unlinked
Apr 3, 07:56 AM
I don't have one, however I did like this ad.
Curious if the same marketing company that does the current ip4 commercials does this one; as many have stated opinions of how terrible it is.
This ad has class, the "if you don't have an iPhone", not so much.
I like it a lot more than the "if you don't have an iPhone" ads but it still leaves me a little confused. The only phone/tablet ads I have ever noticed pushing thinness where iPhone ads (maybe I have poor ad retention or they never aired outside of the US). Making things thinner seemed like an Apple fetish that never overly interested me. I'm glad they agree with me a little bit now.
Curious if the same marketing company that does the current ip4 commercials does this one; as many have stated opinions of how terrible it is.
This ad has class, the "if you don't have an iPhone", not so much.
I like it a lot more than the "if you don't have an iPhone" ads but it still leaves me a little confused. The only phone/tablet ads I have ever noticed pushing thinness where iPhone ads (maybe I have poor ad retention or they never aired outside of the US). Making things thinner seemed like an Apple fetish that never overly interested me. I'm glad they agree with me a little bit now.
swarmster
Sep 14, 08:57 AM
This story gets buried in the blog and a story of ninja stars makes page one? No Apple bias here. :rolleyes:
Consumer Reports says "we still think the same thing" for the third time and that's first page news? Sounds more like they're fishing for free publicity.
Anyway, when a reviewing organization "doesn't recommend" what I consider the best phone I've ever owned, it sounds more like I shouldn't bother paying attention to that reviewing organization. Their taste just isn't relevant to mine.
Consumer Reports says "we still think the same thing" for the third time and that's first page news? Sounds more like they're fishing for free publicity.
Anyway, when a reviewing organization "doesn't recommend" what I consider the best phone I've ever owned, it sounds more like I shouldn't bother paying attention to that reviewing organization. Their taste just isn't relevant to mine.
yukio
Apr 12, 10:11 PM
Supposedly the guy behind this new version is also the criminal that destroyed iMovie a few years back.
Randy Ubillos is brilliant, and a really good guy to boot.
Seriously.
Randy Ubillos is brilliant, and a really good guy to boot.
Seriously.
RebootD
Apr 12, 09:59 PM
I hope they don't consider this a all new program and not offer upgrades.
But then again it might be offered for cheap on the App Store anyway.
It will be interesting if they sell it stand alone and drop motion/livetype etc.
But then again it might be offered for cheap on the App Store anyway.
It will be interesting if they sell it stand alone and drop motion/livetype etc.
Baseline
Nov 15, 12:21 PM
OK, I'm hardly a programmer (PHP doesn't really count) but that's the exact same description that I've heard applied to the description of what it takes to vectorize a program (i.e. make it Alti-Vec optimized) [that and the process of making loops that can be unrolled]. So I've got to ask, is there some difference between those two concepts? If not, it sure seems like we would have a lot more multi-core enabled apps out there already...
I'm glad you admit that PHP doesn't count :)
But to answer your question: There are situations where vectorization and multi-threading/processing are both applicable. However, vectorization *tends* to work on chunks of data that are not dependent on each other, but simliar. Say, you have four integers, and you need to double them all. You could vectorize that, and it'd be a lot cheaper that spawning additional threads to do each multiplication.
However, take Word for example. I don't know how it works, but let's assume that the main editor is one thread, and the real-time spell/grammar checker is a separate thread. Those two tasks are not at all the same, so you couldn't vectorize that, but you could very easily multi-thread it.
To bring it back to my cake example, let's say you had to crack four eggs. It would make sense to vectorize that, crack all four at the same time. But then let's say you have to crack one egg, pour 500ml of milk, and measure 250g of flour. You wouldn't vectorize that, you'd multi-thread it.
I'm glad you admit that PHP doesn't count :)
But to answer your question: There are situations where vectorization and multi-threading/processing are both applicable. However, vectorization *tends* to work on chunks of data that are not dependent on each other, but simliar. Say, you have four integers, and you need to double them all. You could vectorize that, and it'd be a lot cheaper that spawning additional threads to do each multiplication.
However, take Word for example. I don't know how it works, but let's assume that the main editor is one thread, and the real-time spell/grammar checker is a separate thread. Those two tasks are not at all the same, so you couldn't vectorize that, but you could very easily multi-thread it.
To bring it back to my cake example, let's say you had to crack four eggs. It would make sense to vectorize that, crack all four at the same time. But then let's say you have to crack one egg, pour 500ml of milk, and measure 250g of flour. You wouldn't vectorize that, you'd multi-thread it.
