aegisdesign
Sep 13, 11:54 AM
All that BeOS had was separate threads per window at the UI level. This does nothing for parallelizing compute tasks. These extra thread that BeOS had spent most of their time doing absolutely nothing.
Whilst true in that regard, BeOS also had threads for event queues too if you used BLooper, which could also be overused.
I think the threaded-ness just gave everyone the impression it was fast and not waiting on anything to a large extent rather than it actually being fast. Most of the speed just came from it being very lightweight and the apps written for it being written by good programers that knew how the thread.
Whilst true in that regard, BeOS also had threads for event queues too if you used BLooper, which could also be overused.
I think the threaded-ness just gave everyone the impression it was fast and not waiting on anything to a large extent rather than it actually being fast. Most of the speed just came from it being very lightweight and the apps written for it being written by good programers that knew how the thread.
MCIowaRulz
Apr 5, 08:35 PM
4GB download with in-app purchases for content would be my guess.
I hope they ship it on DVD as i'm not going to tie up my Internet connection for 3 hrs while it downloads:(
I hope they ship it on DVD as i'm not going to tie up my Internet connection for 3 hrs while it downloads:(
jmgregory1
Apr 6, 03:33 PM
The idea that Apple needs competitors to keep pushing forward with the iPad or any other product makes no sense. Apple brought the iPad, iPhone, iPod to market and it's the competition that is trying to catch up to Apple. By suggesting that Apple needs others to push forward with new designs/ideas is not giving Apple the credit they deserve for creating these markets (as we know them) in the first place.
Competition between tablets is going to potentially benefit the non-iPad tablets most - as they compete on specs, not the bigger picture ecosystem (because for those running android, there will be no ecosystem difference). BB's PB will have to fight for its own share of the non-Apple, non-Android market as will HP.
Competition between tablets is going to potentially benefit the non-iPad tablets most - as they compete on specs, not the bigger picture ecosystem (because for those running android, there will be no ecosystem difference). BB's PB will have to fight for its own share of the non-Apple, non-Android market as will HP.
Erasmus
Jul 21, 11:55 PM
So I read in this thread that Kentsfield and Clovertown ARE compatible with Conroe and Woodcrest sockets (respectively) (Cloverton or Clovertown?)
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
chatin
Aug 20, 02:21 PM
Mac Pros will need 64bit Leopard to achieve their full multi-core potential. Expect all Core 2 based Macs to hold value well through the next release cycle of OSX Leopard.
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros!
:rolleyes:
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros!
:rolleyes:
Mike84
Apr 25, 03:13 PM
"Federal Marshals need a warrant. . . . . "
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Also, there is a case in California, upheld by the 9th Circuit, that says the police do NOT need a warrant to come onto your property and place a GPS tracking device on your car and track you and your car. It might get overturned at the USSC, but today, it is legal. Their legal theory is that you don’t have a right to privacy on PUBLIC roads, and it also isn't unreasonable to think that no one would ever come on your property, uninvited. . salesmen, delivery people, the neighbor, etc. So, unless your yard is fenced, and/or clearly posted NO TRESPASSING, the police can put that GPS on your car.
You are right, but you are wrong in mentioning that you need a fence and a sign saying "NO TRESPASSING" for cops to come in and take a look. Look up the cases from the United States Supreme Court that hold otherwise. That will not stop cops and it has not stopped cops. For example, cases where people were growing pot in their barn. Cops jumped the fence, peeked into the barn, saw the rugs, boom you have a warrant because it is based on probable cause. . However, this is not the point of the discussion here.
I think Apple just moved for summary judgment as a matter of law and get with it because these attorneys are trying to see if Apple will settle, but I highly doubt they will even consider it.
"If you are a federal marshal you have to have a warrant to do this kind of thing, and Apple is doing it without one."
This lawyer needs to go back to law school. The 4th amendment, which protects our right to privacy, is to prevent the government from infringing on that right. Last I checked Apple was not part of the government.
Also, Apple is not tracking anything. They simple have a file on your phone that has all of this information. (correct me if I am wrong).
