Dagless
Aug 12, 05:43 AM
GT by Citro�n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT_by_Citro�n).
Ooo I have that on GT PSP. Can't remember if it's a collectors edition bonus or whatever, but the ultra annoying thing (which I cannot wrap my head around why they would do this) is some cars cannot be transferred to the PS3 version of the game. Despite the PS3 version having the same cars and then some.
Ooo I have that on GT PSP. Can't remember if it's a collectors edition bonus or whatever, but the ultra annoying thing (which I cannot wrap my head around why they would do this) is some cars cannot be transferred to the PS3 version of the game. Despite the PS3 version having the same cars and then some.
DJMastaWes
Aug 26, 10:12 PM
No. its usually by 6AM Pacific 9AM Eastern. I KNOW - not guessing.
Well, this was not the case for the BT Mighty Mouse.
Anyway, I'm hopeing that we see Merom in a the next few days. That would make me JUMP for joy!
Well, this was not the case for the BT Mighty Mouse.
Anyway, I'm hopeing that we see Merom in a the next few days. That would make me JUMP for joy!
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.
mcrain
Mar 22, 10:09 AM
The hypocrisy coming from the left in the media on this issue is palpable...
I was stewing about this, and went to the Google News page, more "liberal" sites like the Huffington Post or MSNBC, my local paper, FoxNews and in every case, there were stories that were either critical or were about the criticism or the reasons for the criticism of the Libya action. (Stories about Senator XYZ saying coalition has issues vs. a story about the issues with the coaltion). So, it's pretty obvious that the mainstream media are covering this story, and reporting both the white house story and providing analysis and criticism.
I'm confused by what you think is so hypocritical or who you think is being such.
Are you talking about hipocracy from "the left in the media" or the left?" Do you expect every story to be critical of President Obama and Libya? Do you think every story that came out during the GWB administration was critical of Afghanistan or Iraq? Especially in the first days? Do you think every story from certain media outlets is liberal? I mean, is a story automatically liberal because it comes from NPR, or say, MSNBC or Huffington Post? Someone critiqued your using Fox News as a source, but what you quoted was mainly just facts. I think Fox News often inserts more of their spin into stories than their competitors (and as a result, their news reporting often appears tainted or is assumed tainted), and they are always supportive of the GOP, but that doesn't mean that I think the facts they report are any less fact. Is critique of the President from MSNBC any less critique because its coming from MSNBC? Are you suspicious of their criticism? Do you think they are using kid gloves? Would you expect a hypothetical neutral news site (if it exists) to be more critical? Would it be as critical and partisan as Fox News?
On the other hand, are you talking about hipocracy by those on the left, in the media? I mean, you quoted the President and what he said. If so, it really hasn't got anything to do with the media, right? Also, doesn't it seem like President Obama got pushed into this conflict? There were allies and some organizations clamoring for involvement, unlike prior to Iraq. The President was making statements that indicated reluctance to get involved. The military was saying it would not be simple, would involve real attacks, and it may be too late. But, there was pushing by our allies, human rights groups, etc... Plus, aren't we on the hook to have our allies backs? I mean, isn't the US on the hook to pay back a lot of favors to the Iraq/Afghanistan coalitions?
Unlike Iraq where the President was actively trying to sell the public on a conflict he, and a small group of insiders, wanted. Using evidence that was weak at best, and we now know was false. This salesmanship initially received pretty positive reporting, which only turned really sour as the evidence of betrayal and lies started coming out.
I was stewing about this, and went to the Google News page, more "liberal" sites like the Huffington Post or MSNBC, my local paper, FoxNews and in every case, there were stories that were either critical or were about the criticism or the reasons for the criticism of the Libya action. (Stories about Senator XYZ saying coalition has issues vs. a story about the issues with the coaltion). So, it's pretty obvious that the mainstream media are covering this story, and reporting both the white house story and providing analysis and criticism.
I'm confused by what you think is so hypocritical or who you think is being such.
