mc68k
Dec 6, 06:02 PM
yeah the AI driver is piss poor at overtaking. it's all racing lines and he'll only overtake on a sharp turn or on a long straight. even with a significantly more powerful car the driver won't always come out on top. i remember in GT4 you could drop out of bspec into aspec and you could also speed up a race by several times to make the enduros go faster. so far i haven't seen this functionality in gt5?
the car trading sounds like fun. do u trade for car/car or car/$ or just gift back and forth? do both players have to be online at the same time?
thanks for the tips on the different car settings. i haven't been frustrated enough to try these out yet, but every little bit would help with those top gear tracks. i got so annoyed with the VW Bus and the lotus one that i just gave up and did other stuff. what did you get for completing the lotus/top gear?
the car trading sounds like fun. do u trade for car/car or car/$ or just gift back and forth? do both players have to be online at the same time?
thanks for the tips on the different car settings. i haven't been frustrated enough to try these out yet, but every little bit would help with those top gear tracks. i got so annoyed with the VW Bus and the lotus one that i just gave up and did other stuff. what did you get for completing the lotus/top gear?
kingsmuse
Apr 6, 05:08 PM
This can't be right. MR posters have assured me that the Xoom is better than the iPad. I mean, if you can't trust MR posters, whom can you trust?
You don`t really use the opinion of the American public as a standard for what is "better" do you?
:)
You don`t really use the opinion of the American public as a standard for what is "better" do you?
:)
ninjadoc
Apr 6, 07:10 PM
I have something better than a MacBook Air. It's called an iPad 2.
That with my iMac and I have no need anymore for my 13" aluminum MacBook. While the Air is a nice looking and light machine, I still like having things like Firewire, an optical drive (without having to pay extra for it or plug it in), and above all, screen real estate.
My 24" iMac gives me that. While my iPad 2 gives my instant on, mobile, and light. When the iMacs get a refresh and ship with Lion, it will be time for a 27".
I can't send a private message, wanna sell that Macbook Air?
That with my iMac and I have no need anymore for my 13" aluminum MacBook. While the Air is a nice looking and light machine, I still like having things like Firewire, an optical drive (without having to pay extra for it or plug it in), and above all, screen real estate.
My 24" iMac gives me that. While my iPad 2 gives my instant on, mobile, and light. When the iMacs get a refresh and ship with Lion, it will be time for a 27".
I can't send a private message, wanna sell that Macbook Air?
kdarling
Mar 31, 04:16 PM
Yet what he said is 100% accurate..Weird how that can happen sometimes.
Gruber is rarely accurate in his conclusions, and this time is no exception.
None of what is happening smacks of being a "bait-and-switch" as he claims. That would've required extremely clever pre-planning years ago on the part of Google.
Instead, it's got all the hallmarks of too little pre-planning.
Anyone with experience dealing with large projects can see that Rubin has belatedly come to realize that things were getting out of control. Now he is goofing up trying to take full control himself instead of doing the smart thing and first getting a consensus from the OHA members.
Gruber is rarely accurate in his conclusions, and this time is no exception.
None of what is happening smacks of being a "bait-and-switch" as he claims. That would've required extremely clever pre-planning years ago on the part of Google.
Instead, it's got all the hallmarks of too little pre-planning.
Anyone with experience dealing with large projects can see that Rubin has belatedly come to realize that things were getting out of control. Now he is goofing up trying to take full control himself instead of doing the smart thing and first getting a consensus from the OHA members.
amin
Aug 19, 09:42 AM
You make good points. I guess we'll learn more as more information becomes available.
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
Cameront9
Aug 7, 06:35 PM
I am not hearing impaired, but I often watch TV and movies with the closed captioning on. I cannot really say what about it makes it more enjoyable to me--no one has ever understood why I do it, maybe it has to do with how I process information (I do have trouble listening in lecture classes, maybe a learning disability etc.), but my point is to say that I am also interested in getting closed captioning on iTunes shows.
I wrote to Apple on the feedback part of their web-site about this. I was wondering if you might know better what the law is about closed captioning. I always assumed it was required for network television shows. Is it not for network shows that appear online?
Anyhow, it's functionality I would definitely like to see.
Online is a grey area because it's new...
I'm not completely familiar with Closed Captioning laws. I believe all new TVs are required to have a Closed-Captioning decoder, and I think that all Network shows (and maybe cable-based, too) have to be captioned.
