KnightWRX
Apr 20, 11:35 AM
I pointed out the Grid layout many times in the other thread and was told that wasn't part of the lawsuit. If it is than Apple isn't just stretching... they are being idiotic.
According to the analysis, it is in the suit, as part of the trade dress claims.
According to the analysis, it is in the suit, as part of the trade dress claims.
h'biki
Apr 11, 06:41 PM
Then that just begs the question, "why haven't these people left already?" FCP has been fairly stagnant for years. There are plenty of other alternatives, so doesn't that kinda make them fanboyish too for sticking it out when up to this point Apple has given zero hints about when or how it will take FCP to the next level?
They are abandoning it. I know quite a few FCP editors who have switched to Avid MC5 or Premiere Pro.
We are large facility with about 10-12 full time FCP editors and we will probably switch to Avid MC5 unless Apple provides *needed* features for the future.
I'd there's a general mood of 'Apple is abandoning FCP' in the post community and facilities/users are setting up their exit strategies.
And its a strategy. Buying into new software is expensive and time consuming.
They are abandoning it. I know quite a few FCP editors who have switched to Avid MC5 or Premiere Pro.
We are large facility with about 10-12 full time FCP editors and we will probably switch to Avid MC5 unless Apple provides *needed* features for the future.
I'd there's a general mood of 'Apple is abandoning FCP' in the post community and facilities/users are setting up their exit strategies.
And its a strategy. Buying into new software is expensive and time consuming.
littleman23408
Dec 14, 06:26 AM
Lookin good SevenInchScrew:cool:
JFreak
Aug 19, 03:11 AM
this kinds of benchmarks show clearly that the world is not yet ready for Universally Better appplications. Quad G5 still rocks as a production system, but it would surely be nice to give those new Mac Pro's a test drive; however, it would be rather lame, as not nearly all audio plugins have been converted. For myself -- for that very reason -- the Intel-era begins in 2008 at the earliest. I want zero crashes when I mix.
freakonguitar
Aug 26, 03:55 PM
well...then maybe we will see a new macbook pro and possibly some other things in the next few weeks to come. :) but from some of the rumors, mermon has worse battery life and more heat than yonah :( ....which is too bad, cause we could use a cpu that gives at least just as good performance but less heat!
iFry
Jul 31, 12:28 PM
Sure, it may be more expensive than a custom-built Intel machine, but it will run OS X like a charm, and that's ultimately the most important factor in my computer purchase. But access to Windows games and Mac OS X, that's a dream come true for this mac fanatic. I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that virtualization makes big enough strides that I never have to leave OS X to play Windows-based games.
my thoughts exactly... MacBook Pro in two weeks :D
wish i had that Core 2 goin in it...
my thoughts exactly... MacBook Pro in two weeks :D
wish i had that Core 2 goin in it...
h'biki
Apr 11, 06:41 PM
Then that just begs the question, "why haven't these people left already?" FCP has been fairly stagnant for years. There are plenty of other alternatives, so doesn't that kinda make them fanboyish too for sticking it out when up to this point Apple has given zero hints about when or how it will take FCP to the next level?
They are abandoning it. I know quite a few FCP editors who have switched to Avid MC5 or Premiere Pro.
We are large facility with about 10-12 full time FCP editors and we will probably switch to Avid MC5 unless Apple provides *needed* features for the future.
I'd there's a general mood of 'Apple is abandoning FCP' in the post community and facilities/users are setting up their exit strategies.
And its a strategy. Buying into new software is expensive and time consuming.
They are abandoning it. I know quite a few FCP editors who have switched to Avid MC5 or Premiere Pro.
We are large facility with about 10-12 full time FCP editors and we will probably switch to Avid MC5 unless Apple provides *needed* features for the future.
I'd there's a general mood of 'Apple is abandoning FCP' in the post community and facilities/users are setting up their exit strategies.
And its a strategy. Buying into new software is expensive and time consuming.
al2o3cr
Apr 25, 01:43 PM
Hope nobody tells these lawyers that anybody who can access the location data can also get at the address book and text messages - OMG PRIVACY VIOLATION!
rscharf
Apr 25, 02:36 PM
Obviously these know-nothings have not tried to "easily access" their supposed private tracking information on the iPhone.
FIRST, you cannot access it directly on the iPhone, you have to have access to the OSX (Mac) computer that the iPhone was synced with.