Are you talking about hipocracy from "the left in the media" or the left?" Do you expect every story to be critical of President Obama and Libya? Do you think every story that came out during the GWB administration was critical of Afghanistan or Iraq? Especially in the first days? Do you think every story from certain media outlets is liberal? I mean, is a story automatically liberal because it comes from NPR, or say, MSNBC or Huffington Post? Someone critiqued your using Fox News as a source, but what you quoted was mainly just facts. I think Fox News often inserts more of their spin into stories than their competitors (and as a result, their news reporting often appears tainted or is assumed tainted), and they are always supportive of the GOP, but that doesn't mean that I think the facts they report are any less fact. Is critique of the President from MSNBC any less critique because its coming from MSNBC? Are you suspicious of their criticism? Do you think they are using kid gloves? Would you expect a hypothetical neutral news site (if it exists) to be more critical? Would it be as critical and partisan as Fox News?
On the other hand, are you talking about hipocracy by those on the left, in the media? I mean, you quoted the President and what he said. If so, it really hasn't got anything to do with the media, right? Also, doesn't it seem like President Obama got pushed into this conflict? There were allies and some organizations clamoring for involvement, unlike prior to Iraq. The President was making statements that indicated reluctance to get involved. The military was saying it would not be simple, would involve real attacks, and it may be too late. But, there was pushing by our allies, human rights groups, etc... Plus, aren't we on the hook to have our allies backs? I mean, isn't the US on the hook to pay back a lot of favors to the Iraq/Afghanistan coalitions?
Unlike Iraq where the President was actively trying to sell the public on a conflict he, and a small group of insiders, wanted. Using evidence that was weak at best, and we now know was false. This salesmanship initially received pretty positive reporting, which only turned really sour as the evidence of betrayal and lies started coming out.
blahblah100
Apr 27, 09:46 AM
There aren't any concerns, but since the media hyped this up so much, they had to address it. Now they have. Should be the end of the story. But it won't be since there are anti-Apple folks who will push to keep this story alive as long as they can until the next Apple-gate story gets created.
And I'm sure when the next Apple-gate story gets created, the blind fanbois will jump to their defense. :rolleyes:
And I'm sure when the next Apple-gate story gets created, the blind fanbois will jump to their defense. :rolleyes:
illegalprelude
Aug 25, 03:15 PM
Call it what you want but these new MacBooks are crap. Yea there is people who are enjoying theirs without a hitch but look at all the reports of problems. Not once on this forum have we had a flood of problems with a single unit. Apple dropped the ball on this one. Poorly made unit
Some_Big_Spoon
Aug 26, 09:21 PM
May have been said, but ship dates on iMacs are 7-10 days.
tripjammer
Mar 22, 12:51 PM
The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Nope...its rim...so the hardware is going to be crap. The Samsung will be closer to the ipad 2 killer....what am I saying there will never be an ipad 2 killer.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Nope...its rim...so the hardware is going to be crap. The Samsung will be closer to the ipad 2 killer....what am I saying there will never be an ipad 2 killer.
Mtn Tamale
Jul 14, 03:27 PM
If they use single woodcrest CPU's instead of Conroe in the lower end, it isn't because marketing is driving the decision, it would likely be manufacturing and operations, probably a volume/pricing decision. If the most popular Powermacs are low and high end, which I believe is true, then there is benefit to making all Woodcrest. If Apple only populated the scantily sold highest end model with Woodcrest chips they would likely have to sell them for too much.
I'm talking about Core2 Duo machines - either Conroe or Woodcrest.
Ports? My G5 tower had no more ports than any other PC I've seen. My current CD iMac actually lacks any kind of high-speed port for external hard-drives or burners.
Software? OK, I know it's supposed to be a selling point, but there's not a damn thing outside of iTunes I use in iLife enough to justify hardware prices at any level. They're nice freebies, but I happily pay the Apple Tax to have an OS that works with me rather than against me. Unquestionably worth it, but I'm not going to pretend that I'm getting good value in the (theoretical) hardware.
I think I know what the apologists will say - no one else will offer Woodcrest in a low-end pro machine, they'll use Conroe. And yeah, that's probably true, but for a reason - there's no reason to put Woodcrest in the low-end tower offering, aside from a desire to perpetuate the artifical line distinctions. Which isn't going to cut it in the Intel world.
I'm talking about Core2 Duo machines - either Conroe or Woodcrest.
Ports? My G5 tower had no more ports than any other PC I've seen. My current CD iMac actually lacks any kind of high-speed port for external hard-drives or burners.