A quick Google gives this:
http://www.captions.org/caplaw.cfm
Which explains in more detail...
Regardless, I have seen a number of hearing-impaired users comment on the issue before. It would be so simple to implement, after all...
I wrote to Apple on the feedback part of their web-site about this. I was wondering if you might know better what the law is about closed captioning. I always assumed it was required for network television shows. Is it not for network shows that appear online?
Anyhow, it's functionality I would definitely like to see.
Online is a grey area because it's new...
I'm not completely familiar with Closed Captioning laws. I believe all new TVs are required to have a Closed-Captioning decoder, and I think that all Network shows (and maybe cable-based, too) have to be captioned.
A quick Google gives this:
http://www.captions.org/caplaw.cfm
Which explains in more detail...
Regardless, I have seen a number of hearing-impaired users comment on the issue before. It would be so simple to implement, after all...
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.
BillyShears
Aug 7, 10:03 PM
Perhaps sometime between now and Spring 2007 they might find the time to change that.
Right, but certainly not "all the pictures" show a unified interface, which is what I was replying to. I'd like if it were unified, though.
Right, but certainly not "all the pictures" show a unified interface, which is what I was replying to. I'd like if it were unified, though.
Sol
Mar 23, 12:44 AM
Is MacRumors branching out to coverage of all tablets and media players now? I can't speak for everyone who visits the site but I come here to read about Apple products, not the competition's knock-offs.
dakwar
Mar 22, 02:48 PM
I wasn't thinking straight, big deal.
And Thankfully I'm more successful in life than you'll ever be. Thanks.
Keep telling yourself that. You'll sleep better at night.
And Thankfully I'm more successful in life than you'll ever be. Thanks.
Keep telling yourself that. You'll sleep better at night.
rezenclowd3
Dec 8, 02:25 AM
Actually, Sony explained that the damage is not unlocked or progressive as one dives deeper into the game. It's just that as one goes further into the game, one is able to FINALLY collect more premium cars which do have the better damage engine.
As far as the cars...I really want more already...but not more of the same version. I REALLY want a Triumph TR6 and Datsun 240Z...theres a Triumph Spitfire, which is not near as collectible. Also should have the Brabham fan car as well IMO, plus some Can-Am cars. Stupid having 40 or so of the same body style.
Also, can one set a stick to look around? Racing without the ability to look around is for earlier generations, not THIS generation.
As far as the cars...I really want more already...but not more of the same version. I REALLY want a Triumph TR6 and Datsun 240Z...theres a Triumph Spitfire, which is not near as collectible. Also should have the Brabham fan car as well IMO, plus some Can-Am cars. Stupid having 40 or so of the same body style.
Also, can one set a stick to look around? Racing without the ability to look around is for earlier generations, not THIS generation.
skunk
Mar 22, 07:59 PM
Probably, but it was certainly orchestrated to look anything but. Sarkozy was very obliging in shooting his mouth off, as was Cameron. It may have just been luck, but if so it was a remarkable piece of luck to have 4 submarines, a flagship-capable surface ship and all necessary support in the right place at the right time. These things don't travel very fast.
laidbackliam
Aug 7, 10:39 AM
I'd like to see your "Mac" model bumped up past the iMac. I think a lot of people, myself included, would pay a premium for the ability to upgrade. In fact, I wouldn't care if they didn't offer a completely new model as long as they offer some "affordable" manifestations of the Mac Pro. So how's this (and go easy on me here because I rarely delve into the technical aspect of things):
-Squire
yes, but i see the price point being under the iMac still. but again, this is just something i'd LIKE to see, and don't expect. and i know some people would pay a premium. but i'm not some people.
-Squire
yes, but i see the price point being under the iMac still. but again, this is just something i'd LIKE to see, and don't expect. and i know some people would pay a premium. but i'm not some people.
skunk
Feb 28, 06:16 PM
Lee, I agree with you about what you say, but he clearly did say that this was only his opinion. People are allowed that, even if it is hateful and exclusionist.Sure, but if they are going to air their opinions, they should also be able to back their opinions up with something better than hearsay.
makingdots
Apr 11, 12:51 PM
I've been living with this iphone 3g since it launched and didn't want the iphone 4 for antenna reasons.
Now if this is true that they will push back the iphone 5 release. I will seriously consider jumping platforms.
