Plymouthbreezer
Jan 12, 12:07 PM
300C img...
Still fantastic. :D And gorgeous!
Sweet ride + great "color." A 300C will be my next car, probably after I graduate college in a year-ish, unless I find one for a great price before / my current car poops out.
My 2001 LHS has over 155,000 miles, and it will be nice to upgrade to a Hemi with lower miles.
Still fantastic. :D And gorgeous!
Sweet ride + great "color." A 300C will be my next car, probably after I graduate college in a year-ish, unless I find one for a great price before / my current car poops out.
My 2001 LHS has over 155,000 miles, and it will be nice to upgrade to a Hemi with lower miles.
tristangage
Nov 26, 05:26 PM
http://www.radphone.info/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/d4125f3e4ezlynrx.jpg.jpg
Wanna know something awesome? (if that game is the same as the one released for xbox/ps3/other consoles,) My brother did the voiceover 'sounds' for Harry Potter in that game :D
.. I say sounds, as there isn't actually any speech, but noises made when jumping, or pushing, or being hit by spells etc were all my brother :)
Wanna know something awesome? (if that game is the same as the one released for xbox/ps3/other consoles,) My brother did the voiceover 'sounds' for Harry Potter in that game :D
.. I say sounds, as there isn't actually any speech, but noises made when jumping, or pushing, or being hit by spells etc were all my brother :)
Tones2
Mar 22, 03:44 PM
The chance that the iPod Classic is updated to 220GB is zero. Apple has no plans to ever update a hard drive based non-touch portable device (they would not waste their time), and they've shown even less interest in increasing the capacity of any device beyond even 64GB flash.
Tony
Tony
ImNoSuperMan
Sep 6, 03:49 PM
It may have been introduced then, but that wasn't the last time it was refreshed . See here (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/05/20060516092750.shtml) which is actually on May 16th.
Well if you consider a minor speed bump as a refresh. In that case MBP was refreshed within 4 months of it`s launch and now it`s been 4 months since that refresh too. So MBP still is due for a refresh even if we go by your theory of refresh timings.
I know the sept 12 event might only concentrate on Movie store and maybe a new iPod. But in case MBP is not redesigned I guess they`ll do a silent upgrade within a couple of weeks.
Well if you consider a minor speed bump as a refresh. In that case MBP was refreshed within 4 months of it`s launch and now it`s been 4 months since that refresh too. So MBP still is due for a refresh even if we go by your theory of refresh timings.
I know the sept 12 event might only concentrate on Movie store and maybe a new iPod. But in case MBP is not redesigned I guess they`ll do a silent upgrade within a couple of weeks.
Hunabku
Apr 13, 01:50 AM
+1 here. Every time I've tried to use iMovie for a "quick" edit it always ends in disasters like this. In my case, I was trying to move some music around and time my edits with the music. It was really infuriating trying to do this in iMovie compared to how fast I could have done it in FCP. I guess we'll have wait till Apple posts more info or we get it in our hands to really tell if it can be run like the current FCP.
Yes i agree we have to get our hands on it to know. Which in a way negates everything you said previously. Just because the UI borrows some of the visuals from imovie does not mean that running the program and editing will be like iMovie.
This is typical of people -apple releases something radically new in a given category and everyone proclaims the sky is falling and the product is a flop. Only after time we discover that there was deep thought given to the users' experience and the end result is booming sales.
Randy has definined the vanguard of video editing software - from writing/architecting Premiere, Final Cut, iMovie and now Final Cut X. He knows how to make software for video pros so please reserve judgment until using it and respect the depth of experience here.
PS i really think that apple is powerfully positioning themselves by selling final cut so cheap. Now you can justify paying more for a Mac box because the software is so much less than the competition. Brilliant if you ask me - make software cheap, sell more macs and cost kick your competition out of the market.
Yes i agree we have to get our hands on it to know. Which in a way negates everything you said previously. Just because the UI borrows some of the visuals from imovie does not mean that running the program and editing will be like iMovie.
This is typical of people -apple releases something radically new in a given category and everyone proclaims the sky is falling and the product is a flop. Only after time we discover that there was deep thought given to the users' experience and the end result is booming sales.
Randy has definined the vanguard of video editing software - from writing/architecting Premiere, Final Cut, iMovie and now Final Cut X. He knows how to make software for video pros so please reserve judgment until using it and respect the depth of experience here.
PS i really think that apple is powerfully positioning themselves by selling final cut so cheap. Now you can justify paying more for a Mac box because the software is so much less than the competition. Brilliant if you ask me - make software cheap, sell more macs and cost kick your competition out of the market.
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 02:38 PM
AMD Fusion is a better CPU because it does true OpenCL in the GPU, not like Intel's alpha OpenCL which runs on the CPU side.