SECOND, you have to log onto said computer, download a specific application which may or may not work.
THIRD, if the app does not work, you have to find the specific subdirectory where the data is located, load a specific file into a text editor, identify the device, run a Python script to convert random strings, start terminal and cd into the subdirectory, run a command, then pipe it through grep, and finally run the results through some type of SQL database reader to get the CellLocation table.
I am sure that virtually all users can accomplish these tasks with ease, thus allowing the entire world access to this data.
What a crock of crap!
FIRST, you cannot access it directly on the iPhone, you have to have access to the OSX (Mac) computer that the iPhone was synced with.
SECOND, you have to log onto said computer, download a specific application which may or may not work.
THIRD, if the app does not work, you have to find the specific subdirectory where the data is located, load a specific file into a text editor, identify the device, run a Python script to convert random strings, start terminal and cd into the subdirectory, run a command, then pipe it through grep, and finally run the results through some type of SQL database reader to get the CellLocation table.
I am sure that virtually all users can accomplish these tasks with ease, thus allowing the entire world access to this data.
What a crock of crap!
infidel69
Mar 31, 02:37 PM
Lol, the fragmentation that "doesnt exist".
I knew it would bite them in the ass someday.
How is it biting them in the ass? Android is the fastest growing OS with a larger share than IOS. I think it's been a very succesfull strategy.
I knew it would bite them in the ass someday.
How is it biting them in the ass? Android is the fastest growing OS with a larger share than IOS. I think it's been a very succesfull strategy.
whooleytoo
Apr 27, 08:48 AM
I thought they said that there was not any concerns?
Because, despite how Apple excel at so many things, when it comes to handling user (quality or privacy) concerns like this, they suck.
Look at their responses to the iPhone 4 antenna issue:
"You're holding it wrong" - Blame the customer.
'Every phone has the same issue' - Our phone is bad, but no worse than anyone else's
'Let's change how the signal bars are displayed' - Let's hide the problem.
'Let's give a bumper case with the iPhone' - Let's offer a solution to some users, to get them off our back for a problem we used to deny even existed.
I'm not even saying the antenna issue was a serious problem, but Apple's dismissive attitude is only throwing fuel on the fire. If they had tackled it quicker, it would be never have been newsworthy.
It's great that Apple are addressing this (location) issue much quicker, but still it only is happening after they initially denied there was any issue, and waiting for the furore to grow before acting.
Because, despite how Apple excel at so many things, when it comes to handling user (quality or privacy) concerns like this, they suck.
Look at their responses to the iPhone 4 antenna issue:
"You're holding it wrong" - Blame the customer.
'Every phone has the same issue' - Our phone is bad, but no worse than anyone else's
'Let's change how the signal bars are displayed' - Let's hide the problem.
'Let's give a bumper case with the iPhone' - Let's offer a solution to some users, to get them off our back for a problem we used to deny even existed.
I'm not even saying the antenna issue was a serious problem, but Apple's dismissive attitude is only throwing fuel on the fire. If they had tackled it quicker, it would be never have been newsworthy.
It's great that Apple are addressing this (location) issue much quicker, but still it only is happening after they initially denied there was any issue, and waiting for the furore to grow before acting.
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 13, 11:05 AM
and this got negative votes because...??????????
All the people that just coughed up $3k for a quad core MacPro.
All the people that just coughed up $3k for a quad core MacPro.
Tommyg117
Aug 7, 03:33 PM
anyone else a little underwhelmed with today's WWDC? There isn't anything that really jumped out at me besides the Mac Pro.
BWhaler
Aug 26, 06:37 PM
In other news, Merom this, Merom that, just make sure you get it out on time Apple :p
...and with quality.
Enough of these crappy shortcuts and horific QA Apple; we're premium buyers. Or maybe you didn't notice how well Dell is doing nowadays.
You're screwing up, intel. We don't want 300 trillion transistors on a 1 nm die. We want longer battery life. Idiots.
Agreed. I still think Intel doesn't get it. Yes, faster is good. But Intel has been paying lip service to the 9 - 10 hour battery life for about a decade now.
Only problem with that is that a 2.33 GHz Merom chip will be fifty percent more expensive than a 2.16 GHz Yonah is today. So do you think Apple will increase prices of the MacBook Pro by $150 to $200 or reduce their profit?