No point in getting a 4 since it's already outdated and I was hoping for the iphone 5 release in June/July.
I think this is a serious mistake on apple's part and yes, it would also be dumb to release the 5 in june and a 5.5 with LTE in January, but They could push the lte until june of 2012.
The androids are starting to look better and better as time goes on.
Looks like you block mailing Apple? LOL
Just get an android if you can't wait. sheesh
btw, iPhone 4 still awesome even if there's a tons of plastic droids came along before iPhone 5.
Now if this is true that they will push back the iphone 5 release. I will seriously consider jumping platforms.
No point in getting a 4 since it's already outdated and I was hoping for the iphone 5 release in June/July.
I think this is a serious mistake on apple's part and yes, it would also be dumb to release the 5 in june and a 5.5 with LTE in January, but They could push the lte until june of 2012.
The androids are starting to look better and better as time goes on.
Looks like you block mailing Apple? LOL
Just get an android if you can't wait. sheesh
btw, iPhone 4 still awesome even if there's a tons of plastic droids came along before iPhone 5.
kiljoy616
Apr 25, 01:34 PM
Strange Google is not on the lawsuit since they do the same. I guess its Apple turn to deal with privacy.
Multimedia
Aug 21, 05:43 AM
I stopped by the Apple store tonight to play with a Macpro. I'm getting ready to buy and thought I'd get some hands on experience to see how it performed with Finalcut Pro. I was especially interested in how it handles playback of uncompressed footage.
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.That's great info. Would you please tell us:
1. How fast that is compared to what Mac model-speed you are currently using?
2. IE Were you impressed or not so impressed with how fast-slow it rendered?
3. What kind of speed were you expecting?
I'm no expert, but my guess is that the lack of RAM may have been the culprit. Need more independent tests like this from other FCP users. Thanks a lot. :)
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.That's great info. Would you please tell us:
1. How fast that is compared to what Mac model-speed you are currently using?
2. IE Were you impressed or not so impressed with how fast-slow it rendered?
3. What kind of speed were you expecting?
I'm no expert, but my guess is that the lack of RAM may have been the culprit. Need more independent tests like this from other FCP users. Thanks a lot. :)
saving107
Apr 6, 02:06 PM
Nice...I'm glad to have a more rare piece of hardware. I love mine and have no issues, it'll only get better over time.Reminds me of the days of the RAZR, that's what the iPhone and iPad have become.
Honda sells a TON more cars than BMW by a huge factor...I'd rather drive a BMW, I guess you're all happy with the Hondas :)
Nissan/Dodge driver myself, as well as an iPad/iPhone user.
We all choose the product that best first our needs and buget, and these are my choices.
Honda sells a TON more cars than BMW by a huge factor...I'd rather drive a BMW, I guess you're all happy with the Hondas :)
Nissan/Dodge driver myself, as well as an iPad/iPhone user.
We all choose the product that best first our needs and buget, and these are my choices.
MrNomNoms
Mar 26, 03:57 AM
I use my computer as a "real computer" and I like virtually every change I've seen. I wish people wouldn't generalize so broadly and presume that because certain additions aren't something that they use that it has nothing to do with "real work."
Why shouldn't they be related? Borrowing concepts and sharing library isn't the same as being merged. The only people who honestly believe the OSes are being merged into one are the paranoid people on this forum.
Unless I'm missing something, Mission Control is added in addition to Expos� as it is now. The old functionality will still be there. As for it being "ruined," a couple of days before the Lion preview the graphic artist I work with most was describing changes he wished they'd make to Expos� and we were laughing together a few days later when we watched the preview and boom, there it was. Incidentally, he makes his living off what he does with his "real" computer.
Cool. Don't use "full screen apps." However, they make a lot of sense in a few places. Paired with Spaces I'm looking forward to this when working on my laptop without an external monitor. Also, on a multimonitor setup it makes a lot of sense.
Again, don't do any of it. I've been using Steam for my games on the PC basically since CounterStrike: Condition Zero was released. It's awesome. I was thrilled with the AppStore for similar reasons. It's just convenient. However, it's not the only distribution method available for software so its existence doesn't impede you.
I also use my trackpad when using my computer like a desktop and love having my Expos� gestures there.