Fusion is DirectX 11 class. Intel is DirectX 10.1 class.
Uhh, no bro. The CPU and GPU are two separate things, and Sandy Bridge smokes Fusion on the CPU side. If you want to argue OpenCL for all of the zero current day applications it currently has then be my guest and do so. Fusion is DX11? Wow, more vaporware that rarely gets added in modern games due to wanting to be backwards compatible, how exciting!
Once again, run Sandy Bridge and a discrete GPU if you are really looking for performance. There's your OpenCL and DX11 support that you need so badly. It will smoke anything AMD has to offer.
Fusion is DirectX 11 class. Intel is DirectX 10.1 class.
Uhh, no bro. The CPU and GPU are two separate things, and Sandy Bridge smokes Fusion on the CPU side. If you want to argue OpenCL for all of the zero current day applications it currently has then be my guest and do so. Fusion is DX11? Wow, more vaporware that rarely gets added in modern games due to wanting to be backwards compatible, how exciting!
Once again, run Sandy Bridge and a discrete GPU if you are really looking for performance. There's your OpenCL and DX11 support that you need so badly. It will smoke anything AMD has to offer.
KnightWRX
Apr 26, 02:25 PM
This debate made me think of this. Now that I've thought about it more this is actually really interesting. Reminds me of Kleenex, or Xerox.
This has nothing to do with the current case.
This has nothing to do with the current case.
wizard
Jun 22, 03:53 PM
Exactly. When did the keyboard and mouse become public enemy number 1? These technologies have been perfected over years and years of real use.
If Apple introduces a touch iMac it's clearly a money grab, to sucker the public into thinking touch is somehow superior when in fact it is vastly inferior on a desktop monitor.
Not in every case but certainly in most cases a Touch screen on the desktop, supporting most productivity apps, is a TERRIBLE idea. I work in a plant full of touch screens supporting various systems and frankly they all suck for general run of the mill interaction or data entry. There is nothing about Apples GUI that can improve this as it is more of a physical ergonomic issue.
However that doesn't mean that touch screen are never useful on the desktop. On the contrary there are apps that can effectively leverage a touch screen. The problem is these are not the apps that most people will be making use of.
In the end I believe you are right about people getting suckered into something they might not ever use. Further I'm more surprised that this rumor is desktop related as a touch screen might actually get used more on a laptop. In the end I just hope this is a bogus rumor.
If Apple introduces a touch iMac it's clearly a money grab, to sucker the public into thinking touch is somehow superior when in fact it is vastly inferior on a desktop monitor.
Not in every case but certainly in most cases a Touch screen on the desktop, supporting most productivity apps, is a TERRIBLE idea. I work in a plant full of touch screens supporting various systems and frankly they all suck for general run of the mill interaction or data entry. There is nothing about Apples GUI that can improve this as it is more of a physical ergonomic issue.
However that doesn't mean that touch screen are never useful on the desktop. On the contrary there are apps that can effectively leverage a touch screen. The problem is these are not the apps that most people will be making use of.
In the end I believe you are right about people getting suckered into something they might not ever use. Further I'm more surprised that this rumor is desktop related as a touch screen might actually get used more on a laptop. In the end I just hope this is a bogus rumor.
AppliedVisual
Oct 24, 01:16 AM
Could anyone tell me what is "Santa Rosa " ?
Uh, sure... Click Here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrino#Santa_Rosa_platform).
Uh, sure... Click Here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrino#Santa_Rosa_platform).
AFPoster
Mar 22, 12:52 PM
So Apple should have the choice what they allow and don't allow?
Yes, it's a company that makes it's own decisions and it's own products. They choose what they will allow and won't allow. If you are a car company you choose to make a mini van or not. Apple chooses what they want, we accept what they give us. If you don't, dont download it or get it, no one is forcing you to have it!
Yes, it's a company that makes it's own decisions and it's own products. They choose what they will allow and won't allow. If you are a car company you choose to make a mini van or not. Apple chooses what they want, we accept what they give us. If you don't, dont download it or get it, no one is forcing you to have it!
quagmire
Mar 1, 01:34 PM
that the US car makers still sells trucks, pickups etc. without diesel options is simply a complete lack of any common sense. diesel engines are practically made to be perfect for pulling and towing in commercial vehicles
for it's south american Amarok pick up VW simply took the 2.0 I4 TDI from the golf/jetta and set up the engine slightly different in regards to the power/torque band and ends up with an engine which was very likely cheaper to develop, cheaper to build had less weight and still achieves 400nm of torque
GM had the 4.5 liter Duramax in development for their half-ton trucks, but the economy and their situation canned that. Ford also was working on a baby Powerstroke and Cummins was working on a baby I-6 for Dodge. But, those as well have been canned.
for it's south american Amarok pick up VW simply took the 2.0 I4 TDI from the golf/jetta and set up the engine slightly different in regards to the power/torque band and ends up with an engine which was very likely cheaper to develop, cheaper to build had less weight and still achieves 400nm of torque
GM had the 4.5 liter Duramax in development for their half-ton trucks, but the economy and their situation canned that. Ford also was working on a baby Powerstroke and Cummins was working on a baby I-6 for Dodge. But, those as well have been canned.