Software? OK, I know it's supposed to be a selling point, but there's not a damn thing outside of iTunes I use in iLife enough to justify hardware prices at any level. They're nice freebies, but I happily pay the Apple Tax to have an OS that works with me rather than against me. Unquestionably worth it, but I'm not going to pretend that I'm getting good value in the (theoretical) hardware.
I think I know what the apologists will say - no one else will offer Woodcrest in a low-end pro machine, they'll use Conroe. And yeah, that's probably true, but for a reason - there's no reason to put Woodcrest in the low-end tower offering, aside from a desire to perpetuate the artifical line distinctions. Which isn't going to cut it in the Intel world.
newdeal
Apr 6, 10:12 AM
Has Intel R&D come up with a new, low-power, backlit keyboard? ;)
(Figured I'd throw that out straight off, as it's bound to come up somewhere along the line)
For most people the ipad is more useful than the air anyway imo. Yes i owned an air, the ipad 1, and now the ipad 2 and the air was just a watered down macbook pro more than the ipad is a scaled up ipod touch
(Figured I'd throw that out straight off, as it's bound to come up somewhere along the line)
For most people the ipad is more useful than the air anyway imo. Yes i owned an air, the ipad 1, and now the ipad 2 and the air was just a watered down macbook pro more than the ipad is a scaled up ipod touch
donlphi
Nov 29, 11:54 AM
To those saying they'll boycott, I'd just like to point out...
...Universal is by far the largest record label in the world, and those of you that say you don't listen to anyone of their artists might need to dig deeper into their subsidiaries, as just a few of the musicians in their stable are:
The Carpenters
Jimi Hendrix
Nikelback
Carole King
Andrea Bocell
Four Tops
Lionel Richie
Cat Stevens
The Jackson 5
The Andrews Sisters
lack ops prestige badges 1-15
lack ops prestige badges.
lack ops prestige symbols
lack ops prestige symbols
lack ops prestige 15 symbol.
cod lack ops prestige levels.
lack ops prestige emblems
call of duty lack ops
...Universal is by far the largest record label in the world, and those of you that say you don't listen to anyone of their artists might need to dig deeper into their subsidiaries, as just a few of the musicians in their stable are:
The Carpenters
Jimi Hendrix
Nikelback
Carole King
Andrea Bocell
Four Tops
Lionel Richie
Cat Stevens
The Jackson 5
The Andrews Sisters
faroZ06
Apr 8, 12:46 AM
I meant last year when the iPhone 4 was released....
Yes, did they have the iPhone 4 in the AT&T stores? I thought they did. I know for sure when the 3G came out, they had it in the AT&T stores as well as the Apple stores.
I don't mean the $50 3GS that you can get now from AT&T.
Yes, did they have the iPhone 4 in the AT&T stores? I thought they did. I know for sure when the 3G came out, they had it in the AT&T stores as well as the Apple stores.
I don't mean the $50 3GS that you can get now from AT&T.
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 2, 04:30 PM
I love that i won a mini in the mini-only race. I'll never touch either of my minis again.
manu chao
Apr 25, 02:10 PM
Clearly you don't understand the issue. Apple is not tracking you since they do not collect this data. Rather your phone is generating a local cache of nearby cell towers and wifi hotspots. This benefits you by making your phones GPS function faster, more accurately and with less battery.
The issue is that the cache is not properly protected and could be used to infer some generalized information about roughly where your phone has been. This data is only accessible by somebody with direct access to your phone, or you phones backup files.
Why do people like that the data on their phones is encrypted and can be remotely wiped? Because it all too likely that something on your phone should not fall into somebody else's hand.
Enabling encryption of the phone by default is just taking reasonable precautions. Creating this data log (by which I mean not deleting any but the most recent entries) is not taking what would be a very reasonable precaution.
I always wondered why the option to encrypt the iPhone backup was there. What data would be on my iPhone but not on my computer (e-mails, browsing history, all sorts of passwords are generally both on my iPhone and my computer). Now I know of one reason, that Apple (or a third-party app) might without my knowledge create databases relating to my phone usage that are more critical than the rest of the data on my computer.
The point is that I would have assumed that any app or part of the OS creating a database would be open and transparent about it.