CIA
Apr 13, 01:11 AM
+1 here. Every time I've tried to use iMovie for a "quick" edit it always ends in disasters like this. In my case, I was trying to move some music around and time my edits with the music. It was really infuriating trying to do this in iMovie compared to how fast I could have done it in FCP. I guess we'll have wait till Apple posts more info or we get it in our hands to really tell if it can be run like the current FCP.
I second this.
I second this.
designed
Mar 23, 11:36 AM
33 mins per frame with the iMac i7? That seems awfully fast. 25k PPD. That looks like the time of a 3Ghz 8 core previous generation Mac Pro.
Actually I'm using a Mac Pro with a 8-core 2,26GHz setup.
Actually I'm using a Mac Pro with a 8-core 2,26GHz setup.
Carniphage
Nov 30, 03:22 AM
I'll speak loud and clear:
DVR
iTunes Store can't now nor will it likely ever replace Dish Network for me. Just let me record my shows either directly with iTV or via something connected to it. I hope when this is released, HD DVD and Blu-ray make there way into Macs.
No No No No No!
All a DVR is - is a better VHS. A way of watching broadcast TV a little more easily. It's a timeshifter, but it is not revolutionary.
DVRs are popular with the (few) people who have them because they end some of the scheduling tyranny of the broadcasters.
But the problem is not scheduling. The problem is broadcasting itself.
Every modern business has had to face up to the opportunities and challenges of the Internet. One of the most significant is what they call disintermediation. Cutting out the middle men. Buying direct.
TV needs to be disintermediated. The advertisers and the networks get in the way. There needs to be a better pathway between producers and consumers.
Advertisers screw-up television. They influence content. Great shows are pulled, not because they don't have enough enthusiastic viewers, but because they don't attract enough consumers of sanitary towels or tooth whitener.
Lousy shows clog up the airwaves because they attract a large number of bottom-dwelling viewers who might just notice the ad for low-price hemorrhoid cream.
Broadcast TV is a business model from the 50s which needs to die. But if you *really* want your TV content determined by the marketeers of ant-acid remedies then stick with your DVR. Stick with Celebrity Love Spacktard. Cheer it up for American Idle. Wave pom poms like a sixteen year-old for the vacuous, empty spam that the networks churn out, to fill the gaps between revenue-generating advertising.
But while dreaming of Celebutard Love Assault... just for a second, imagine how much better TV could be if we could pay Joss Wheadon for Firefly DIRECTLY, or pay someone to make Star Trek with the same level of integrity as Battlestar.
Hint - if it started to suck, we would stop paying.
I'd prefer my television direct.
Screw the advertisers. Screw the networks. Screw Rupert Murdoch. In fact, pull down your dish and cram it in Rupert Murdoch.
Go iTV
C.
DVR
iTunes Store can't now nor will it likely ever replace Dish Network for me. Just let me record my shows either directly with iTV or via something connected to it. I hope when this is released, HD DVD and Blu-ray make there way into Macs.
No No No No No!
All a DVR is - is a better VHS. A way of watching broadcast TV a little more easily. It's a timeshifter, but it is not revolutionary.
DVRs are popular with the (few) people who have them because they end some of the scheduling tyranny of the broadcasters.
But the problem is not scheduling. The problem is broadcasting itself.
Every modern business has had to face up to the opportunities and challenges of the Internet. One of the most significant is what they call disintermediation. Cutting out the middle men. Buying direct.
TV needs to be disintermediated. The advertisers and the networks get in the way. There needs to be a better pathway between producers and consumers.
Advertisers screw-up television. They influence content. Great shows are pulled, not because they don't have enough enthusiastic viewers, but because they don't attract enough consumers of sanitary towels or tooth whitener.
Lousy shows clog up the airwaves because they attract a large number of bottom-dwelling viewers who might just notice the ad for low-price hemorrhoid cream.
Broadcast TV is a business model from the 50s which needs to die. But if you *really* want your TV content determined by the marketeers of ant-acid remedies then stick with your DVR. Stick with Celebrity Love Spacktard. Cheer it up for American Idle. Wave pom poms like a sixteen year-old for the vacuous, empty spam that the networks churn out, to fill the gaps between revenue-generating advertising.
But while dreaming of Celebutard Love Assault... just for a second, imagine how much better TV could be if we could pay Joss Wheadon for Firefly DIRECTLY, or pay someone to make Star Trek with the same level of integrity as Battlestar.
