Spanky Deluxe
Nov 28, 06:30 PM
They can **** right off, the greedy *******s!! :mad: :mad: :mad:
mactree
Apr 25, 04:40 PM
I'm sure they're re-writting their next big unveiling keynote as we speak, since this was probably part of some amazing new feature we would have all stood up and cheered for :apple:
shawnce
Jul 27, 11:02 AM
"...Core 2 Duo chips need less electricity, drawing just 65 watts compared to the Pentium 4’s 95 watts and Pentium D’s 130 watts"
Good Lord - does anybody know what the G5 is? I'd imagine that the elaborate cooling system in the current G5 towers probably won't be needed it it's running anything like the D's...
1) The watts numbers listed are TDP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_Design_Power). They are not the amount of power the processor consumes ("drawing").
2) PPC 970fx falls in the realm of Conroe in terms of heat generation but of course the Conroe has better performance.
I should note that the PPC 970FX is a single core chip while the PPC 970MP is the dual core one... don't have good numbers for the later but I would guess it would be about 1.75 times (or more) the PPC 970FX in terms of thermal generation and power consumption.
Good Lord - does anybody know what the G5 is? I'd imagine that the elaborate cooling system in the current G5 towers probably won't be needed it it's running anything like the D's...
1) The watts numbers listed are TDP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_Design_Power). They are not the amount of power the processor consumes ("drawing").
2) PPC 970fx falls in the realm of Conroe in terms of heat generation but of course the Conroe has better performance.
I should note that the PPC 970FX is a single core chip while the PPC 970MP is the dual core one... don't have good numbers for the later but I would guess it would be about 1.75 times (or more) the PPC 970FX in terms of thermal generation and power consumption.
MattInOz
Apr 6, 11:30 PM
Although the only thing that will ultimately matter is what Apple releases on Tuesday, if you want to get an inkling as to why FCP development has been at loggerheads since do yourself a favour and read a couple articles from Philip Hodgett's blog on FCP, QTkit, Cocoa, and it's unfortunate collision with OSX's 64 bit platform development.
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/category/technology/apple-pro-apps/
Which has been in development longer FCP overhaul or iPhone?
AV foundation was overkill for iOS from the outset so that would suggest is was always intended for FCP.
His articles have a funny assumption that the OS team has the most secrecy.
Surely the more valuable projects Like FCP have greater access to information and the greater control over when the broader company gets to see their work. Sure they would have been trumped to iPhone team who would seem to have free reign. The CoreOS team would seem like they are the most open their job is to turn the private API's developed by the product teams into to a public developer platform. A lot of their work is even open source.
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/category/technology/apple-pro-apps/
Which has been in development longer FCP overhaul or iPhone?
AV foundation was overkill for iOS from the outset so that would suggest is was always intended for FCP.
His articles have a funny assumption that the OS team has the most secrecy.
Surely the more valuable projects Like FCP have greater access to information and the greater control over when the broader company gets to see their work. Sure they would have been trumped to iPhone team who would seem to have free reign. The CoreOS team would seem like they are the most open their job is to turn the private API's developed by the product teams into to a public developer platform. A lot of their work is even open source.
Rafterman
Apr 27, 08:12 AM
Since I'm neither a criminal nor paranoid, I thought it was kind of cool/interesting too.
Its not about being a criminal or paranoid. This data is for the sole purpose of marketers to sell us crap.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
It reminds me of a line from Futurama:
Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 21st century?"
Fry: Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in dreams, no siree.
Well, Fry could have added our iPads and our phones too. Its disgusting already how much advertising has infiltrated our lives. You can't even read a news story on the internet without an ad being being intrusively shoved in your face.
Its not about being a criminal or paranoid. This data is for the sole purpose of marketers to sell us crap.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
It reminds me of a line from Futurama:
Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 21st century?"
Fry: Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in dreams, no siree.
Well, Fry could have added our iPads and our phones too. Its disgusting already how much advertising has infiltrated our lives. You can't even read a news story on the internet without an ad being being intrusively shoved in your face.
slb
Aug 26, 07:05 PM
I happen to have a Yonah Macbook, and im a little concerned.
