z4n3
Apr 6, 03:27 AM
Forget about new Macs! just give us FCS A.S.A.P. :eek:
xStep
Apr 10, 11:35 PM
Everyone is pretty worried about this new overhaul because the guy who botched iMovie is the guy now in charge of FCP.
Uh, iMovie was botched?
Uh, iMovie was botched?
ergle2
Aug 27, 07:41 PM
HI!
Anyone knows if jointly with this rumor is the rumor of the upgrade of graphic cards on MacBook (not Pro) to Intel GMA 965 (I think is this the reference...)?
Thanks!
From the benchmarks I've seen, the 3000/X3000 stuff (the 965 integrated graphics) is *slower* than the 945 integrated graphics. The only advantage it offers is SM 3.0 (pixel shaders), which are required for Vista compliance -- and that nice little sticker that all new PC systems will want for this holiday season. I wouldn't consider it an upgrade.
Anyone knows if jointly with this rumor is the rumor of the upgrade of graphic cards on MacBook (not Pro) to Intel GMA 965 (I think is this the reference...)?
Thanks!
From the benchmarks I've seen, the 3000/X3000 stuff (the 965 integrated graphics) is *slower* than the 945 integrated graphics. The only advantage it offers is SM 3.0 (pixel shaders), which are required for Vista compliance -- and that nice little sticker that all new PC systems will want for this holiday season. I wouldn't consider it an upgrade.
Westside guy
Aug 11, 11:50 PM
What sjo wrote seem quite accurate. Cells are extremly common here. It has become so common that cellphones nowdays are almost considered as a anti-status symbol. Poor people cant "afford" a land line.
I'm old enough to remember that cell phones became the norm in much of what used to be known as Eastern Europe based on simple economics. In many former Soviet-bloc countries the telephone infrastructure was spotty or even non-existent, and setting up cellular phone networks was a heck of a lot cheaper than laying new phone lines all over the countryside.
Of course that's not particularly relevant to Western Europe market penetration; but it does explain how cell phones are so prevalent Europe-wide.
I'm old enough to remember that cell phones became the norm in much of what used to be known as Eastern Europe based on simple economics. In many former Soviet-bloc countries the telephone infrastructure was spotty or even non-existent, and setting up cellular phone networks was a heck of a lot cheaper than laying new phone lines all over the countryside.
Of course that's not particularly relevant to Western Europe market penetration; but it does explain how cell phones are so prevalent Europe-wide.
extraextra
Aug 26, 09:24 PM
The update time for Apple's store is 9am EST? I was under the impression that it was 9am PST. I'm behind the times! (pun intended, I suppose)
Is the 7-10 days for BTO iMacs? Or stock ones?
Is the 7-10 days for BTO iMacs? Or stock ones?
Multimedia
Aug 19, 12:33 PM
And I'm not convinced this is only an application problem. When I run Handbrake on the Quad G5 alone it uses just over two cores 203% @ about 100fps analysis (1st Pass of 2) speed. If I add a Toast encode while that is happening, Handbrake takes a huge hit down to below 150% @ 70-80 fps analysis while Toast can only use about 130% instead of more alone. So the Tiger OS X seems to have difficulty managing more than one multicore application's core usage allocation up to its maximum capability - IE Tiger is not so MultiCore Enabeled as it could be IE Leopard probably will be much moreso - let's hope that is one of its TOP SECRETS.
When I ran tests on the Mac Pro at the Apple Store last Saturday between Toast and/or Handbrake, their use of more cores alone and together was much better. Handbrake alone can analyze up to around 134fps while writing at about 107 fps using about 1.5-1.75 cores. So while not yet fully optimized for Mac Pro yet, it's already outperforming the Quad G5 significantly. Handbrake would appear to analyze files about 33% faster while writing them about 15% faster while using 1.5 to 1.75 cores. Quad G5 does analysis @ about 100fps and writes about 93 fps (2nd Pass) using up to about 2.2 cores.
Toast 7.1 UB uses Mac Pro cores much more than it does Quad cores - in the range of 280 - 310% IE about 3 cores compared to only about 1.5 cores on the Quad G5 as well as on the Dual Core G5. Unfortunately I didn't have encode times for each of the sample files I brought with me from the Quad so I don't know the real time how much faster that really amounts to. Running simultaneously on the Mac Pro, Toast would use over 2.5 cores while handbrake would use only one or less than one at best.
Together simultaneously on Mac Pro 2.66 it's
Toast/Handbrake
2.7 cores/1 core best
2.5 cores/.75 core worst
Handbrake during Toast is down to as few as 60fps but sometimes up to 100fps as well. Toast meanwhile is Still consuming up to almost 3 cores with Handbrake running at the same time. So Toast would appear to be much more optimized for the Mac Pro's MultiCores than it is for the Quad G5's Multicores. Same could be said for Handbrake - especially since it is not really fully Optimized for Mac Pro yet.
When I ran tests on the Mac Pro at the Apple Store last Saturday between Toast and/or Handbrake, their use of more cores alone and together was much better. Handbrake alone can analyze up to around 134fps while writing at about 107 fps using about 1.5-1.75 cores. So while not yet fully optimized for Mac Pro yet, it's already outperforming the Quad G5 significantly. Handbrake would appear to analyze files about 33% faster while writing them about 15% faster while using 1.5 to 1.75 cores. Quad G5 does analysis @ about 100fps and writes about 93 fps (2nd Pass) using up to about 2.2 cores.
Toast 7.1 UB uses Mac Pro cores much more than it does Quad cores - in the range of 280 - 310% IE about 3 cores compared to only about 1.5 cores on the Quad G5 as well as on the Dual Core G5. Unfortunately I didn't have encode times for each of the sample files I brought with me from the Quad so I don't know the real time how much faster that really amounts to. Running simultaneously on the Mac Pro, Toast would use over 2.5 cores while handbrake would use only one or less than one at best.
Together simultaneously on Mac Pro 2.66 it's
Toast/Handbrake
2.7 cores/1 core best
2.5 cores/.75 core worst
Handbrake during Toast is down to as few as 60fps but sometimes up to 100fps as well. Toast meanwhile is Still consuming up to almost 3 cores with Handbrake running at the same time. So Toast would appear to be much more optimized for the Mac Pro's MultiCores than it is for the Quad G5's Multicores. Same could be said for Handbrake - especially since it is not really fully Optimized for Mac Pro yet.
bigmc6000
Jul 27, 10:08 AM
Rule 1 of Apple Events:
You never get all the marbles.
Considering some of the rumors I'm thinking all the marbles would be:
MacPro
MBP, MB, iMac, Mini processor update
Leopard Preview
iTunes Movie Store
Larger capacity nanos
True Video iPod
So, you're right. Not a chance we're getting all of that (one can only dream).
You never get all the marbles.
Considering some of the rumors I'm thinking all the marbles would be:
MacPro
MBP, MB, iMac, Mini processor update
Leopard Preview
iTunes Movie Store
Larger capacity nanos
True Video iPod
So, you're right. Not a chance we're getting all of that (one can only dream).
~Shard~
Jul 14, 02:33 PM
Maybe one of the drives will be Blu-Ray.
... and the other one HD-DVD! :eek: ;) :D
... and the other one HD-DVD! :eek: ;) :D
fsck-y dingo
Apr 27, 08:53 AM
for all the tin foil hatters out there, what will happen to the phone performance when the location services are turned off?
Improved battery life. :)
I only activate Locations Services when I feel it's needed. Maps, Star Walk and MLB at Bat are about the only ones that come to mind. I don't keep Location Services turned on all of the time. I switch it on before using one of these. For The Weather Channel and other apps that require a location to function I manually enter it.
I've got the Cydia tweak Untrackerd installed and haven't noticed a slow down with any apps regarding location. I run Speed Test without Location Services and it's quick to choose a nearby server using cell tower info. This is why I don't think the record of previously used towers is needed as much as Apple says. Things work well, and fast enough, without these stored lists.
Improved battery life. :)
I only activate Locations Services when I feel it's needed. Maps, Star Walk and MLB at Bat are about the only ones that come to mind. I don't keep Location Services turned on all of the time. I switch it on before using one of these. For The Weather Channel and other apps that require a location to function I manually enter it.
I've got the Cydia tweak Untrackerd installed and haven't noticed a slow down with any apps regarding location. I run Speed Test without Location Services and it's quick to choose a nearby server using cell tower info. This is why I don't think the record of previously used towers is needed as much as Apple says. Things work well, and fast enough, without these stored lists.