Hint - if it started to suck, we would stop paying.
I'd prefer my television direct.
Screw the advertisers. Screw the networks. Screw Rupert Murdoch. In fact, pull down your dish and cram it in Rupert Murdoch.
Go iTV
C.
dietwater5
Apr 21, 11:17 AM
If you have a passcode on your phone then you cant sync/create a backup if your phone was lost or stolen
Edge100
Sep 1, 12:28 PM
I'm not sure about this one. It will depend on how agressively Apple prices these.
I have a 20" iMac, and with my edu discount (at the time), I paid about $2500 (Canadian) for it with 2GB RAM (from Apple...was cheaper than anywhere else, believe it or not!), 256MB VRAM, and a 250GB HD.
For about $350-450, I can get a decent (not great, but decent) 20" widescreen display and hook it up to my iMac, giving me 3360 x 1050 resolution, which is plenty wide enough to display 36+ faders in Logic, plus some other apps (Live, Reason) that I use with it. A 23" display would only give me 1920 x 1200.
The point is: depending on how Apple prices it, I can get the 20" plus an external monitor and get more space for less money.
I can see this working if (a) the 23" isn't substantially more expensive than the 20" AND (b) there are a few other things (i.e. bigger HD, more RAM, faster/better vid card) to distinguish the machines. This is the precise reason I didn't get the 500GB drive in my iMac...I went up to 250, but I could make up the additional 250GB over Firewire for a lot less.
Either way, these should be sweet. I love my iMac (it does EVERYTHING I need today) and I don't anticipate upgrading for a number of years (well, maybe I'll slap in a Merom after the Applecare expires!)
Anyway, just my two cents.
I have a 20" iMac, and with my edu discount (at the time), I paid about $2500 (Canadian) for it with 2GB RAM (from Apple...was cheaper than anywhere else, believe it or not!), 256MB VRAM, and a 250GB HD.
For about $350-450, I can get a decent (not great, but decent) 20" widescreen display and hook it up to my iMac, giving me 3360 x 1050 resolution, which is plenty wide enough to display 36+ faders in Logic, plus some other apps (Live, Reason) that I use with it. A 23" display would only give me 1920 x 1200.
The point is: depending on how Apple prices it, I can get the 20" plus an external monitor and get more space for less money.
I can see this working if (a) the 23" isn't substantially more expensive than the 20" AND (b) there are a few other things (i.e. bigger HD, more RAM, faster/better vid card) to distinguish the machines. This is the precise reason I didn't get the 500GB drive in my iMac...I went up to 250, but I could make up the additional 250GB over Firewire for a lot less.
Either way, these should be sweet. I love my iMac (it does EVERYTHING I need today) and I don't anticipate upgrading for a number of years (well, maybe I'll slap in a Merom after the Applecare expires!)
Anyway, just my two cents.
brianfast
Sep 14, 12:24 PM
I'm going to try to pick up the Griffin Vue today... Sometimes it pays to release your product first...
tortoise
Sep 7, 02:17 AM
Now that iMac is Core 2 Duo, the Academic $899 17" iMac is a mini killer config.
Except that I want to use my 24" monitor...
Except that I want to use my 24" monitor...
koruki
Mar 22, 10:53 PM
It's for people who are SERIOUS about music and would never listen to anything less then lossless (whenever possible).
There are people who are serious about music and there are audiophiles. I have my share of high end headphones and amps. In saying that I'd never take anything away from someone who just enjoys the sound of music instead of checking to see if they can hear the air between two strings from a guitar in a track :)
There are people who are serious about music and there are audiophiles. I have my share of high end headphones and amps. In saying that I'd never take anything away from someone who just enjoys the sound of music instead of checking to see if they can hear the air between two strings from a guitar in a track :)
Spoony
Apr 26, 02:02 PM
Also i've never had a Mac.
Does apple use the term "applications" for their software as opposed to "programs" like windows.
If that is the case all Apple is doing is shortening their Mac name Applications to App. Everyone else is just copying them.
Everyone else can call them programs and lets call it a day.
Does apple use the term "applications" for their software as opposed to "programs" like windows.
If that is the case all Apple is doing is shortening their Mac name Applications to App. Everyone else is just copying them.
Everyone else can call them programs and lets call it a day.
Plymouthbreezer
Sep 1, 03:11 PM
This would give me a lovely reason to ask for a nice 20" iMac for Christmas!
My 1GHz G4 iMac is starting to show its age!