Wrong. Just wrong.
Google is your friend. Learn some facts before you post.
Yippee.....
Definitely buying a MBP asap.....not gonna wait for santa rosa!
Me too. I am sure I could squeeze out another 9 months with my 17" PowerBook--which is less than 1 year old--but I think it's time to get with the future.
It's a pretty easy decision given how much faster the Intel Macs are.
Old, but still funny. A little :p
Only if you have no sense of humour! :p
Nothing would make me happier than for the new MacBook Pros to be shipping early next week. And with all of the quality issues worked out.
My expectations for the next generation 17" MacBook Pro:
2.33 Core 2 Duo
Better GPU
160gig HD
Higher quality displays. No more of this uneven backlighting crap.
My hopes:
Longer battery life
Get the power adaptor below 70 watts so we can use them on planes
Lower price
Hell, I'm buying whatever comes next. I just hope there are some solid spec bumps across the board.
And most importantly, I hope Apple fixes the crappy quality issues that have been plaguing their portable line all year.
...and with quality.
Enough of these crappy shortcuts and horific QA Apple; we're premium buyers. Or maybe you didn't notice how well Dell is doing nowadays.
You're screwing up, intel. We don't want 300 trillion transistors on a 1 nm die. We want longer battery life. Idiots.
Agreed. I still think Intel doesn't get it. Yes, faster is good. But Intel has been paying lip service to the 9 - 10 hour battery life for about a decade now.
Only problem with that is that a 2.33 GHz Merom chip will be fifty percent more expensive than a 2.16 GHz Yonah is today. So do you think Apple will increase prices of the MacBook Pro by $150 to $200 or reduce their profit?
Wrong. Just wrong.
Google is your friend. Learn some facts before you post.
Yippee.....
Definitely buying a MBP asap.....not gonna wait for santa rosa!
Me too. I am sure I could squeeze out another 9 months with my 17" PowerBook--which is less than 1 year old--but I think it's time to get with the future.
It's a pretty easy decision given how much faster the Intel Macs are.
Old, but still funny. A little :p
Only if you have no sense of humour! :p
Nothing would make me happier than for the new MacBook Pros to be shipping early next week. And with all of the quality issues worked out.
My expectations for the next generation 17" MacBook Pro:
2.33 Core 2 Duo
Better GPU
160gig HD
Higher quality displays. No more of this uneven backlighting crap.
My hopes:
Longer battery life
Get the power adaptor below 70 watts so we can use them on planes
Lower price
Hell, I'm buying whatever comes next. I just hope there are some solid spec bumps across the board.
And most importantly, I hope Apple fixes the crappy quality issues that have been plaguing their portable line all year.
fastlane1588
Aug 5, 05:35 PM
iMac - No.
iPod - No.
MacBook - No.
MacBook Pro - No.
MacPro - Yes.
Xserve - Yes.
Displays - Yes.
Leopard Preview - Yes.
iPhone - Ha ha ha ha ha ha.
Conversiones
tablas de conversiones.
1: Ejercicio de conversión
Tabla 3.
![]()
iPod - No.
MacBook - No.
MacBook Pro - No.
MacPro - Yes.
Xserve - Yes.
Displays - Yes.
Leopard Preview - Yes.
iPhone - Ha ha ha ha ha ha.
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 10:41 AM
Well let's just check we are 'on the same page then'..
Ok, lets.
You agree Samsung have copied Apple, but only on things that you think don't really matter, while on the other hand anything where they don't look the same is terribly important..
I agree that the pictures in the media do show some ressemblance, but since I know better, I waited for a full claims analysis. The complaint is broad and to not seperate it in parts and claim a "black or white" answer is quite disingenuous.
In the many claims, the trademark icons remain to be seen by a court how much ressemblance/confusion there is. There is no point in arguing this since all it is at the end of the day is hot air. This one is up to a judge. Are these trademarks even registered ? If they are, what are they registered as and is Samsung's design really infringing on this ?
Not matters we'll settle here anyway.
As for the trade dress, again as I have stated, Apple claims a wide array of devices, yet the media have only posted pictures of the I9000. Other models don't share the ressemblances claimed here and it is baffling why Apple would put down their claims on all models. I question the validity of this one as it applies as broadly as the media paints it. Do I question for the I9000 ? Depends on the angle. In person, the phones are quite hard to confuse.