The issue is that the cache is not properly protected and could be used to infer some generalized information about roughly where your phone has been. This data is only accessible by somebody with direct access to your phone, or you phones backup files.
Why do people like that the data on their phones is encrypted and can be remotely wiped? Because it all too likely that something on your phone should not fall into somebody else's hand.
Enabling encryption of the phone by default is just taking reasonable precautions. Creating this data log (by which I mean not deleting any but the most recent entries) is not taking what would be a very reasonable precaution.
I always wondered why the option to encrypt the iPhone backup was there. What data would be on my iPhone but not on my computer (e-mails, browsing history, all sorts of passwords are generally both on my iPhone and my computer). Now I know of one reason, that Apple (or a third-party app) might without my knowledge create databases relating to my phone usage that are more critical than the rest of the data on my computer.
The point is that I would have assumed that any app or part of the OS creating a database would be open and transparent about it.
akdj
Apr 6, 11:01 AM
Have any of you been able to use Sandy Bridge hardware h.264 on the MBP for your AVC files?
I understand that there is an issue with 24p (it's 24.000 hz not 23.976 hz as it should be) which will be corrected with Ivey Bridge, but 30p/60p/60i should work fine. I'm assuming that this feature will show up in Lion, but probably isn't yet supported in SL.
Yes...using the new MBP, 17" SB 2.2 with FCP. Works fine, regardless of frame rate...however, there are a gazillion different "flavors" of AVC and h.264. I shoot HVX/HPX/EX1 and Canon 5d2/7d cams...all either at 24p/30p/60p. And obviously not AVC...however, h.264 I have plenty of experience with... Never had an issue with ANY FR, and this MBP is zippy as hell! Comparable to my '08 Mac Pro 3ghz/8 core machine for times on rendering and compression and exporting. Love this machine and I'm anxiously awaiting the new iMac/Mac Pro updates. I almost bought the 2010 Mac Pro 12 core...but I wanted to wait out the FCP news this year, so held off. If my new MBP is indicative of the performance boost we can expect with the new Mac pro....regardless of whether they use Sandy or Ivy bridge....it's going to be a phenomenal improvement. Big. Huge. Step up!!!
A lot of pros have already left Mac, but I have been holding out. However, this is the last straw. If the new FCP disappoints I will be jumping ship, buying a high-end PC and switching to Avid or Premiere. I just can't stand the frustrations anymore of watching every consumer itoy get upgraded, and then the Pro stuff getting shafted.
The time is now. The new FCP had better have something equivalent to Mercury Playback, optimization for RED footage, different HD codecs, real-time playback, 64 bit, multi-core usage, etc. If it's a dumbed-down consumer product I will be absolutely livid.
This is Bowl *****!!! Come on man....I see these claims with absolutely NO, ZERO proof to back it up...Links? Pics? Video???? IF anything, MORE people have joined the FCP camp...because more people than EVER are buying Macs! Even though Adobe and Avid are cross platform, the affordability of FCP is a real bonus. Everyone I know that uses FCP and has been using FCP has ZERO interest in flipping. Unless you have an extreme PC...Adobe makes no sense (unless you are using the Quadro nVidia cards in a Mac Pro). Sure, the Merc engine increases performance for a few transitions and filters....but rendering is still necessary in MOST cases! Today's speed of the new Macs....MBP, iMacs, Mac Pros...makes the transition from AVC, XDCam, DVCPro, etc to Pro-Res, is actually a very speedy process. Even Canon stepped up last spring with a plug in to increase transcode speeds almost a 1,000% (used to take a minute or two to transform...now done in 10 seconds or less!!!). Once in Pro Res, editing is an absolute breeze...a cake walk, easy as pie:) Especially if you have a recent generation Mac from the last couple of years.
Now...that said, absolutely, I totally agree improvements can be made. As mentioned many times....media management and better integration between other programs in the suite. However, being a long time FCP user, I'm "used" to the export/share option and don't find it too difficult.
Motion is the program I would like to see take a big step forward. I am also a heavy Adobe user and have the entire CS5 Production bundle...but NOT for Premier...I solely use PhotoShop and After Effects. AE has been my go to animated title compositor. Motion, while decent...is certainly behind the eight ball in comparison to Avid and AE for these tasks.