My 1GHz G4 iMac is starting to show its age!
garybUK
Feb 24, 03:13 AM
Hold it right there! The Kia models sold in Europe actually nowadays borrow from the current Hyundai Motor Company parts bin, and as such are way more civilized cars. Anyone who's driven the Kia Cee'd hatchback in Europe know it's a way better car than people think.
Your using Hyundai to make Kia/Chevy seem a good car?! hah, the ONLY good Hyundai is the Coupe, all the others are pretty nasty.
Most of the dealerships here lump Proton, Hyundai and Kia... why? they are cheap cars for mums and old people that goto the supermarket, they are no where near upto the quality of the big german cars. Even most jap cars are pretty rubbish to be honest, even Honda dealers are shutting down left, right and centre, GM (Opel/Vauxhall's) new Astra's and the other bigger horrible thing, seem to have just styled them on the Japanese cars... yuk! World cars do not work, different markets want different things.
Your using Hyundai to make Kia/Chevy seem a good car?! hah, the ONLY good Hyundai is the Coupe, all the others are pretty nasty.
Most of the dealerships here lump Proton, Hyundai and Kia... why? they are cheap cars for mums and old people that goto the supermarket, they are no where near upto the quality of the big german cars. Even most jap cars are pretty rubbish to be honest, even Honda dealers are shutting down left, right and centre, GM (Opel/Vauxhall's) new Astra's and the other bigger horrible thing, seem to have just styled them on the Japanese cars... yuk! World cars do not work, different markets want different things.
Heavy Fluid
Nov 25, 03:56 PM
Used, but in really good condition. Great components and tires should make this a blast to ride.
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q34/lovtrance/KHS2.jpg
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q34/lovtrance/KHS2.jpg
surroundfan
Aug 29, 09:40 AM
Provided they move the current Core Duo model down to the $US599 price point with the specs intact, I'll be happy.
My main concerns are to ditch the Core Solo and to lose the combo drive (a bit too 2002 when the rest of the world is offering DVD burners in everything but their $US299 base models). An 80GB HDD (rather than 60GB) to compete with all these cheapies would also be nice.
My main concerns are to ditch the Core Solo and to lose the combo drive (a bit too 2002 when the rest of the world is offering DVD burners in everything but their $US299 base models). An 80GB HDD (rather than 60GB) to compete with all these cheapies would also be nice.
Blue Velvet
Nov 28, 01:22 PM
Honestly, why does M$ keeps trying to "innovate" on each and every market, instead of just focusing on the PC platform?
Because they fear the iPod and what it — and its ecosystem — may potentially evolve into; becoming a platform in its own right, particularly with the convergence of multimedia in the home.
Because they fear the iPod and what it — and its ecosystem — may potentially evolve into; becoming a platform in its own right, particularly with the convergence of multimedia in the home.
Object-X
Sep 1, 12:08 PM
hopefully it's going to look like this:
56364
I agree, I want an iMac like computer with the aluminum housing; looks better on my desk! ;)
At any rate, hopefully the form factor will be thinner. I can see the 17" eventually being relegated to eMac status.
56364
I agree, I want an iMac like computer with the aluminum housing; looks better on my desk! ;)
At any rate, hopefully the form factor will be thinner. I can see the 17" eventually being relegated to eMac status.
drewyboy
May 2, 04:36 PM
I'm just wondering if this is a more thorough way of deleting the app. Like, taking out app support and preferences unlike when you just drag the app into the trash. Does this simply move it to the trash or does it take care of everything in the background?
I think it is basically making 2 ways to delete an app, which I suppose will be more "user friendly" for people coming to Mac from the iDevices halo. But again, wondering if this actually cleans the apps crap up.
I think it is basically making 2 ways to delete an app, which I suppose will be more "user friendly" for people coming to Mac from the iDevices halo. But again, wondering if this actually cleans the apps crap up.
surroundfan
Sep 6, 06:56 AM
Most of Europe's down. Oz and the US are still up, so a product update's unlikely (I'd guess)...
shecky
Oct 23, 10:53 AM
What I would like to see them add is eSATA support but I bet they dont.
agreed, and agreed.
agreed, and agreed.
Unspeaked
Sep 1, 01:58 PM
Definitely not. There's too much branding in the iMac name. For consumers, it means ease and simplicity with power and looks.
Agreed.
It'd be almost as bad as calling their music player a Pod.
The iMac name is gold.
Agreed.
It'd be almost as bad as calling their music player a Pod.
The iMac name is gold.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий