focus on figuring out why the document is weird so we can all move on!?!? Do you just have fun laying down baseless attacks for no reason instead? It's a simple question - aimed at graphic artists who know what they're talking about (not you) - so why even discuss it other than to disrupt this issue, misdirect the conversation, and accuse me lying?
The drama is just amazing from you. If this were a movie you would be cleaning up on Oscar night. I have criticized Obama many times in this forum and even started a lot of threads criticizing him. He's not my favorite either, but you have nothing but vitriol for the guy.
Why are you focusing on why the document is weird even after it's been explained to you?
perhaps the Design & Graphics forum would have been a better place to post a technical question about layers in PDF documents.
Because that would not have been dramatic enough.
The drama is just amazing from you. If this were a movie you would be cleaning up on Oscar night. I have criticized Obama many times in this forum and even started a lot of threads criticizing him. He's not my favorite either, but you have nothing but vitriol for the guy.
Why are you focusing on why the document is weird even after it's been explained to you?
perhaps the Design & Graphics forum would have been a better place to post a technical question about layers in PDF documents.
Because that would not have been dramatic enough.
PCClone
Apr 25, 02:22 PM
Look out Apple...the chattel are beginning to rise. I hope these power-hungry thugs (Apple) get taken to the cleaners. Sad that Apple now views our location as a resource to be exploited.
Why do you do nothing but troll here? You goo fans are lame.
Why do you do nothing but troll here? You goo fans are lame.
EagerDragon
Nov 29, 05:12 AM
Just tell them that they are getting the same deal they had before, or they can sell their music elsewhere. Apple is not a new comer to the industry like Microsoft.
Standard response from the music industry, "Our customers are thieves, and have iPods full of illigal music". Tell them to Stick it where .......
Standard response from the music industry, "Our customers are thieves, and have iPods full of illigal music". Tell them to Stick it where .......
macduke
Mar 25, 10:44 PM
This seems a little fast for the first GM. Maybe not such a big update after all? Where are all the secrets? The UI could use more of an overhaul IMO. This is probably just for the devs and they will bust out some fancy fancy at WWDC. I hope! Gotta have that one more thing...
I hope Lion lives up to the name and is BEAST.
I hope Lion lives up to the name and is BEAST.
THX1139
Sep 13, 12:42 PM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
Why do people think the computing world always revolves around them? Extra cores WILL be recognized by most 3d applications and will speed up rendering. There are many other applications for multiple core use that don't include web browseing or writing email to your grandma.
peace
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
Why do people think the computing world always revolves around them? Extra cores WILL be recognized by most 3d applications and will speed up rendering. There are many other applications for multiple core use that don't include web browseing or writing email to your grandma.
peace
dejo
Aug 7, 06:51 PM
Would Dashcode be considered part of the "Enhanced Dashboard" choice?
eMagius
Aug 7, 07:36 PM
As others have said, Time Machine is likely either a direct port of Sun's ZFS, or an equivalent implementation in HFS+.
I don't think we can say exactly how things work underneath. Windows 2003 offers differential snapshots without making massive changes to NTFS, for example. It would be neat if Apple did throw its weight behind ZFS, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen with 10.5.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
I don't see how this would work for anything other than other Leopard (maybe Tiger, with a software update) Macs. Spotlight has to have the indexes pre-generated, after all.
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret?
Call me a cynic, but I'd say Apple either hasn't implemented them yet or hasn't thought of them yet.
I don't think we can say exactly how things work underneath. Windows 2003 offers differential snapshots without making massive changes to NTFS, for example. It would be neat if Apple did throw its weight behind ZFS, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen with 10.5.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
I don't see how this would work for anything other than other Leopard (maybe Tiger, with a software update) Macs. Spotlight has to have the indexes pre-generated, after all.
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret?
Call me a cynic, but I'd say Apple either hasn't implemented them yet or hasn't thought of them yet.
portishead
Apr 12, 02:50 AM
People actually use Motion, for actual work?
Motion is a lot like After Effects, if After Effects' mom got drunk, did some crank and tossed herself down a flight of stairs every Friday night during her pregnancy, and then delivered a breech baby with the cord wrapped around its neck.
and then dropped it.
twice.
I was gonna say... you need a hug... then I read your sig. :p
Motion is a lot like After Effects, if After Effects' mom got drunk, did some crank and tossed herself down a flight of stairs every Friday night during her pregnancy, and then delivered a breech baby with the cord wrapped around its neck.
and then dropped it.
twice.
I was gonna say... you need a hug... then I read your sig. :p
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:27 PM
I said that in another thread and was laughed at.
Its the same idea though. Its a grid layout with icons that are shortcuts to Applications. Same idea.
Are you talking about the Newton?
http://www.thocp.net/hardware/pictures/pda/apple_newton_sml.jpg
Its the same idea though. Its a grid layout with icons that are shortcuts to Applications. Same idea.
Are you talking about the Newton?
http://www.thocp.net/hardware/pictures/pda/apple_newton_sml.jpg
Amazing Iceman
Mar 22, 04:46 PM
well said. it's hard to even have a civil conversation here anymore. not sure what the majority of the age group here is now, but the discussions since i've joined here just a couple of years ago seem to be on the decline with immaturity. there are a handful of respectful and open minded people who do back up their thoughts with details and sense, but you'd have to wade through a lot of "fanboy" (i hate that term) jargon to sift the ones worth replying to.
True. The debate gets too personal, and starts loosing credibility after a while.
If this was a live debate, there would have been a shootout already.
Cool off people, and provide solid arguments to sustain your point.
True. The debate gets too personal, and starts loosing credibility after a while.
If this was a live debate, there would have been a shootout already.
Cool off people, and provide solid arguments to sustain your point.
No comments:
Post a Comment