dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:37 PM
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, 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 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.
Who said Apple created the first GUI.
Jobs himself credits Xerox for their GUI. :rolleyes:
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes, 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 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.
Who said Apple created the first GUI.
Jobs himself credits Xerox for their GUI. :rolleyes:
Arcus
Apr 25, 03:46 PM
Sued for breaking what law?
Being sued and breaking the law are two different things. I can sue you for killing the tree between our yards. You didnt break any law, but I can still sue.
I kinda see where he is a bit right. If I turn off or say no to allowing the apps to use my location this might suggest to the user that it is not tracking and storing this data. I do not think that it is a stretch to make that connection.
I do agree this is way out of hand though.
Being sued and breaking the law are two different things. I can sue you for killing the tree between our yards. You didnt break any law, but I can still sue.
I kinda see where he is a bit right. If I turn off or say no to allowing the apps to use my location this might suggest to the user that it is not tracking and storing this data. I do not think that it is a stretch to make that connection.
I do agree this is way out of hand though.
R94N
Aug 18, 05:23 AM
A blue PS3 is a nice idea.
GQB
Mar 31, 05:10 PM
Good. I hope they take one of the last strengths of the iPad ecosystem away from it.
If you're going to spew nonsense, at least make it relevant to the thread.
If you're going to spew nonsense, at least make it relevant to the thread.
fraserdrew
Aug 6, 01:02 PM
I have tried the vista Beta, and ran in via BootCamp, so no different hardware. Tiger is miles ahead of vista.
Put simply: Tiger Works.... Vista Crashes and takes 2 years longer than tiger to do the same task.
I don't care how it looks, i don't care about see-through windows. I want something that works. Tiger gives me that.... and i hope leopard makes it even better. Tiger is ahead of the competition, hopefully leopard will be further forward, beating Vista to where it should be... In a beige, boring box:D
Put simply: Tiger Works.... Vista Crashes and takes 2 years longer than tiger to do the same task.
I don't care how it looks, i don't care about see-through windows. I want something that works. Tiger gives me that.... and i hope leopard makes it even better. Tiger is ahead of the competition, hopefully leopard will be further forward, beating Vista to where it should be... In a beige, boring box:D
barkomatic
Mar 31, 03:58 PM
At a glance your statement sounds fine. But that logic can be used for following logics:
1. I don't care what US does to rest of world as long as I as an american can live nice, prosperous life.
but i digress...
You're comparing a phone or a tablet to U.S. foreign policy? I'm sorry, I don't think gadgets are as important as that but apparently you do. I think you need a check on your perspective.
1. I don't care what US does to rest of world as long as I as an american can live nice, prosperous life.
but i digress...
You're comparing a phone or a tablet to U.S. foreign policy? I'm sorry, I don't think gadgets are as important as that but apparently you do. I think you need a check on your perspective.
THX1139
Aug 21, 02:09 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.
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.
andiwm2003
Apr 25, 03:01 PM
Maybe next time read the post you are responding to - rather negatively to boot. The post I quoted discussed Apple exploiting people.
So an old post says apple is exploiting them and you imply I said that then? I said on numerous occasions clearly that this is not about Apple using this data. Interesting way to quote posts you have there:rolleyes:
So an old post says apple is exploiting them and you imply I said that then? I said on numerous occasions clearly that this is not about Apple using this data. Interesting way to quote posts you have there:rolleyes:
leekohler
Apr 28, 10:21 AM
I think you hit the nail on the head. Trump may have made a tactical error by starting the hardcore birther attack too early. But of course he's got more tricks in his bag. He will fire one attack after another to wear down his enemy. It kind of makes me wonder if Trump is a closet Scientologist.
Well, he's certainly not a closet jackass.
Well, he's certainly not a closet jackass.
Silentwave
Jul 14, 05:28 PM
All three chips produce the same performance at the same clockspeed. Cache size may make a difference, but the Conroe models starting at 2.4 GHz all have the large 4 MB cache. So a single 2.66 GHz Woodcrest will be substantially slower than a 2.93 GHz Conroe. Not that it matters; the 2.93 GHz Conroe is extremely overpriced and unlikely to be used in any Macintosh.