I wonder, if merom does make it into the Macbooks did i make a mistake by buying my computer before i had to (as in next friday is the cutoff)
I wonder if Merom is really that good. *it sucks that macbooks dont have PGA slots*
It'll just be a slightly faster chip with 64-bit (which won't get used until Leopard, and which most people will never need anyway).
The time you'll want to upgrade will be next year after Santa Rosa comes out with its faster FSB to really take advantage of the Core 2 chips. Intel calls these upcoming Meroms an "initial version," a stepping stone for current Yonah users. It'll be interesting to see if Apple does anything with the Robson flash.
That said, the current Core Duo Macs are still really fast and will continue to be so next year, running Leopard fine. I've got no regrets. I expect my iMac to last me for at least a few years.
I wonder, if merom does make it into the Macbooks did i make a mistake by buying my computer before i had to (as in next friday is the cutoff)
I wonder if Merom is really that good. *it sucks that macbooks dont have PGA slots*
It'll just be a slightly faster chip with 64-bit (which won't get used until Leopard, and which most people will never need anyway).
The time you'll want to upgrade will be next year after Santa Rosa comes out with its faster FSB to really take advantage of the Core 2 chips. Intel calls these upcoming Meroms an "initial version," a stepping stone for current Yonah users. It'll be interesting to see if Apple does anything with the Robson flash.
That said, the current Core Duo Macs are still really fast and will continue to be so next year, running Leopard fine. I've got no regrets. I expect my iMac to last me for at least a few years.
generik
Sep 19, 01:17 AM
However, I am willing to pay more for Apples reliability, ease of use, and lack of numerous viruses. But, not too much more.
Apple's reliability? Care to elaborate more specifically? Good high quality well designed never dying logic boards that run at 40-ish degrees Celsius for one? :p
Apple's reliability? Care to elaborate more specifically? Good high quality well designed never dying logic boards that run at 40-ish degrees Celsius for one? :p
Metatron
Nov 28, 11:38 PM
Actually, they do. They also got paid on every blank tape sold when cassettes were big. I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth?
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
You my friend, sound like a socialist...
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
You my friend, sound like a socialist...
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 10:05 AM
And I don't see the point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the opposite sex, but since society tells me it's "normal" I live with it nonetheless. It's all a matter of perception and experience. You have yours, I have mine and they're both normal to us.
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
toddybody
Apr 6, 11:06 AM
You obviously don't know how powerful SB actually is compared to C2D
I think he didnt see the mention of their turbo (auto OC) speed of 2.3Ghz.
I think he didnt see the mention of their turbo (auto OC) speed of 2.3Ghz.
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 2, 02:53 PM
I can't open the links due to work internet, but they should have done equal damage to all cars. Besides, every real car dents and scratches pretty easily.
They kind of cant do more detailed damage to standard cars. Premium cars are modeled exactly right their real counterpart. Each body part is completely separate from the rest and can be torn off in a collision. Standard cars are one big mesh that can be dented, but not broken apart. In order to give the same level of damage to a standard car they'd have to update it to a premium model.
I've heard/read chatter that some patches will update some standard cars to premium, but i dont think i've seen anything official yet. Kaz is way too ambitious and had to cut a lot out of the game already. I expect he'll add it in as time goes on, as patches and not paid DLC.
They kind of cant do more detailed damage to standard cars. Premium cars are modeled exactly right their real counterpart. Each body part is completely separate from the rest and can be torn off in a collision. Standard cars are one big mesh that can be dented, but not broken apart. In order to give the same level of damage to a standard car they'd have to update it to a premium model.
I've heard/read chatter that some patches will update some standard cars to premium, but i dont think i've seen anything official yet. Kaz is way too ambitious and had to cut a lot out of the game already. I expect he'll add it in as time goes on, as patches and not paid DLC.
kdarling
Mar 22, 07:38 PM
It runs Android. Pretty sure that's what he meant. So, Google, Android developers, Android marketplace.
Ah, I thought perhaps he knew something I didn't.
True, they don't have to spend a lot of time or money on core OS improvements.
Nor do they have to worry about maintaining an app market (or getting bad publicity because they approved baby-killer or gay-fixer apps). OTOH, they don't directly profit from app sales.
Samsung, HTC and others do have staff for third party developer relations, and all maintain R&D labs for their Android porting and customization.
That doesn't change the accounting. Cost is still the same, and they are pricing theirs very low. The first Tab came out at what, $800, and then dropped immediately on entrance to Costco and other retailers. Last I saw it was $400, I haven't been paying close attention, though.
It came out at $600, which many thought made some sense (http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/20/editorial-why-the-galaxy-tabs-price-makes-sense/) considering it had 3G and GPS. I bought one myself.
I think you're right, now it's as low as $400 on contract. (Heck, it's only $250 right now on T-Mobile (http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/galaxy-tab/SGH-T849ZKATMB).)
Ah, I thought perhaps he knew something I didn't.
True, they don't have to spend a lot of time or money on core OS improvements.
Nor do they have to worry about maintaining an app market (or getting bad publicity because they approved baby-killer or gay-fixer apps). OTOH, they don't directly profit from app sales.
Samsung, HTC and others do have staff for third party developer relations, and all maintain R&D labs for their Android porting and customization.
That doesn't change the accounting. Cost is still the same, and they are pricing theirs very low. The first Tab came out at what, $800, and then dropped immediately on entrance to Costco and other retailers. Last I saw it was $400, I haven't been paying close attention, though.
It came out at $600, which many thought made some sense (http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/20/editorial-why-the-galaxy-tabs-price-makes-sense/) considering it had 3G and GPS. I bought one myself.
I think you're right, now it's as low as $400 on contract. (Heck, it's only $250 right now on T-Mobile (http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/galaxy-tab/SGH-T849ZKATMB).)
weckart
Apr 8, 02:48 AM
Really? C'mon. Most Best Buys don't even have an employee maning the Apple section.
Our local BB has an Apple employee looking after the Apple section. There is no way it could pull any stunt in breach of Apple's agreement with BB without Apple's finding out.
Maybe things are different in the US.
Our local BB has an Apple employee looking after the Apple section. There is no way it could pull any stunt in breach of Apple's agreement with BB without Apple's finding out.
Maybe things are different in the US.
mactoday
Apr 6, 11:02 AM
I might not expect IPS, doesn’t it draw more power than TN LCDs?
I don't think you'll see IPS screens in MacBook Pro's or Air in the future.
Apple is working on the mass market now and mass market don't care about quality of the screens specially on the portables.
If you need colors and better screen then Apple will sale you "****ing glossy amazing" 27" display. :)
I don't think you'll see IPS screens in MacBook Pro's or Air in the future.
Apple is working on the mass market now and mass market don't care about quality of the screens specially on the portables.
If you need colors and better screen then Apple will sale you "****ing glossy amazing" 27" display. :)
cmaier
Apr 20, 01:49 PM
So all that is left is to discuss the actual merit of the trade dress claim, of course, something that will in the end be up to the judge.
We can use pictures all we want, something tells me Samsung is just going to bring in devices into the courtroom. Pictures can be misleading as certain angles/shots might make ressemblances show up that aren't quite there.
Also, it remains to be seen how much the judge will accept generic things like "rounded corner", since I don't think I've ever had a phone without rounded corners and how much in the end, he decides that the devices to ressemble or not each other.
Do you know of someone that looked up the icon trademarks on the USPTO site ? Did Apple even register them (I know you don't have to, unless you want punitive damages) ?
No such thing as punitive damages here. In any event, they did register them. I posted on this earlier. They registered three trade dresses too.
We can use pictures all we want, something tells me Samsung is just going to bring in devices into the courtroom. Pictures can be misleading as certain angles/shots might make ressemblances show up that aren't quite there.
Also, it remains to be seen how much the judge will accept generic things like "rounded corner", since I don't think I've ever had a phone without rounded corners and how much in the end, he decides that the devices to ressemble or not each other.
Do you know of someone that looked up the icon trademarks on the USPTO site ? Did Apple even register them (I know you don't have to, unless you want punitive damages) ?
No such thing as punitive damages here. In any event, they did register them. I posted on this earlier. They registered three trade dresses too.
j26
Nov 29, 06:23 AM
Apple has sold what, 70m (ish) iPods since launch. What's it running at now about 10 a year? That's about $10m in revenue Universal could get a year.
If they walk they are losing a share in over 1bn songs translating to a whatever share they can get (say 10%), which would translate to $65m in revenue (2/3 of 10% of 1bn)**
Universal would be killing the golden goose if they were to try to force Apples hand, and Apple said "feck off then and take yer shite music with ye"
Apple on the other hand only stand to lose maybe $4-5m.
** the assumptions may be way off, but it's illustrative anyway. Feel free to correct the numbers
If they walk they are losing a share in over 1bn songs translating to a whatever share they can get (say 10%), which would translate to $65m in revenue (2/3 of 10% of 1bn)**
Universal would be killing the golden goose if they were to try to force Apples hand, and Apple said "feck off then and take yer shite music with ye"
Apple on the other hand only stand to lose maybe $4-5m.
** the assumptions may be way off, but it's illustrative anyway. Feel free to correct the numbers
Zargot
Jul 20, 01:07 PM
New Apple Mac Pro Dual Quad
Dual Intel Xeon 8400 Quardro processors at 3.4Ghz (2 x 4 core)
2Gb Buffered DDR2 RAM
750 Gb Sata2 Hard drive
Blue Ray Super drive 2x
Regular DVD rom in second bay
ATI X1900 video card 512mb PCI express x16
$3950
More like $13,950
:rolleyes:
Dual Intel Xeon 8400 Quardro processors at 3.4Ghz (2 x 4 core)
2Gb Buffered DDR2 RAM
750 Gb Sata2 Hard drive
Blue Ray Super drive 2x
Regular DVD rom in second bay
ATI X1900 video card 512mb PCI express x16
$3950
More like $13,950
:rolleyes:
shelterpaw
Jul 20, 11:11 AM
I think Logic can only use two cores/processors with a cludge to use the other two on a quad (by pretending it's a remote machine). Someone told me this though so I'm not 100% on that.I'm not sure either and I shouldn't have made the assumption. I know Ableton and Cubase do as I've used both and I'm now an avid Ableton user. I'd imagine Logic will take full advantage sometime soon since it's now one of Apple's pro applications. It certainly makes sense considering how bogged down your system gets once you load enough virtual instruments and effects.
faroZ06
Apr 8, 12:34 AM
I am confused about this. Did Best Buy get iPads but tell customers that they don't have them? So now Apple pulled the iPads from the shelves, but there weren't any on the shelves...
Why would they do that :confused:?
Why would they do that :confused:?
shawnce
Aug 6, 02:45 PM
So to post my top bets for WWDC...
1) A much clearer roadmap for 64 bit support in Mac OS X. I believe they will outline full 64 bit support across all non-10.4 deprecated frameworks (I believe in the initial release of 10.5). Of course it will also fully support 32 bit applications run side by side with 64 bit applications.
2) Resolution Independent UI will be ready for main stream use with display products possible with in the next year or two (would love to be surprised with 150-200 DPI or so display of course).
3) Quartz 2D Extreme will be ready for main stream use along with some good news on the OpenGL front.
4) Full roll out of the unified user interface look and fell across all frameworks and Apple applications (at least most).
5) Improved Quartz API to allow for more advanced window styles and effects.
6) PowerMac replacement with Quad core model... a true workstation class system (likely similar enclosure to what we have now in the PMG5).
... gotta go.
1) A much clearer roadmap for 64 bit support in Mac OS X. I believe they will outline full 64 bit support across all non-10.4 deprecated frameworks (I believe in the initial release of 10.5). Of course it will also fully support 32 bit applications run side by side with 64 bit applications.
2) Resolution Independent UI will be ready for main stream use with display products possible with in the next year or two (would love to be surprised with 150-200 DPI or so display of course).
3) Quartz 2D Extreme will be ready for main stream use along with some good news on the OpenGL front.
4) Full roll out of the unified user interface look and fell across all frameworks and Apple applications (at least most).
5) Improved Quartz API to allow for more advanced window styles and effects.
6) PowerMac replacement with Quad core model... a true workstation class system (likely similar enclosure to what we have now in the PMG5).
... gotta go.
lsvtecjohn3
Apr 19, 02:45 PM
Sorry about the caps but everyone should see this:
EVERYONE: THE PICTURE POSTED HERE IS STRAIGHT FUD. THE F700 WAS NOT ANNOUNCED AT CEBIT 2006! THIS IS A LIE!
Here are the phones they announced: http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_at_cebit_2006-news-177.php
So, is it possible for a mod to get rid of this? It's trolling and FUD at its finest.
this is true Announced February 2007 Released December 2007
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_f700-1849.php
EVERYONE: THE PICTURE POSTED HERE IS STRAIGHT FUD. THE F700 WAS NOT ANNOUNCED AT CEBIT 2006! THIS IS A LIE!
Here are the phones they announced: http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_at_cebit_2006-news-177.php
So, is it possible for a mod to get rid of this? It's trolling and FUD at its finest.
this is true Announced February 2007 Released December 2007
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_f700-1849.php
AdeFowler
Aug 26, 05:47 AM
How depressing :o
It seems to me that there are very few clear policies at Apple Support; it often depends on who you talk to. For example;
my 15" PowerBook had a stuck red pixel. I rang Apple and the guy said "Sorry but that's within acceptable limits (for Apple)". I put the phone down and rang again. The next guy said it was totally unacceptable and insisted on sending me a new machine.
I'm on the verge of getting a friend to buy a MacBook but I'm seriously scared, having preached to her for years about Apple's legendary quality and support.
If you're reading this Steve, spend your next $100m on staff training ;)
It seems to me that there are very few clear policies at Apple Support; it often depends on who you talk to. For example;
my 15" PowerBook had a stuck red pixel. I rang Apple and the guy said "Sorry but that's within acceptable limits (for Apple)". I put the phone down and rang again. The next guy said it was totally unacceptable and insisted on sending me a new machine.
I'm on the verge of getting a friend to buy a MacBook but I'm seriously scared, having preached to her for years about Apple's legendary quality and support.
If you're reading this Steve, spend your next $100m on staff training ;)
afrowq
Apr 6, 07:52 PM
This is Bowl *****!!! Come on man....I see these claims with absolutely NO, ZERO proof to back it up...Links? Pics? Video???? IF anything, MORE people have joined the FCP camp...because more people than EVER are buying Macs! Even though Adobe and Avid are cross platform, the affordability of FCP is a real bonus. Everyone I know that uses FCP and has been using FCP has ZERO interest in flipping. Unless you have an extreme PC...Adobe makes no sense (unless you are using the Quadro nVidia cards in a Mac Pro). Sure, the Merc engine increases performance for a few transitions and filters....but rendering is still necessary in MOST cases! Today's speed of the new Macs....MBP, iMacs, Mac Pros...makes the transition from AVC, XDCam, DVCPro, etc to Pro-Res, is actually a very speedy process. Even Canon stepped up last spring with a plug in to increase transcode speeds almost a 1,000% (used to take a minute or two to transform...now done in 10 seconds or less!!!). Once in Pro Res, editing is an absolute breeze...a cake walk, easy as pie:) Especially if you have a recent generation Mac from the last couple of years.
Now...that said, absolutely, I totally agree improvements can be made. As mentioned many times....media management and better integration between other programs in the suite. However, being a long time FCP user, I'm "used" to the export/share option and don't find it too difficult.
Motion is the program I would like to see take a big step forward. I am also a heavy Adobe user and have the entire CS5 Production bundle...but NOT for Premier...I solely use PhotoShop and After Effects. AE has been my go to animated title compositor. Motion, while decent...is certainly behind the eight ball in comparison to Avid and AE for these tasks.
However...most, if not ALL of the pros I know that have been using FCP continue to do so....and there are more motion pictures, BIG ones...this year, edited on FCP than I can remember in years past. Pulling this BS out of your arse is crap. The iToy phenomenon, in my very humble opinion will actually HELP the Pro Apps...as Apple is making more money than EVER!!! This will afford them the expertise they need to develop the pro apps...more so than they've ever been able to do in the past. Keep in mind...for these iToys to be great, they need content....and again, IMHO...I think Apple knows this, and would be happy if every app, movie, song, etc...that resides in iTunes, Mac Store, App Store, etc....was created WITH their soft/hardware as well. Again, just my opinion....Apple won't shoot themselves and the entire creative community in the foot....just when they've becoming the HIGHEST gaining computer sales platform in the world!!! They're selling more computers (MB, MBP, MBair, MP, iMacs) then EVER...and I attribute that somewhat to the excellent user experience so many folks have had with their "iToys". You gotta figure some of those folks will be "Pro" creative guys. And enticed they will be (my Yoda impersonation) by the hardware and software that Apple offers....so if anything, there is Growth in the Pro sector...hardware and software both. NOT a mass exodus. Again...if you truly have proof that "All those Pros have already left Mac"...I'm all ears. If anything, they've made significant gains. Hence the reason AVID has DECREASED their pricing from the astronomical rates it used to cost...and the proprietary rigs you had to have to run the program.
Sorry for the rant. But what you've stated is absolutely NOT true my friend. Period. And THAT is a fact! If you're deciding whether or not to stick with FCP, cool...fine to make that point. Don't make up BS about other "Pros" and their Post Workflow. Other than the BBC switching to Premier, I can think of NO other real, true professionals that have abandoned FCP because it's lacking. It's still a VERY powerful program. Getting older, several places to shine it up, but it still does the job and does it well.
J
I don't need links, videos, etc. to prove my point. I know it's the case, because I've seen it with my own eyes. And frankly I don't care to impress you with pointless links and statistics. I am a professional, and I work with professionals, and several of them have already switched to Premiere. That, my friend, is a fact, and it's all I need.
Now...that said, absolutely, I totally agree improvements can be made. As mentioned many times....media management and better integration between other programs in the suite. However, being a long time FCP user, I'm "used" to the export/share option and don't find it too difficult.
Motion is the program I would like to see take a big step forward. I am also a heavy Adobe user and have the entire CS5 Production bundle...but NOT for Premier...I solely use PhotoShop and After Effects. AE has been my go to animated title compositor. Motion, while decent...is certainly behind the eight ball in comparison to Avid and AE for these tasks.
However...most, if not ALL of the pros I know that have been using FCP continue to do so....and there are more motion pictures, BIG ones...this year, edited on FCP than I can remember in years past. Pulling this BS out of your arse is crap. The iToy phenomenon, in my very humble opinion will actually HELP the Pro Apps...as Apple is making more money than EVER!!! This will afford them the expertise they need to develop the pro apps...more so than they've ever been able to do in the past. Keep in mind...for these iToys to be great, they need content....and again, IMHO...I think Apple knows this, and would be happy if every app, movie, song, etc...that resides in iTunes, Mac Store, App Store, etc....was created WITH their soft/hardware as well. Again, just my opinion....Apple won't shoot themselves and the entire creative community in the foot....just when they've becoming the HIGHEST gaining computer sales platform in the world!!! They're selling more computers (MB, MBP, MBair, MP, iMacs) then EVER...and I attribute that somewhat to the excellent user experience so many folks have had with their "iToys". You gotta figure some of those folks will be "Pro" creative guys. And enticed they will be (my Yoda impersonation) by the hardware and software that Apple offers....so if anything, there is Growth in the Pro sector...hardware and software both. NOT a mass exodus. Again...if you truly have proof that "All those Pros have already left Mac"...I'm all ears. If anything, they've made significant gains. Hence the reason AVID has DECREASED their pricing from the astronomical rates it used to cost...and the proprietary rigs you had to have to run the program.
Sorry for the rant. But what you've stated is absolutely NOT true my friend. Period. And THAT is a fact! If you're deciding whether or not to stick with FCP, cool...fine to make that point. Don't make up BS about other "Pros" and their Post Workflow. Other than the BBC switching to Premier, I can think of NO other real, true professionals that have abandoned FCP because it's lacking. It's still a VERY powerful program. Getting older, several places to shine it up, but it still does the job and does it well.
J
I don't need links, videos, etc. to prove my point. I know it's the case, because I've seen it with my own eyes. And frankly I don't care to impress you with pointless links and statistics. I am a professional, and I work with professionals, and several of them have already switched to Premiere. That, my friend, is a fact, and it's all I need.
dpMacsmith
Jul 20, 09:28 AM
You realize there are probably only four people on this board who are old enough to get that joke, right?
I even had a client that was using one until about a month ago. The hard drive died. But, that Quadra just kept going and going and going.
I even had a client that was using one until about a month ago. The hard drive died. But, that Quadra just kept going and going and going.
0 comments:
Post a Comment