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Also, there is a case in California, upheld by the 9th Circuit, that says the police do NOT need a warrant to come onto your property and place a GPS tracking device on your car and track you and your car. It might get overturned at the USSC, but today, it is legal. Their legal theory is that you don’t have a right to privacy on PUBLIC roads, and it also isn't unreasonable to think that no one would ever come on your property, uninvited. . salesmen, delivery people, the neighbor, etc. So, unless your yard is fenced, and/or clearly posted NO TRESPASSING, the police can put that GPS on your car.
You are right, but you are wrong in mentioning that you need a fence and a sign saying "NO TRESPASSING" for cops to come in and take a look. Look up the cases from the United States Supreme Court that hold otherwise. That will not stop cops and it has not stopped cops. For example, cases where people were growing pot in their barn. Cops jumped the fence, peeked into the barn, saw the rugs, boom you have a warrant because it is based on probable cause. . However, this is not the point of the discussion here.
I think Apple just moved for summary judgment as a matter of law and get with it because these attorneys are trying to see if Apple will settle, but I highly doubt they will even consider it.
"If you are a federal marshal you have to have a warrant to do this kind of thing, and Apple is doing it without one."
This lawyer needs to go back to law school. The 4th amendment, which protects our right to privacy, is to prevent the government from infringing on that right. Last I checked Apple was not part of the government.
Also, Apple is not tracking anything. They simple have a file on your phone that has all of this information. (correct me if I am wrong).
Cameront9
Aug 7, 06:35 PM
I am not hearing impaired, but I often watch TV and movies with the closed captioning on. I cannot really say what about it makes it more enjoyable to me--no one has ever understood why I do it, maybe it has to do with how I process information (I do have trouble listening in lecture classes, maybe a learning disability etc.), but my point is to say that I am also interested in getting closed captioning on iTunes shows.
I wrote to Apple on the feedback part of their web-site about this. I was wondering if you might know better what the law is about closed captioning. I always assumed it was required for network television shows. Is it not for network shows that appear online?
Anyhow, it's functionality I would definitely like to see.
Online is a grey area because it's new...
I'm not completely familiar with Closed Captioning laws. I believe all new TVs are required to have a Closed-Captioning decoder, and I think that all Network shows (and maybe cable-based, too) have to be captioned.
A quick Google gives this:
http://www.captions.org/caplaw.cfm
Which explains in more detail...
Regardless, I have seen a number of hearing-impaired users comment on the issue before. It would be so simple to implement, after all...
I wrote to Apple on the feedback part of their web-site about this. I was wondering if you might know better what the law is about closed captioning. I always assumed it was required for network television shows. Is it not for network shows that appear online?
Anyhow, it's functionality I would definitely like to see.
Online is a grey area because it's new...
I'm not completely familiar with Closed Captioning laws. I believe all new TVs are required to have a Closed-Captioning decoder, and I think that all Network shows (and maybe cable-based, too) have to be captioned.
A quick Google gives this:
http://www.captions.org/caplaw.cfm
Which explains in more detail...
Regardless, I have seen a number of hearing-impaired users comment on the issue before. It would be so simple to implement, after all...
fullmanfullninj
Apr 8, 02:03 AM
Just to let y'all know, unless someone else knows otherwise, Best Buy makes zero off Apple product sales (that haven't been marked up).
I read this thread and I noted that someone pointed out that BB apparently marks up some items -Airports, Time Machines, etc. I found this odd since Apple controls all the pricing, but eh, not going to question that since those are the facts I'm assuming (can't be bothered to go on a comparing spree).
Anyway, the iPad 2s aren't marked up, thus they make zero.
Each department should be meeting their budget daily. How do they do that? By selling products they make notional margin and that allows that department to meet their budget. On a slow, sh-tty day, a department may only be 70% to budget; on a fast, awesome day, a department may be 110% to budget.
But when you make zero off iPad sales, keeping them away from customers does not help notional margin. Doesn't bring them any closer to hitting budget. The only way they'd make money on that iPad sale would be selling accessories or the Black Tie protection. But that's entirely something else.
Best Buy makes zero notional margin on iPad sales, so they're not withholding stock to meet daily budgets.
I can't explain why they're doing this, but given my knowledge, I can invalidate the claim that managers are hoarding iPads so that they can meet budget every day.
Cheers! :D
I read this thread and I noted that someone pointed out that BB apparently marks up some items -Airports, Time Machines, etc. I found this odd since Apple controls all the pricing, but eh, not going to question that since those are the facts I'm assuming (can't be bothered to go on a comparing spree).