Malligator
Mar 31, 03:49 PM
And the Apple haters do yet another 180...
1. Macs
1995 to 2007: Don't use a Mac. Noone uses Macs.
2007 to Present: Don't use a Mac. Everyone uses a Mac.
2. Apps
1995 to 2/22/2011: Don't use Apple. There is no software and they can't do anything.
2/22 to Present: Apps? Who needs Apps as long as you have a robust UI?
3. Open
2007 to Today: Apple is a walled garden that only stupid lemmings use.
Today going forward: Controlling the OS is necessary and good for the consumer.
1. Macs
1995 to 2007: Don't use a Mac. Noone uses Macs.
2007 to Present: Don't use a Mac. Everyone uses a Mac.
2. Apps
1995 to 2/22/2011: Don't use Apple. There is no software and they can't do anything.
2/22 to Present: Apps? Who needs Apps as long as you have a robust UI?
3. Open
2007 to Today: Apple is a walled garden that only stupid lemmings use.
Today going forward: Controlling the OS is necessary and good for the consumer.
SuperCachetes
Mar 22, 06:53 PM
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition:
Here's a little fun little nugget for those who say "Obama's just Bush all over again."
UN Resolution 1441 (2002) was drafted by the US and UK, and presented at the UN by Bush.
UN Resolution 1973 (2011) was drafted by France, Lebanon, and the UK, and not presented by the US.
Like you, I would rather us not be involved at all - but we hardly have quite the same hand in this latest business as we did when we went WMD-hunting...
Here's a little fun little nugget for those who say "Obama's just Bush all over again."
UN Resolution 1441 (2002) was drafted by the US and UK, and presented at the UN by Bush.
UN Resolution 1973 (2011) was drafted by France, Lebanon, and the UK, and not presented by the US.
Like you, I would rather us not be involved at all - but we hardly have quite the same hand in this latest business as we did when we went WMD-hunting...
Clydefrog
Aug 26, 04:16 PM
same here! I just hope Sept 5th or sooner:D
QCassidy352
Aug 26, 07:20 PM
The only change is likely to be the cpu. The rest of the MBP will probably be kept the same and if you look at the yonah vs merom benchmarks at places like AnandTech, it probably isn't worth sending it back.
I'm sure the GPU will also be bumped, at the very least. The MBP will probably also see some things that the MB has like a user-removable hard drive and magnetic latch. The CPU and GPU alone make it worth getting the new one, IMO.
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
I'm sure the GPU will also be bumped, at the very least. The MBP will probably also see some things that the MB has like a user-removable hard drive and magnetic latch. The CPU and GPU alone make it worth getting the new one, IMO.
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
Ugg
Mar 22, 11:51 AM
I'm confused. :confused:
What point is 5P trying to make here?
Is the fact that one list contains more countries by count make it superior to the second? Is that the only way to judge a coalition, by count?
That seems a little too simplistic to me.
For instance, I added up these two lists (after removing duplicates) according to how much the countries spend on their military ...
� Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003 ~ 152 billion
� Coalition - Libya - 2011 ~ 179 billion
I guess it's just how you want to look at it. :cool:
5p's posts rarely have anything to do with reason and everything to do with histrionic political bile.
We could also point out that the Arab League is backing the Allied actions and that Libya now is not Iraq then, but why bother, because he'll just take off on some irrelevant tangent praising Reagan and Paul et fils while denigrating Obama.
What point is 5P trying to make here?
Is the fact that one list contains more countries by count make it superior to the second? Is that the only way to judge a coalition, by count?
That seems a little too simplistic to me.
For instance, I added up these two lists (after removing duplicates) according to how much the countries spend on their military ...
� Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003 ~ 152 billion
� Coalition - Libya - 2011 ~ 179 billion
I guess it's just how you want to look at it. :cool:
5p's posts rarely have anything to do with reason and everything to do with histrionic political bile.
We could also point out that the Arab League is backing the Allied actions and that Libya now is not Iraq then, but why bother, because he'll just take off on some irrelevant tangent praising Reagan and Paul et fils while denigrating Obama.
fatfish
Aug 7, 10:17 PM
Any ideas on whether we will be able to make our own stationary templates in mail ???
mwswami
Jul 21, 04:48 PM
Interesting. You know links where we can learn more about Bensley?
TechReport: The Bensley server platform debuts (http://techreport.com/etc/2006q2/woodcrest/index.x?pg=1)
TechReport: The Bensley server platform debuts (http://techreport.com/etc/2006q2/woodcrest/index.x?pg=1)
jaxstate
Jul 27, 10:29 AM
Sorry if i missed it, but at what speeds do these run? Don't they know just because they keep bumping and bumping the chip speed don't really mean they have a faster system. Seem just like yesterday when a better design was more important than a super fast chip. Oh well, everyone is buying into the Mhz myth now. Funny that just a year or so ago, Apple was trying to shoot down the Mhz myth, now they have people cheering for it. I guess power consumption is good though.
Consultant
Apr 19, 04:02 PM
Well if I'm wrong about the information, then I don't think anyone will argue about the fact that the Palm OS has been around since 1996, and the Apple iPhone uses a similar interface..
All I'm saying is that If there were devices using a similar interface before the iPhone came out I don't see how its fair to sue anyone for it..
http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/9153/palmtranicononpalmos.jpg
http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/3721/palmiiicwcradle.jpg
FAIL. Ever heard the Apple Newton?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton_(platform)
All I'm saying is that If there were devices using a similar interface before the iPhone came out I don't see how its fair to sue anyone for it..
http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/9153/palmtranicononpalmos.jpg
http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/3721/palmiiicwcradle.jpg
FAIL. Ever heard the Apple Newton?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton_(platform)
voiceofreason23
Apr 11, 12:24 PM
Hi
With all the Android phones coming out and manufacturers having no specific cycle, the iPhone is really out of date already!
iPhone 1 - 2G
iPhone 2 - adds 3G
iPhone 3 - adds 3GS
Therefore the above three phones are all 'old' regarding what was released around the same time.
iPhone 4 - will be about 18 months old by the time the iPhone 5 comes out.
People will loose interest in Apple iPhones with so many other new releases coming out on a regular basis.
I agree. My 3Gs contract runs out in June and was looking forward to jumping to Verizon with the iPhone 5. I really hope it still comes out in June. If not, I'll just jump to Verizon and the iPhone 4 and buy it at Best Buy with the Buy Back program on it.
With all the Android phones coming out and manufacturers having no specific cycle, the iPhone is really out of date already!
iPhone 1 - 2G
iPhone 2 - adds 3G
iPhone 3 - adds 3GS
Therefore the above three phones are all 'old' regarding what was released around the same time.
iPhone 4 - will be about 18 months old by the time the iPhone 5 comes out.
People will loose interest in Apple iPhones with so many other new releases coming out on a regular basis.
I agree. My 3Gs contract runs out in June and was looking forward to jumping to Verizon with the iPhone 5. I really hope it still comes out in June. If not, I'll just jump to Verizon and the iPhone 4 and buy it at Best Buy with the Buy Back program on it.
twoodcc
Nov 28, 08:17 PM
Won't happen.
yeah, i hope you're right. just doesn't seem right
yeah, i hope you're right. just doesn't seem right
macaddiict
Apr 25, 01:38 PM
money grubbers
I agree, Apple is pretty ridiculous at times.
That must be who you meant, since you clearly haven't had time to read the lawsuit yet.
Or do you think all lawsuits are 'money grubbers'?
I agree, Apple is pretty ridiculous at times.
That must be who you meant, since you clearly haven't had time to read the lawsuit yet.
Or do you think all lawsuits are 'money grubbers'?
maclaptop
Apr 19, 03:26 PM
Pssstt... I think it already is a religion to many.
So True...
Poor lost souls rely on Steve to think for them, bring them courage, and guide them in worship.
Anyone who fails to fall in line, is immediately a threat to them.
It's this weakness is laughable.
So True...
Poor lost souls rely on Steve to think for them, bring them courage, and guide them in worship.
Anyone who fails to fall in line, is immediately a threat to them.
It's this weakness is laughable.
mactoday
Apr 6, 11:22 AM
I still don't think this means new MacBook Airs in June. Can anyone really see Apple releasing new hardware before Lion is released?
I bet you that you'll see Air's refresh before June.
I bet you that you'll see Air's refresh before June.
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.