What's being dumbed down exactly? Ease of use is very different than "dumbing down." Workflows that aren't what one particular individual likes are not "dumb." There are plenty of UNIX fanatics that think people using anything but CLI for half their workflow are using "dumbed down" interfaces. They're wrong and they're annoying.
Launchpad is, in my opinion, the lamest and most unnecessary addition to Lion. However, it's so minor that I don't care. I know some people will really like it. I am not personally offended by the inclusion of a feature I don't use or care about either.
The vast majority of people using computers are not techies, pros or developers. They're people like my parents. As a developer, I'm generally more excited about a new release of XCode than I am about OS X because overall, it's going to affect what I do far more than the OS will.
If they merge in the sense that the Mac becomes as locked down as an iPhone, I agree that that's it on Macs and even if they don't die in the market from Apple's would be hubris I'll be leaving Apple for something else. Thankfully, this will only occur if most of Apple's leadership is replaced with an army of complete morons.
Really, my point is this: you don't have to like these features. However, that doesn't mean they're not useful. It doesn't mean that they're "dumbed down." It doesn't mean "pros" won't like them. It doesn't mean people who like them don't use their computer as a "real computer" and instead treat it as a "toy." It means you don't like them.
Thank you for your constructive reply but I have a feeling it will all fall on deaf ears given that most have never actually gone on Google and researched what has been added/changed/enhanced to Mac OS X Lion. For example SAMBA has been removed and completely replaced with a ground up clean room implementation of SMB2 which will translate into better support for Windows Vista and 7 clients as well as the latest versions of Windows. Why hasn't that been mentioned by the nay sayers here?
OpenGL 3.2 has been added and funny enough not a single thing has been said about the fact that it lays the foundation for future updates that will be more prompt.
Then there is Webkit2 based web browser whose knock on effects go well beyond Safari and into applications wishing to utilise web based technologies with framework that provides said functionality but handles all the mundane security/process isolation/etc behind the scenes.
The merging of AV Foundation that serves as the foundation for future development for media products that will span iOS and Mac OS X; that you can have the same media core on iOS and Mac OS X then build upon it to differentiate between the desktop and tablet version by having a different interface, more features on the desktop version etc.
Sandboxing is being enhanced further and more system components are being put into it as to reduce the security exposure when a bug is found.
I'm sure others can note even more enhancements but it is frustrating when I hear the same nauseating ignorance over and over again from the cheap seats screaming there are no new features and yet they've done zero in the way of researching and reading on the matter.
Why shouldn't they be related? Borrowing concepts and sharing library isn't the same as being merged. The only people who honestly believe the OSes are being merged into one are the paranoid people on this forum.
Unless I'm missing something, Mission Control is added in addition to Expos� as it is now. The old functionality will still be there. As for it being "ruined," a couple of days before the Lion preview the graphic artist I work with most was describing changes he wished they'd make to Expos� and we were laughing together a few days later when we watched the preview and boom, there it was. Incidentally, he makes his living off what he does with his "real" computer.
Cool. Don't use "full screen apps." However, they make a lot of sense in a few places. Paired with Spaces I'm looking forward to this when working on my laptop without an external monitor. Also, on a multimonitor setup it makes a lot of sense.
Again, don't do any of it. I've been using Steam for my games on the PC basically since CounterStrike: Condition Zero was released. It's awesome. I was thrilled with the AppStore for similar reasons. It's just convenient. However, it's not the only distribution method available for software so its existence doesn't impede you.
I also use my trackpad when using my computer like a desktop and love having my Expos� gestures there.
What's being dumbed down exactly? Ease of use is very different than "dumbing down." Workflows that aren't what one particular individual likes are not "dumb." There are plenty of UNIX fanatics that think people using anything but CLI for half their workflow are using "dumbed down" interfaces. They're wrong and they're annoying.
Launchpad is, in my opinion, the lamest and most unnecessary addition to Lion. However, it's so minor that I don't care. I know some people will really like it. I am not personally offended by the inclusion of a feature I don't use or care about either.
The vast majority of people using computers are not techies, pros or developers. They're people like my parents. As a developer, I'm generally more excited about a new release of XCode than I am about OS X because overall, it's going to affect what I do far more than the OS will.
If they merge in the sense that the Mac becomes as locked down as an iPhone, I agree that that's it on Macs and even if they don't die in the market from Apple's would be hubris I'll be leaving Apple for something else. Thankfully, this will only occur if most of Apple's leadership is replaced with an army of complete morons.