Anyway, the iPad 2s aren't marked up, thus they make zero.
Each department should be meeting their budget daily. How do they do that? By selling products they make notional margin and that allows that department to meet their budget. On a slow, sh-tty day, a department may only be 70% to budget; on a fast, awesome day, a department may be 110% to budget.
But when you make zero off iPad sales, keeping them away from customers does not help notional margin. Doesn't bring them any closer to hitting budget. The only way they'd make money on that iPad sale would be selling accessories or the Black Tie protection. But that's entirely something else.
Best Buy makes zero notional margin on iPad sales, so they're not withholding stock to meet daily budgets.
I can't explain why they're doing this, but given my knowledge, I can invalidate the claim that managers are hoarding iPads so that they can meet budget every day.
Cheers! :D
gekko513
Jul 15, 01:24 PM
The only reason I see Apple going all Woodcrest is to justify their high markups , while insulting you Mac Loyalist on price they also offer you less performance for your money.
Look here at the current woody pricing at Newegg
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?Submit=ENE&N=50001157+2010340343+1050922423&Subcategory=343&description=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=
So apple is going to charge you guys $1799 for a Desktop with a 2.0ghz CPU , when everyone else will charge $1199 for a Conroe E6600 2.4ghz based desktop.
This is not looking good apple.
There's a good point here, but it's not the one you're pointing at. If Apple continues as they have with the PowerMac pricing, the Mac Pro will not be an insult if you compare it to Dells, HP and other vendors' pro offerings. Historically they have all been at very comparable price levels for comparable products. There are other differences between the lines than GHz. Quality standards for the pro/expensive lines are higher than for the consumer line, for one thing.
The point is that Apple doesn't have an option for potential buyers that want a high performance, customisable and upgradable consumer level product (not all-in-one). There are no Apple product to compare those $1199 Conroe PCs to. The closest thing is the iMac.
Look here at the current woody pricing at Newegg
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?Submit=ENE&N=50001157+2010340343+1050922423&Subcategory=343&description=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=
So apple is going to charge you guys $1799 for a Desktop with a 2.0ghz CPU , when everyone else will charge $1199 for a Conroe E6600 2.4ghz based desktop.
This is not looking good apple.
There's a good point here, but it's not the one you're pointing at. If Apple continues as they have with the PowerMac pricing, the Mac Pro will not be an insult if you compare it to Dells, HP and other vendors' pro offerings. Historically they have all been at very comparable price levels for comparable products. There are other differences between the lines than GHz. Quality standards for the pro/expensive lines are higher than for the consumer line, for one thing.
The point is that Apple doesn't have an option for potential buyers that want a high performance, customisable and upgradable consumer level product (not all-in-one). There are no Apple product to compare those $1199 Conroe PCs to. The closest thing is the iMac.
emotion
Jul 20, 09:13 AM
I wonder just how Apple would react to news that the next processor update is ahead of schedule. Presumably their plans are carefully laid out, and if a PC competitor can jump on Intel updates faster than they can without having to conform to a similar timeline, then Apple might get burned, if only slightly.
Remember Apple will be privvy to a lot more information that we as consumers are. They are probably on a level playing field at least with Intel compared with other PC vendors. They may even have a special relationship with Intel to get stuff slightly before people like Lenovo and Dell.
Remember Apple will be privvy to a lot more information that we as consumers are. They are probably on a level playing field at least with Intel compared with other PC vendors. They may even have a special relationship with Intel to get stuff slightly before people like Lenovo and Dell.
myemosoul
Jun 14, 08:13 PM
Now they're saying white won't be available until later this summer. dammit, i wanted white!
http://modmyi.com/forums/iphone-news/714102-exclusive-iphone-4-only-black-initially.html
http://modmyi.com/forums/iphone-news/714102-exclusive-iphone-4-only-black-initially.html
p0intblank
Aug 5, 04:50 PM
Just an opinion p0intblank.We all have em :)
Oh, I know. Don't think I was shooting yours down or anything. I'm all for listening to others and hearing what they think.
Oh, I know. Don't think I was shooting yours down or anything. I'm all for listening to others and hearing what they think.
unlinked
Apr 6, 04:51 PM
BTW... the Xoom at the Best Buy here is broken... been that way for two weeks now according to the sales guy.
If the sales are so bad why don't they just replace it from the stock they have?
If the sales are so bad why don't they just replace it from the stock they have?
princealfie
Nov 29, 08:57 AM
2 - How are they compensated equitably? Do you compensate Jay-Z and a classical artist the same? Which ever you prefer, Jay-Z sells more.
3
Well, we should base it on quality then. Since Jay-Z sucks compared to Isaac Stern or Yo-Yo Ma, shouldn't Ma be a millionaire?
Hmm... we need an official rating system to compensate artists that way. So that Paris Hell-ton never signs another record deal.
3
Well, we should base it on quality then. Since Jay-Z sucks compared to Isaac Stern or Yo-Yo Ma, shouldn't Ma be a millionaire?
Hmm... we need an official rating system to compensate artists that way. So that Paris Hell-ton never signs another record deal.
AndroidfoLife
Apr 8, 01:06 AM
Best Buy is a strange store. It is the only place where you can be told a computer with an i3 and 8 gbs of ram is better then a MBP simply because it has a picture of an alien on it. Best Buys tech people are fun to talk to because they are normally so wrong and they are the reason for the stupid PC and Mac "Fanboy" arguements. When they want to sell a product they will do all that is in their power to do so.
If the store favors apple they will tell people that every single PC will get a virus and they will need to get really expensive anti-virus that needs to be updated five times a day. If the Store is Bias against apple then macs are incapable of doing PC things such as Word processing. Got to love Best Tards
If the store favors apple they will tell people that every single PC will get a virus and they will need to get really expensive anti-virus that needs to be updated five times a day. If the Store is Bias against apple then macs are incapable of doing PC things such as Word processing. Got to love Best Tards
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 12:14 PM
Sorry I don't see that happening... Apple has basically always given developers a few months (to several months) lead time with the next major version of Mac OS X. That has taken place yet... so I don't see it being released at WWDC 2006.
I thought we were talking MWSF here, in January, so that's on par with expectations
I thought we were talking MWSF here, in January, so that's on par with expectations
Leoff
Sep 19, 07:28 AM
Sorry but I've heard this so many times it gets pretty annoying. Dont assume to know what ppl want to use their Macbooks for. I want to use it for music production which can be very intensive on the processor, other people for graphics etc where a few seconds shaved off processing times when added up many times can make quite a difference to productivity.
Also, when the new chips come out it will instantly knock a chunk off the resell value - yes this is always the way with technology but buying when an update is coming soon seems silly.
It gets annoying. Why? Because it's true and most people don't want to admit it.
In a few cases here and there, the extra processor power/speed is going to help. But for a majority of people buying a MacBook, they're not going to be burning home-made DVD's, doing intense Music compositions, or using it for hard-core gaming. They're going to SURF and WRITE.
As for the "resale" value, again, most people who are buying a used MacBook are NOT going to ask "is it a Merom?" They're going to ask how nice the case is, how much use it's gotten, and how much it is, and that's it.
Everybody likes to play "ooo, I'm the hard-core computing whiz and I need the BEST out there", but I bet you if you took an honest poll out there of everyone who's answered this thread, you'd find at least 75% these Apple fans have no need for for the extra speed, they just want it because it's "cool" and "fast" and it's the latest thing out there.
Also, when the new chips come out it will instantly knock a chunk off the resell value - yes this is always the way with technology but buying when an update is coming soon seems silly.
It gets annoying. Why? Because it's true and most people don't want to admit it.
In a few cases here and there, the extra processor power/speed is going to help. But for a majority of people buying a MacBook, they're not going to be burning home-made DVD's, doing intense Music compositions, or using it for hard-core gaming. They're going to SURF and WRITE.
As for the "resale" value, again, most people who are buying a used MacBook are NOT going to ask "is it a Merom?" They're going to ask how nice the case is, how much use it's gotten, and how much it is, and that's it.
Everybody likes to play "ooo, I'm the hard-core computing whiz and I need the BEST out there", but I bet you if you took an honest poll out there of everyone who's answered this thread, you'd find at least 75% these Apple fans have no need for for the extra speed, they just want it because it's "cool" and "fast" and it's the latest thing out there.
Geckotek
Apr 7, 10:29 PM
Every day Apple stores get shipments of iPads....but they don't sell them when the arrive. They hold them for the line that forms the next morning.