Courts will tell again.
Okay, got it!
At least wait for me to validate your "on the same page" before you get it. That is what good faith discussion is about. ;)
Ok, lets.
You agree Samsung have copied Apple, but only on things that you think don't really matter, while on the other hand anything where they don't look the same is terribly important..
I agree that the pictures in the media do show some ressemblance, but since I know better, I waited for a full claims analysis. The complaint is broad and to not seperate it in parts and claim a "black or white" answer is quite disingenuous.
In the many claims, the trademark icons remain to be seen by a court how much ressemblance/confusion there is. There is no point in arguing this since all it is at the end of the day is hot air. This one is up to a judge. Are these trademarks even registered ? If they are, what are they registered as and is Samsung's design really infringing on this ?
Not matters we'll settle here anyway.
As for the trade dress, again as I have stated, Apple claims a wide array of devices, yet the media have only posted pictures of the I9000. Other models don't share the ressemblances claimed here and it is baffling why Apple would put down their claims on all models. I question the validity of this one as it applies as broadly as the media paints it. Do I question for the I9000 ? Depends on the angle. In person, the phones are quite hard to confuse.
Courts will tell again.
Okay, got it!
At least wait for me to validate your "on the same page" before you get it. That is what good faith discussion is about. ;)
Silentwave
Aug 17, 11:05 AM
pc world, september issue, mentioned amd's plan for a quad core processor in 2007 and if that happens, some pc box will be faster than our best xeon powered machines...that is, he he, unless we get that quad core K8L amd with their 4x4 motherboard architecture which would enable a desktop to run two quads for a total of 8 amd cores (but the price of such a machine will debut at a very high price and probably won't directly compete with the mac pro)
Um....that's why intel has quad core chips coming out...starting in *2006*
On the Xeon side, Clovertown, on the consumer side, kentsfield. Sometime in the first half of 2007 I believe we'll see Tigerton, which will be an even more formidable quad core xeon, capable of more than 2 processor configurations- so if apple gets a 3 socket logic board, or a 4 socket one, we could have 12 or 16 cores.
Um....that's why intel has quad core chips coming out...starting in *2006*
On the Xeon side, Clovertown, on the consumer side, kentsfield. Sometime in the first half of 2007 I believe we'll see Tigerton, which will be an even more formidable quad core xeon, capable of more than 2 processor configurations- so if apple gets a 3 socket logic board, or a 4 socket one, we could have 12 or 16 cores.
Danksi
Aug 15, 01:16 PM
Video cards won't make a difference in FCP as of now if that's what you are asking performance wise. If you are using Motion/Games, anything that really feeds off the video card, then I'd go for the higher end video card.
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
I've not really used Motion yet, just the other apps within FC-Studio.
Just been comparing their iMac 1.9 G5 results with those of the 2.66Ghz Mac Pro numbers... I don't think I'll be disappointed in the performance boost! :D
I guess my main concern is whether or not Apple integrates the individual Final Cut Studio applications more closely, so all of a sudden you'd need a better graphics card to comfortably run the 'editor', rather than just Motion as is the case at the moment.
I think I'll stick to the 2.66Ghz and standard graphics card, as FCP and compressor are more CPU intensive I believe.
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
I've not really used Motion yet, just the other apps within FC-Studio.
Just been comparing their iMac 1.9 G5 results with those of the 2.66Ghz Mac Pro numbers... I don't think I'll be disappointed in the performance boost! :D
I guess my main concern is whether or not Apple integrates the individual Final Cut Studio applications more closely, so all of a sudden you'd need a better graphics card to comfortably run the 'editor', rather than just Motion as is the case at the moment.
I think I'll stick to the 2.66Ghz and standard graphics card, as FCP and compressor are more CPU intensive I believe.
BlizzardBomb
Jul 14, 03:40 PM
512MB RAM on low-end and an X1800 Pro on high-end. I must admit, I'm a little disappointed if this is true.
EDIT: MacRumors lists as X1800 Pro, AppleInsider says X1800 GTO.
EDIT: MacRumors lists as X1800 Pro, AppleInsider says X1800 GTO.
jonharris200
Nov 28, 06:33 PM
They'd be lucky.
11thIndian
Apr 5, 10:17 PM
I doubt Apple will ship a new version of FCP before they ship lion, there are simply no real video editor APIs in Snow Leopard that are capable of 64 bit, QT Kit is a joke.