Really, my point is this: you don't have to like these features. However, that doesn't mean they're not useful. It doesn't mean that they're "dumbed down." It doesn't mean "pros" won't like them. It doesn't mean people who like them don't use their computer as a "real computer" and instead treat it as a "toy." It means you don't like them.
Thank you for your constructive reply but I have a feeling it will all fall on deaf ears given that most have never actually gone on Google and researched what has been added/changed/enhanced to Mac OS X Lion. For example SAMBA has been removed and completely replaced with a ground up clean room implementation of SMB2 which will translate into better support for Windows Vista and 7 clients as well as the latest versions of Windows. Why hasn't that been mentioned by the nay sayers here?
OpenGL 3.2 has been added and funny enough not a single thing has been said about the fact that it lays the foundation for future updates that will be more prompt.
Then there is Webkit2 based web browser whose knock on effects go well beyond Safari and into applications wishing to utilise web based technologies with framework that provides said functionality but handles all the mundane security/process isolation/etc behind the scenes.
The merging of AV Foundation that serves as the foundation for future development for media products that will span iOS and Mac OS X; that you can have the same media core on iOS and Mac OS X then build upon it to differentiate between the desktop and tablet version by having a different interface, more features on the desktop version etc.
Sandboxing is being enhanced further and more system components are being put into it as to reduce the security exposure when a bug is found.
I'm sure others can note even more enhancements but it is frustrating when I hear the same nauseating ignorance over and over again from the cheap seats screaming there are no new features and yet they've done zero in the way of researching and reading on the matter.
mmmcheese
Sep 13, 09:23 AM
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
Do you mean like how BeOS did things?
Do you mean like how BeOS did things?
drsmithy
Sep 14, 10:05 AM
On the server side.
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
Couldn't be farther from the truth. I have no problem with Microsoft or Windows, evident by the fact that I've ran their operating systems for the last 10 years. I have a problem with all the crap they're putting in Vista, but otherwise - Win2k and XP Pro have left me primarily trouble-free.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
Couldn't be farther from the truth. I have no problem with Microsoft or Windows, evident by the fact that I've ran their operating systems for the last 10 years. I have a problem with all the crap they're putting in Vista, but otherwise - Win2k and XP Pro have left me primarily trouble-free.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
ciTiger
Apr 11, 07:53 AM
I hope there are big improvements...
aohus
Apr 19, 02:35 PM
WRONG. A lot of modern GUI elements are INVENTED by Apple:
http://obamapacman.com/2010/03/myth-copyright-theft-apple-stole-gui-from-xerox-parc-alto/
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
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:
Apple may face special problems because of admissions made by its chairman, John Sculley, in his 1987 book, ''Odyssey,'' a chronicle of his split with Apple's co-founder, Steven P. Jobs. ''Much of the Macintosh technology wasn't invented in the building,'' he wrote. ''Indeed, the Mac, like the Lisa before it, was largely a conduit for technology developed'' at Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center.
^^ 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
http://obamapacman.com/2010/03/myth-copyright-theft-apple-stole-gui-from-xerox-parc-alto/
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
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:
Apple may face special problems because of admissions made by its chairman, John Sculley, in his 1987 book, ''Odyssey,'' a chronicle of his split with Apple's co-founder, Steven P. Jobs. ''Much of the Macintosh technology wasn't invented in the building,'' he wrote. ''Indeed, the Mac, like the Lisa before it, was largely a conduit for technology developed'' at Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center.
^^ 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
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 10:57 AM
Go figure - an American phone with less features than the one sold in the rest of the world.
Doesn't that suggest Paris this year being a very likely time and place for the introduction of the iPhone? I doubt Apple will wait one more year considering the competition (see SE W810i (http://www.sonyericsson.com/spg.jsp?cc=us&lc;=en&ver;=4000&template;=pp1_loader&php;=PHP1_10376&zone;=pp&lm;=pp1&pid;=10376) and others)
Doesn't that suggest Paris this year being a very likely time and place for the introduction of the iPhone? I doubt Apple will wait one more year considering the competition (see SE W810i (http://www.sonyericsson.com/spg.jsp?cc=us&lc;=en&ver;=4000&template;=pp1_loader&php;=PHP1_10376&zone;=pp&lm;=pp1&pid;=10376) and others)