While I agree that the 2.93 Conroe is unlikely to make its way into the macs, I don't think the difference will be 'substantial.' The Woodcrest has a faster FSB, and most other variables are equal except clock speed. Based on the benchmarks on the various Conroe versions, I think that the 2.66 Woodcrest will offer performance only very slightly slower than Conroe 2.93.
I personally would expect 2.0GHz Conroe, 2.66 GHz Conroe, 2 x 2 GHz Woodcrest and 2 x 2.66 GHz Woodcrest for a wide range from cheap to maximum performance.
Just a nit, but IIRC isn't the codename for conroe based chips running at 2.4 and below with 2MB L2 caches Allendale? (there is a separate 2.4 with 4mb L2)
I'm still not sure whether Apple will go all woodcrest to get better prices on chips and RAM (FB-DIMM is exclusive to woodcrest in apple's potential lineup)but I would expect either 2x2GHz or 2x2.3GHz as a low end quad, and either a 2x2.66 or 2x3.0 for the high end. Perhaps the 3.0GHz will be a BTO option for the 2x2.66, like the 2.16 was a BTO originally on the 2.0 MBP.
"One more thing, you know we complained about not breaking 3GHz with Power-PC, so for our latest quad, we figured you'd all like to finally do that. So, you can order your top level 2.66 Xeon quad as a build to order with two of the 3.0GHz Xeon chips!"
While I agree that the 2.93 Conroe is unlikely to make its way into the macs, I don't think the difference will be 'substantial.' The Woodcrest has a faster FSB, and most other variables are equal except clock speed. Based on the benchmarks on the various Conroe versions, I think that the 2.66 Woodcrest will offer performance only very slightly slower than Conroe 2.93.
I personally would expect 2.0GHz Conroe, 2.66 GHz Conroe, 2 x 2 GHz Woodcrest and 2 x 2.66 GHz Woodcrest for a wide range from cheap to maximum performance.
Just a nit, but IIRC isn't the codename for conroe based chips running at 2.4 and below with 2MB L2 caches Allendale? (there is a separate 2.4 with 4mb L2)
I'm still not sure whether Apple will go all woodcrest to get better prices on chips and RAM (FB-DIMM is exclusive to woodcrest in apple's potential lineup)but I would expect either 2x2GHz or 2x2.3GHz as a low end quad, and either a 2x2.66 or 2x3.0 for the high end. Perhaps the 3.0GHz will be a BTO option for the 2x2.66, like the 2.16 was a BTO originally on the 2.0 MBP.
"One more thing, you know we complained about not breaking 3GHz with Power-PC, so for our latest quad, we figured you'd all like to finally do that. So, you can order your top level 2.66 Xeon quad as a build to order with two of the 3.0GHz Xeon chips!"
dscuber9000
Mar 1, 08:13 AM
Yet another case of straight people telling gay people how being gay works. I just don't get it.:rolleyes:
nick123222
Mar 27, 03:59 AM
I use Spotlight, but Launchpad is terribly inefficient compared to stacks. You have to click on its icon to invoke it, hunt through potentially a bunch of different screens, click on a folder if you've organized your apps, and then click on your app. With stacks, I move my cursor down to the dock, click on the appropriate stack, and then click on my app. 2 clicks vs a button press, a bunch of swipes, hunting, and 2 more clicks.
Yes but, with stacks, I often have to do a lot of scrolling to find the app in my applications folder because I haven't spent the time to organise it all into folders. With launchpad, I would have every app in a folder (probably) so I would probably have only 1-3 pages. For me the number of clicks will be the same for the apps that I store in folders already, just with less scrolling:
Stacks: click the stack, scroll to the folder, click the folder, click the app.
Launchpad: click launchpad, swipe to the correct page (if necessary), click the folder, click the app.
I think it will be easier to find apps in launchpad because of the easy use of folders and the fact that it is fullscreen.
Yes but, with stacks, I often have to do a lot of scrolling to find the app in my applications folder because I haven't spent the time to organise it all into folders. With launchpad, I would have every app in a folder (probably) so I would probably have only 1-3 pages. For me the number of clicks will be the same for the apps that I store in folders already, just with less scrolling:
Stacks: click the stack, scroll to the folder, click the folder, click the app.