HOWEVER, according to the developer page for Lion there will be a brand new A/V API in Lion that will be 64 bit and FCP will most likely be written in that.
I guess they could back port the entire API to Snow Leopard, but I wouldn't count on it.
Rumor is that new FCP will be based on A/V Foundation, leaving the legacy QT Kit limitations behind, and negating the need to wait for Lion for 64bit.
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2011/02/a-new-64-bit-final-cut-pro/
HOWEVER, according to the developer page for Lion there will be a brand new A/V API in Lion that will be 64 bit and FCP will most likely be written in that.
I guess they could back port the entire API to Snow Leopard, but I wouldn't count on it.
Rumor is that new FCP will be based on A/V Foundation, leaving the legacy QT Kit limitations behind, and negating the need to wait for Lion for 64bit.
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2011/02/a-new-64-bit-final-cut-pro/
janstett
Sep 13, 01:11 PM
Sheesh...just when I'm already high up enough on Apple for innovating, they throw even more leaps and bounds in there to put themselves even further ahead. I can't wait 'til my broke @$$ can finally get the money to buy a Mac and chuck all my Windows machines out the door.
I'm sure we'll see similar efforts from other PC manufacturers eventually, but let's see the software use those extra cores in Windows land. Ain't gonna happen...not on the level of what Apple's doing at least.
First, this is INTEL innovating, not Apple.
Second, Apple has been the one lagging behind on multiprocessor support. Pre OSX it was a joke of a hack to support multi CPUs in Mac OS and you had to have apps written to take advantage of it with special libraries.
On Windows, the scheduler automatically handles task scheduling no matter how many processors you have, 1 or 8. Your app doesn't have to "know" it's on a single or multiple processor system or do anything special to take advantage of multiple processors, other than threading -- which you can do on a single processor system anyway. Most applications are lazy and unimaginative, and do everything in a single thread (worse, the same thread that is processing event messages from the GUI, which is why apps lock up -- when they end up in a bad state they stop processing events from the OS and won't paint, resize, etc.). But when you take advantage of multithreading, there are some sand traps but it's a cool way to code and that's how you take advantage of multiple cores without having to know what kind of system you are on. I would assume OSX, being based on BSD, is similar, but I don't know the architecture to the degree I know Windows.
In Windows, you can set process "affinity", locking it down to a fixed processor core, through Task Manager. Don't know if you can do that in OSX...
I'm sure we'll see similar efforts from other PC manufacturers eventually, but let's see the software use those extra cores in Windows land. Ain't gonna happen...not on the level of what Apple's doing at least.
First, this is INTEL innovating, not Apple.
Second, Apple has been the one lagging behind on multiprocessor support. Pre OSX it was a joke of a hack to support multi CPUs in Mac OS and you had to have apps written to take advantage of it with special libraries.
On Windows, the scheduler automatically handles task scheduling no matter how many processors you have, 1 or 8. Your app doesn't have to "know" it's on a single or multiple processor system or do anything special to take advantage of multiple processors, other than threading -- which you can do on a single processor system anyway. Most applications are lazy and unimaginative, and do everything in a single thread (worse, the same thread that is processing event messages from the GUI, which is why apps lock up -- when they end up in a bad state they stop processing events from the OS and won't paint, resize, etc.). But when you take advantage of multithreading, there are some sand traps but it's a cool way to code and that's how you take advantage of multiple cores without having to know what kind of system you are on. I would assume OSX, being based on BSD, is similar, but I don't know the architecture to the degree I know Windows.
In Windows, you can set process "affinity", locking it down to a fixed processor core, through Task Manager. Don't know if you can do that in OSX...
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 13, 11:05 AM
and this got negative votes because...??????????
All the people that just coughed up $3k for a quad core MacPro.
All the people that just coughed up $3k for a quad core MacPro.
jholzner
Jul 27, 11:28 AM
I read the link, and it give no mention of the speeds of the notebook chips. It only gives a range for the desktop chips. Maybe you didn't read it.
When did Apple have pentium-era chips in their machines?
They didn't. Where is this Mhz myth you are talking about? They are downplaying the use of Mhz was the point I was making.
When did Apple have pentium-era chips in their machines?
They didn't. Where is this Mhz myth you are talking about? They are downplaying the use of Mhz was the point I was making.