However...most, if not ALL of the pros I know that have been using FCP continue to do so....and there are more motion pictures, BIG ones...this year, edited on FCP than I can remember in years past. Pulling this BS out of your arse is crap. The iToy phenomenon, in my very humble opinion will actually HELP the Pro Apps...as Apple is making more money than EVER!!! This will afford them the expertise they need to develop the pro apps...more so than they've ever been able to do in the past. Keep in mind...for these iToys to be great, they need content....and again, IMHO...I think Apple knows this, and would be happy if every app, movie, song, etc...that resides in iTunes, Mac Store, App Store, etc....was created WITH their soft/hardware as well. Again, just my opinion....Apple won't shoot themselves and the entire creative community in the foot....just when they've becoming the HIGHEST gaining computer sales platform in the world!!! They're selling more computers (MB, MBP, MBair, MP, iMacs) then EVER...and I attribute that somewhat to the excellent user experience so many folks have had with their "iToys". You gotta figure some of those folks will be "Pro" creative guys. And enticed they will be (my Yoda impersonation) by the hardware and software that Apple offers....so if anything, there is Growth in the Pro sector...hardware and software both. NOT a mass exodus. Again...if you truly have proof that "All those Pros have already left Mac"...I'm all ears. If anything, they've made significant gains. Hence the reason AVID has DECREASED their pricing from the astronomical rates it used to cost...and the proprietary rigs you had to have to run the program.
Sorry for the rant. But what you've stated is absolutely NOT true my friend. Period. And THAT is a fact! If you're deciding whether or not to stick with FCP, cool...fine to make that point. Don't make up BS about other "Pros" and their Post Workflow. Other than the BBC switching to Premier, I can think of NO other real, true professionals that have abandoned FCP because it's lacking. It's still a VERY powerful program. Getting older, several places to shine it up, but it still does the job and does it well.
J
I understand that there is an issue with 24p (it's 24.000 hz not 23.976 hz as it should be) which will be corrected with Ivey Bridge, but 30p/60p/60i should work fine. I'm assuming that this feature will show up in Lion, but probably isn't yet supported in SL.
Yes...using the new MBP, 17" SB 2.2 with FCP. Works fine, regardless of frame rate...however, there are a gazillion different "flavors" of AVC and h.264. I shoot HVX/HPX/EX1 and Canon 5d2/7d cams...all either at 24p/30p/60p. And obviously not AVC...however, h.264 I have plenty of experience with... Never had an issue with ANY FR, and this MBP is zippy as hell! Comparable to my '08 Mac Pro 3ghz/8 core machine for times on rendering and compression and exporting. Love this machine and I'm anxiously awaiting the new iMac/Mac Pro updates. I almost bought the 2010 Mac Pro 12 core...but I wanted to wait out the FCP news this year, so held off. If my new MBP is indicative of the performance boost we can expect with the new Mac pro....regardless of whether they use Sandy or Ivy bridge....it's going to be a phenomenal improvement. Big. Huge. Step up!!!
A lot of pros have already left Mac, but I have been holding out. However, this is the last straw. If the new FCP disappoints I will be jumping ship, buying a high-end PC and switching to Avid or Premiere. I just can't stand the frustrations anymore of watching every consumer itoy get upgraded, and then the Pro stuff getting shafted.
The time is now. The new FCP had better have something equivalent to Mercury Playback, optimization for RED footage, different HD codecs, real-time playback, 64 bit, multi-core usage, etc. If it's a dumbed-down consumer product I will be absolutely livid.
This is Bowl *****!!! Come on man....I see these claims with absolutely NO, ZERO proof to back it up...Links? Pics? Video???? IF anything, MORE people have joined the FCP camp...because more people than EVER are buying Macs! Even though Adobe and Avid are cross platform, the affordability of FCP is a real bonus. Everyone I know that uses FCP and has been using FCP has ZERO interest in flipping. Unless you have an extreme PC...Adobe makes no sense (unless you are using the Quadro nVidia cards in a Mac Pro). Sure, the Merc engine increases performance for a few transitions and filters....but rendering is still necessary in MOST cases! Today's speed of the new Macs....MBP, iMacs, Mac Pros...makes the transition from AVC, XDCam, DVCPro, etc to Pro-Res, is actually a very speedy process. Even Canon stepped up last spring with a plug in to increase transcode speeds almost a 1,000% (used to take a minute or two to transform...now done in 10 seconds or less!!!). Once in Pro Res, editing is an absolute breeze...a cake walk, easy as pie:) Especially if you have a recent generation Mac from the last couple of years.
Now...that said, absolutely, I totally agree improvements can be made. As mentioned many times....media management and better integration between other programs in the suite. However, being a long time FCP user, I'm "used" to the export/share option and don't find it too difficult.
Motion is the program I would like to see take a big step forward. I am also a heavy Adobe user and have the entire CS5 Production bundle...but NOT for Premier...I solely use PhotoShop and After Effects. AE has been my go to animated title compositor. Motion, while decent...is certainly behind the eight ball in comparison to Avid and AE for these tasks.
However...most, if not ALL of the pros I know that have been using FCP continue to do so....and there are more motion pictures, BIG ones...this year, edited on FCP than I can remember in years past. Pulling this BS out of your arse is crap. The iToy phenomenon, in my very humble opinion will actually HELP the Pro Apps...as Apple is making more money than EVER!!! This will afford them the expertise they need to develop the pro apps...more so than they've ever been able to do in the past. Keep in mind...for these iToys to be great, they need content....and again, IMHO...I think Apple knows this, and would be happy if every app, movie, song, etc...that resides in iTunes, Mac Store, App Store, etc....was created WITH their soft/hardware as well. Again, just my opinion....Apple won't shoot themselves and the entire creative community in the foot....just when they've becoming the HIGHEST gaining computer sales platform in the world!!! They're selling more computers (MB, MBP, MBair, MP, iMacs) then EVER...and I attribute that somewhat to the excellent user experience so many folks have had with their "iToys". You gotta figure some of those folks will be "Pro" creative guys. And enticed they will be (my Yoda impersonation) by the hardware and software that Apple offers....so if anything, there is Growth in the Pro sector...hardware and software both. NOT a mass exodus. Again...if you truly have proof that "All those Pros have already left Mac"...I'm all ears. If anything, they've made significant gains. Hence the reason AVID has DECREASED their pricing from the astronomical rates it used to cost...and the proprietary rigs you had to have to run the program.
Sorry for the rant. But what you've stated is absolutely NOT true my friend. Period. And THAT is a fact! If you're deciding whether or not to stick with FCP, cool...fine to make that point. Don't make up BS about other "Pros" and their Post Workflow. Other than the BBC switching to Premier, I can think of NO other real, true professionals that have abandoned FCP because it's lacking. It's still a VERY powerful program. Getting older, several places to shine it up, but it still does the job and does it well.
J
DrRadon
Mar 22, 01:11 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Looking at these specs will be awsome while iPad users actualy have a ******** of Apps to actualy use their specs on. :rolleyes:
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Looking at these specs will be awsome while iPad users actualy have a ******** of Apps to actualy use their specs on. :rolleyes:
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)
iliketyla
Mar 31, 02:39 PM
I've been wanting to say this for a very long time. Google's OS has no advantage over iOS. You could even say it has a disadvantage. Having to create a vanilla code base that needs to function on multiple pieces of hardware is complex, more complexity creates weaker system.
But here's my point. The ONLY ONLY reason why Android market share is anywhere near what it is today is because of the Buy One Get One options at most phone retailers. iOS has NEVER done that and hopefully never will. If you didn't care about the phone or service but needed two "Newer Smart Phones" one for you and one for your wife, why not go with the "Blah Blah" model from Verizon where if I buy one today I get the second for free (two year agreement and activation fees required).
Market share means nothing. This platform is doomed unless Google reins it in and get control over it. If they do, providers will be less willing to work with them, if they don't, by by Android.
My Two Cents.
-LanPhantom
From my own personal experience, I know very few people that have Android phones that took advantage of the BOGO deal.
I personally bought this Android phone because I read reviews, and it was the best lower end phone, and I can't justify spending an enormous amount of money on something I'll upgrade in a year.
I used an iPhone 3GS for a year, and I don't miss it.
It's a very nice phone, but the features that I can use on Android more than make up for any advantages the iPhone had.
Once again, this is just MY opinion, but I figured I'd throw it out there.
But here's my point. The ONLY ONLY reason why Android market share is anywhere near what it is today is because of the Buy One Get One options at most phone retailers. iOS has NEVER done that and hopefully never will. If you didn't care about the phone or service but needed two "Newer Smart Phones" one for you and one for your wife, why not go with the "Blah Blah" model from Verizon where if I buy one today I get the second for free (two year agreement and activation fees required).
Market share means nothing. This platform is doomed unless Google reins it in and get control over it. If they do, providers will be less willing to work with them, if they don't, by by Android.
My Two Cents.
-LanPhantom
From my own personal experience, I know very few people that have Android phones that took advantage of the BOGO deal.
I personally bought this Android phone because I read reviews, and it was the best lower end phone, and I can't justify spending an enormous amount of money on something I'll upgrade in a year.
I used an iPhone 3GS for a year, and I don't miss it.
It's a very nice phone, but the features that I can use on Android more than make up for any advantages the iPhone had.
Once again, this is just MY opinion, but I figured I'd throw it out there.
ivladster
Mar 22, 01:40 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Is this a joke? What specs? Where are the apps, where are amazing games, where are publications and magazines? No where to be found.
Playbook will not even scratch the surface - you heart it here first.
lulz:apple:
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Is this a joke? What specs? Where are the apps, where are amazing games, where are publications and magazines? No where to be found.
Playbook will not even scratch the surface - you heart it here first.
lulz:apple:
Blackforge
Apr 6, 04:45 PM
Unfortunately the Xoom (or any Android device) doesn't support Windows Authentication in the default browser. Quite a few Enterprises use on internal websites, etc. Firefox for Android supports it, but last I heard, it wasn't compatible with the newer processors in the tablets.
Puts a damper in a lot of enterprise positioning they could have done.
iPad/iPhone supports it though..
Puts a damper in a lot of enterprise positioning they could have done.
iPad/iPhone supports it though..
cloudnine
Aug 25, 04:51 PM
Speaking of asinine Apple happenings... why is it that the new Mac Pro standard configuration of 2 dual-core Intel 2.66ghz processors, etc, etc is at $2499, but Apple still has the PowerMac standard configuration of 2 dual-core PowerPC 2.5ghz processors, etc, etc at $3299?
Odd.
Odd.
motulist
Aug 11, 12:49 PM
... It may launch this month, or a year from now.
I think you misunderstood. By "delays that could set it back as far as next year," I interpret that to mean calendar year. So my reading of what the rumor is suggesting is that at the most it'll be released sometime within the first 3 months of or 7 months from now.
I think you misunderstood. By "delays that could set it back as far as next year," I interpret that to mean calendar year. So my reading of what the rumor is suggesting is that at the most it'll be released sometime within the first 3 months of or 7 months from now.
LagunaSol
Apr 11, 11:52 AM
Just picked up a Atrix 4G and on my way checked out the iPhone 4 - it looks decidedly antique and bland in front of the competition
If you're going to judge "looks," the Atrix looks (and feels) like cheap junk next to the iPhone. Just like practically every other Android phone on the market. The iPhone looks like a Rolex sitting next to the Casio of the Android offerings.
Enjoy the plastic. ;)
If you're going to judge "looks," the Atrix looks (and feels) like cheap junk next to the iPhone. Just like practically every other Android phone on the market. The iPhone looks like a Rolex sitting next to the Casio of the Android offerings.
Enjoy the plastic. ;)
mrgazpacho
Aug 27, 09:08 AM
Speaking of wish expectations Multimedia;
I know you're hangin' out for Santa Rosa. The article mentions that it's expected in early 2007. Do you think that would be the date for official announcement of production-standard architecture, or actual availability announcement?
Seems very early to be shipping...
I could go out in September and get a Merom notebook, but I don't mind waiting 6 months for Santa Rosa to hit the street.
I know you're hangin' out for Santa Rosa. The article mentions that it's expected in early 2007. Do you think that would be the date for official announcement of production-standard architecture, or actual availability announcement?
Seems very early to be shipping...
I could go out in September and get a Merom notebook, but I don't mind waiting 6 months for Santa Rosa to hit the street.
No comments:
Post a Comment