Launchpad: click launchpad, swipe to the correct page (if necessary), click the folder, click the app.
I think it will be easier to find apps in launchpad because of the easy use of folders and the fact that it is fullscreen.
mandoman
Nov 28, 06:33 PM
Universal can take their catalog of music and shove it where
the sun don't shine.
the sun don't shine.
pavetheforest
Sep 15, 09:44 PM
Dude I'm going to sell my dell.
guffman
Aug 6, 01:46 PM
Apple is described as an "Applicant".
good catch - I still think it won't matter...
EDIT: In this link, the company is also described as an "Applicant"
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=odbjam.6.1
good catch - I still think it won't matter...
EDIT: In this link, the company is also described as an "Applicant"
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=odbjam.6.1
mwswami
Jul 21, 04:45 PM
I have way more than 4 optical dirves. But multiple DVD/CD duplication is not my thing. Moreover, running a bunch of copies of Toast to burn DVDs or CDs is not processor intensive at all and does not recquire more than one core.
One way to get eight cores is to get 4 Mac Minis (just wait for the lowest model to become dual core), stack them up, and put them on a KVM. You get 8 cores, and 4 optical drives for *cheap*. Just a thought.;)
One way to get eight cores is to get 4 Mac Minis (just wait for the lowest model to become dual core), stack them up, and put them on a KVM. You get 8 cores, and 4 optical drives for *cheap*. Just a thought.;)
deconai
Aug 11, 03:48 PM
No, not EVERYONE. I own 4 cell phones. By your logic, I would be counted as 4 people.
I suppose you would be by the cell company.
I suppose you would be by the cell company.
Buschmaster
Nov 29, 09:20 AM
No thanks.
I pay for my music.
Oh, according to them, you must have a Zune. Because everyone who doesn't use a Zune steals music.
This news makes me want to go steal Universal junk I don't even like.
I pay for my music.
Oh, according to them, you must have a Zune. Because everyone who doesn't use a Zune steals music.
This news makes me want to go steal Universal junk I don't even like.
ZildjianKX
Sep 19, 01:53 AM
If all MBPs came with a gig of RAM standard, DL DVD drives, and a better graphics card (and Merom CPU), I would be thrilled.
antdfsc
Nov 29, 07:42 AM
Do they get money from every CD player sold? This is lame, I dont see why Apple should share their profits with any music company just because Microsoft was dumb enough to do it... If they let one company make money off of it, whats to stop the rest from wanting a cut?
aftk2
Aug 25, 04:09 PM
Speaking as someone whose iMac G5 has been out of commission and in the nearby Apple Store for thirty days (!), I'm not the happiest Apple user, either. Thing is, I've only ever had good experiences, prior to this. For example, I had one of the early Apple Studio Displays (the ones that looked like oversized bondi blue iMacs), and when it started wonking out, Apple sent me a box, shipping label pre-printed, and repaired it for free, even after it was out of warranty (there was a known defect.)
This latest episode has been pretty aggravating, though (although the only saving grace is that I'll likely be able to score an Intel iMac out of the deal, which I'm somewhat excited about.)
Heh, maybe I should have the Apple Store twiddle their thumbs for a few more weeks, and I might be able to grab a Core 2 Duo version. :P
This latest episode has been pretty aggravating, though (although the only saving grace is that I'll likely be able to score an Intel iMac out of the deal, which I'm somewhat excited about.)
Heh, maybe I should have the Apple Store twiddle their thumbs for a few more weeks, and I might be able to grab a Core 2 Duo version. :P
safe4mx
Apr 7, 11:57 PM
Well that's pretty childish of both parties. :rolleyes:
kalun
Sep 18, 11:27 PM
As I is naught en Amerikan canned sumone plz tell mi wen tanksgifting is? :p
lol, 1337 sp3ak FTW!!
lol, 1337 sp3ak FTW!!
boncellis
Jul 20, 10:22 AM
As far as the name goes, how about the "Mac Quattro Pro." ;) Then maybe Apple could acquire the rights to the software and include it in the iWork suite...
No comments:
Post a Comment