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.
jgould
Feb 23, 05:29 AM
Handbrake comes VERY close to destroying my Macbook ha ha, the CPU goes up close to 90 degrees celsius! Terrifying!
I gave up on running Handbrake on my MacBook of the same vintage, but only because kept loosing RAM and making it difficult to work. I started running Handbrake on the Mid 2007 Mac Mini instead.
Haven't tried on the 2010 MBP that I just got. Might have to do that and see what we get...
I gave up on running Handbrake on my MacBook of the same vintage, but only because kept loosing RAM and making it difficult to work. I started running Handbrake on the Mid 2007 Mac Mini instead.
Haven't tried on the 2010 MBP that I just got. Might have to do that and see what we get...
miniConvert
Aug 7, 05:11 AM
Last time we played we beat you 3-0 in England im pretty sure.
We should have won the bloody world cup.
We dominated against Italy until Grosso dived and got the most dodgy penalty in history, then we would have smashed ukraine in the quarters, then we would have been in the semi's against Germany, then anythign could have happened. Lets just say FIFA didnt want us to win, because its the one sport we 'aren't meant to dominate'. So the ref played it that way.
People should have learned not to count out an Aussie. Our spirit means we have the best in every field from sport to soldiers.
We would kick ur ass
Well, that's certainly a 'spirited' post! O_o
We should have won the bloody world cup.
We dominated against Italy until Grosso dived and got the most dodgy penalty in history, then we would have smashed ukraine in the quarters, then we would have been in the semi's against Germany, then anythign could have happened. Lets just say FIFA didnt want us to win, because its the one sport we 'aren't meant to dominate'. So the ref played it that way.
People should have learned not to count out an Aussie. Our spirit means we have the best in every field from sport to soldiers.
We would kick ur ass
Well, that's certainly a 'spirited' post! O_o
MattyMac
Aug 6, 09:12 PM
It's like Christmas Eve:D
63dot
Jan 6, 10:13 AM
If properly maintained, mileage holds no bounds! BMW's will go to 250k easy.
Any car will go 250K miles if properly maintained, yet some cars would need more proper maintenance.
There is nothing better looking on the inside and out as the new BMWs, and if I could have a company car for 5 years, it would be a BMW. But today's BMW (engine longevity wise) is not the same company in any way as the one who put together the very rugged 2002 model. There may not have been the same attention to looks and style, but what counted was that the engine was made to last forever. You wouldn't believe how many of those rusted out and ripped up 2002s there are out there, but they keep on going. Kids get them from their parents and soon grandkids will have them from their grandparents.
That being said, today's automobile safety standards are far more strict. If I got hit, or crashed, I would want to be in a new BMW with airbags vs. an old BMW 2002. And I am sure the new BMW could simply kill the 2002 on a slalom course. And as far as chick magnets (or what some guys use as an accessory), the new BMWs have all the looks going for it.
The maintenance on indestructible cars like the BMW 2002 series, and cars like my 70s/80s Volvo DL-GL series amounts to making sure the upholstery is not too ripped up and the rust is kept to a minimum (bondo, sanding, etc) but what you have is a car, as ugly as the weather and age can pit the hell out of it, which will go for 40 or 50 years without any major engine work. And to be fair, my mechanic says the new Volvo engines of the last decade are pretty fragile. A three year old Volvo engine appears to have more wear than my '84's engine according to him. Of course, the sheer durability and weight of my old Volvo engine does amount to a heavier car that doesn't handle any better than a school bus, and gets terrible mileage. ;)
And when you look at where American cars used to be in terms of reliability compared to anything post 1970s, it's sad. Take a look at Cuba who got left behind after Fidel Castro. Many of the cars people have that are still running are 1950s American cars, back when America used to build everlasting cars.
Any car will go 250K miles if properly maintained, yet some cars would need more proper maintenance.
There is nothing better looking on the inside and out as the new BMWs, and if I could have a company car for 5 years, it would be a BMW. But today's BMW (engine longevity wise) is not the same company in any way as the one who put together the very rugged 2002 model. There may not have been the same attention to looks and style, but what counted was that the engine was made to last forever. You wouldn't believe how many of those rusted out and ripped up 2002s there are out there, but they keep on going. Kids get them from their parents and soon grandkids will have them from their grandparents.
That being said, today's automobile safety standards are far more strict. If I got hit, or crashed, I would want to be in a new BMW with airbags vs. an old BMW 2002. And I am sure the new BMW could simply kill the 2002 on a slalom course. And as far as chick magnets (or what some guys use as an accessory), the new BMWs have all the looks going for it.
The maintenance on indestructible cars like the BMW 2002 series, and cars like my 70s/80s Volvo DL-GL series amounts to making sure the upholstery is not too ripped up and the rust is kept to a minimum (bondo, sanding, etc) but what you have is a car, as ugly as the weather and age can pit the hell out of it, which will go for 40 or 50 years without any major engine work. And to be fair, my mechanic says the new Volvo engines of the last decade are pretty fragile. A three year old Volvo engine appears to have more wear than my '84's engine according to him. Of course, the sheer durability and weight of my old Volvo engine does amount to a heavier car that doesn't handle any better than a school bus, and gets terrible mileage. ;)
And when you look at where American cars used to be in terms of reliability compared to anything post 1970s, it's sad. Take a look at Cuba who got left behind after Fidel Castro. Many of the cars people have that are still running are 1950s American cars, back when America used to build everlasting cars.
Sbrocket
Jan 11, 04:55 PM
Interesting name, corroborates with the poster that came out earlier.
It also, obviously, fits with what's sure to be a very light product. Get it? Something in the air? Hah, I bet we can all tell who was the brainchild behind this...
It also, obviously, fits with what's sure to be a very light product. Get it? Something in the air? Hah, I bet we can all tell who was the brainchild behind this...
RebootD
Apr 12, 10:01 PM
Well they just announced it's on the App Store and in June. Only $299!
sisyphus
Jul 14, 12:55 AM
Well I hope it doesn't come too soon. Blu-ray is just too expensive right now and it would jack up Mac cost significantly. It's also better to see how the Blu-ray vs HD DVD thing works out as well just to make sure Apple doesn't back a dead horse.
1) It would probably by a BTO option at first.
2) With that kind of attitude, the standard you are backing will fail if you wait to see if it will succeed.
MMmmmmmm 200 gig burnable disk...
1) It would probably by a BTO option at first.
2) With that kind of attitude, the standard you are backing will fail if you wait to see if it will succeed.
MMmmmmmm 200 gig burnable disk...
Bern
Jan 3, 05:16 PM
Don't forget the possibility of a 12" MBP. I'm upgrading to a MBP in May, figured I might as well wait until after the release of Leopard, iLife 07, iWork 07 and so on. If a 12" model is available I'd gladly get it as long as it's not under par with current models like Apple did with the Powerbooks.
Nipz
Jun 23, 06:00 AM
This why iPad 4.0 has been delayed?
Earendil
Nov 27, 03:03 PM
While I agree with your thought process behind you post that Apple is targeting a different audience. That target audience is dwindling very quickly as Apple's prices increase in comparison to the rest of the market.
I'm sorry, why is their target audience dwindling? Are there fewer professional graphics artists out there? Are there fewer people that demand professional color accuracy today then 5 or 10 years ago? I would be interested in a link to some research, because common sense to me says that day by day that market can only be growing.
Now I haven't done the research, but perhaps you can find a similarly specced 20" wide S-IPS LCD so we can see how out of whack Apple's prices are.
I'm sorry, why is their target audience dwindling? Are there fewer professional graphics artists out there? Are there fewer people that demand professional color accuracy today then 5 or 10 years ago? I would be interested in a link to some research, because common sense to me says that day by day that market can only be growing.
Now I haven't done the research, but perhaps you can find a similarly specced 20" wide S-IPS LCD so we can see how out of whack Apple's prices are.
hypmatize
Nov 28, 03:31 AM
http://cdn1.gamepro.com/box/box_165006-hd.jpg sport games should always be 35 bucks not only for 3 days
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/67/Psych_season4_DVD.jpg/200px-Psych_season4_DVD.jpg awesome deal on amazon only 25 bucks brand new! :D
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/67/Psych_season4_DVD.jpg/200px-Psych_season4_DVD.jpg awesome deal on amazon only 25 bucks brand new! :D
skinniezinho
Nov 26, 04:26 PM
Swatch New Gent "black Rebel"
http://www.kstreetwear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Swatch-New-Gent-Watches-03.jpeg
Seagate Momentus XT 500Gb 32Mb Cache 4Gb "SSD"
http://www.yugatech.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/seagate-momentus-xt.jpg
http://www.kstreetwear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Swatch-New-Gent-Watches-03.jpeg
Seagate Momentus XT 500Gb 32Mb Cache 4Gb "SSD"
http://www.yugatech.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/seagate-momentus-xt.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment