Stridder44
Mar 26, 05:00 AM
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.
Exactly how I feel about it. I mean it feels like they just told us about it. We're just now starting to get rumors and tips about the new OS. Windows 8 isn't slated to come out until Q4 2012. Take your time Apple. Snow Leopard is a fantastic and very stable OS. PLEASE don't rush Lion! Take your time to iron out the bugs, and add more stuff in if need be.
I hope Lion lives up to the name and is BEAST.
Exactly how I feel about it. I mean it feels like they just told us about it. We're just now starting to get rumors and tips about the new OS. Windows 8 isn't slated to come out until Q4 2012. Take your time Apple. Snow Leopard is a fantastic and very stable OS. PLEASE don't rush Lion! Take your time to iron out the bugs, and add more stuff in if need be.
davidcmc
Apr 6, 02:11 PM
It's funny because appletards tend to speak about numbers in different ways.
When it's related to Macs, they say they sell less than PCs but they're still much better.
When it's related to tablets, they say the iPad sells more because it's better.
So, I'm under the impression that the iPad is just like a "PC-like" market, which everyone buys because someone told it's cheaper and better.
That's what appletards say about PCs, isn't that? Something like an underground market that avoids people from knowing the "real quality" of Macs.
Ps: lol.
When it's related to Macs, they say they sell less than PCs but they're still much better.
When it's related to tablets, they say the iPad sells more because it's better.
So, I'm under the impression that the iPad is just like a "PC-like" market, which everyone buys because someone told it's cheaper and better.
That's what appletards say about PCs, isn't that? Something like an underground market that avoids people from knowing the "real quality" of Macs.
Ps: lol.
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:40 PM
Boy. Why do we go back and forth like this arguing between fanboys and non. It's pointless. Nobody cares about your or my opinion, and you're not convincing anyone who disagrees with you as people NEVER change their opinions about anything ever.
I'm not why I do it either, but never again.
Talking to me?
I am not trying to convince; simply stating opinions by providing facts. Problem?
I'm not why I do it either, but never again.
Talking to me?
I am not trying to convince; simply stating opinions by providing facts. Problem?
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 6, 10:27 AM
This is what I've been waiting for. Apple is about to get a chunk of my bank account lol. Upgrading from an early 2008 MBP
SevenInchScrew
Dec 9, 12:36 PM
Even though I sometimes get bored of your constant dissing of GT5, those are my thoughts as well.
I know it probably seems, at times, like I'm just mindlessly bashing the game, but I'm not. That isn't how I intend to come across. I'm a LOOOONG time GT fan who is just really frustrated with how the whole saga of this game has played out. Too long in the making and still releasing with flaws, half-assed features, and needing patches is not what I've come to expect from PD.
My only hope is, now that they've got this out the door, they will start major work on GT6 and get things cleaned up and to customers in a couple years, not half a decade. Like I said, the core of a great game is in there, somewhere. They just need to trim off a lot of the fat, and make GT6 that great game we expected.
I know it probably seems, at times, like I'm just mindlessly bashing the game, but I'm not. That isn't how I intend to come across. I'm a LOOOONG time GT fan who is just really frustrated with how the whole saga of this game has played out. Too long in the making and still releasing with flaws, half-assed features, and needing patches is not what I've come to expect from PD.
My only hope is, now that they've got this out the door, they will start major work on GT6 and get things cleaned up and to customers in a couple years, not half a decade. Like I said, the core of a great game is in there, somewhere. They just need to trim off a lot of the fat, and make GT6 that great game we expected.
AppliedVisual
Oct 22, 03:14 PM
I heard Leo Laporte talking about this on his KFI podcast... exciting... one question... how many softwares take advantage of multi cores? I understand that the OS can deal with it for multi tasking, but how many programs multi thread?
DD
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
DD
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 01:34 PM
I'm sure quite sure what Apple hopes to accomplish here. Every smart phone steals from every other one. I don't know if you can differentiate design "concepts". It's like suing someone because the chords for his blues song goes in a 1-4-5 pattern like yours does. It's just part of the genre.
Tony
You failed to read the blog. Wanna try again?
Tony
You failed to read the blog. Wanna try again?
gorgeousninja
Apr 20, 05:54 AM
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
You're really pushing this aren't you? So what exactly is your point that has a significant relevance to the main topic? ...None, that's what.
Just because 30 years ago Apple took an idea initially developed by Xerox, but then improved upon it and subsequently released to the mass market a product that most people acknowledge as being the first home computer, has absolutely no bearing on the fact that Samsung have blatantly copied Apple's design.