Seems odd to me. Like they are purposely making a spectacle in front of the store every morning.
This morning the store I went to had NO AT&T models?!?!?! So tomorrow morning there will be yet another line of those that failed today (including myself).
On topic, I called Best Buy and was told that unless I pre-ordered before the day of the sale, I could not get an iPad 2. My co-worker walked in last week off the street and purchased one. Why the inconsistent message? I don't get it.
Seems odd to me. Like they are purposely making a spectacle in front of the store every morning.
This morning the store I went to had NO AT&T models?!?!?! So tomorrow morning there will be yet another line of those that failed today (including myself).
On topic, I called Best Buy and was told that unless I pre-ordered before the day of the sale, I could not get an iPad 2. My co-worker walked in last week off the street and purchased one. Why the inconsistent message? I don't get it.
mactoday
Apr 6, 11:02 AM
I might not expect IPS, doesn’t it draw more power than TN LCDs?
I don't think you'll see IPS screens in MacBook Pro's or Air in the future.
Apple is working on the mass market now and mass market don't care about quality of the screens specially on the portables.
If you need colors and better screen then Apple will sale you "****ing glossy amazing" 27" display. :)
I don't think you'll see IPS screens in MacBook Pro's or Air in the future.
Apple is working on the mass market now and mass market don't care about quality of the screens specially on the portables.
If you need colors and better screen then Apple will sale you "****ing glossy amazing" 27" display. :)
kdarling
Mar 22, 07:38 PM
It runs Android. Pretty sure that's what he meant. So, Google, Android developers, Android marketplace.
Ah, I thought perhaps he knew something I didn't.
True, they don't have to spend a lot of time or money on core OS improvements.
Nor do they have to worry about maintaining an app market (or getting bad publicity because they approved baby-killer or gay-fixer apps). OTOH, they don't directly profit from app sales.
Samsung, HTC and others do have staff for third party developer relations, and all maintain R&D labs for their Android porting and customization.
That doesn't change the accounting. Cost is still the same, and they are pricing theirs very low. The first Tab came out at what, $800, and then dropped immediately on entrance to Costco and other retailers. Last I saw it was $400, I haven't been paying close attention, though.
It came out at $600, which many thought made some sense (http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/20/editorial-why-the-galaxy-tabs-price-makes-sense/) considering it had 3G and GPS. I bought one myself.
I think you're right, now it's as low as $400 on contract. (Heck, it's only $250 right now on T-Mobile (http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/galaxy-tab/SGH-T849ZKATMB).)
Ah, I thought perhaps he knew something I didn't.
True, they don't have to spend a lot of time or money on core OS improvements.
Nor do they have to worry about maintaining an app market (or getting bad publicity because they approved baby-killer or gay-fixer apps). OTOH, they don't directly profit from app sales.
Samsung, HTC and others do have staff for third party developer relations, and all maintain R&D labs for their Android porting and customization.
That doesn't change the accounting. Cost is still the same, and they are pricing theirs very low. The first Tab came out at what, $800, and then dropped immediately on entrance to Costco and other retailers. Last I saw it was $400, I haven't been paying close attention, though.
It came out at $600, which many thought made some sense (http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/20/editorial-why-the-galaxy-tabs-price-makes-sense/) considering it had 3G and GPS. I bought one myself.
I think you're right, now it's as low as $400 on contract. (Heck, it's only $250 right now on T-Mobile (http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/galaxy-tab/SGH-T849ZKATMB).)
0815
Mar 31, 06:18 PM
Tightening controls? How about Google having final right of refusal toward any mass production Bill of Materials for any Android phone going into production? That will keep the manufacturing accountants from screwing over the developers taking a $0.76 of parts out to save on a run but generate a million man hours of bug fixing in the third party developer community.
True - but what happend to the 'open is good', 'everyone can customize as they want', 'open is the freedom to do with it what you want'. The one big argument that was always made for Android is gone - it is no longer as open as people think. Anyway, 'open' was in this context anyway a hyped up buzzword ... I understood the 'open' argument since (with exception of the Nexus) everyone got dependent on what the provider chooses to adopt and what not. It is not good if the provider decides what to remove or add on top of the OS.
True - but what happend to the 'open is good', 'everyone can customize as they want', 'open is the freedom to do with it what you want'. The one big argument that was always made for Android is gone - it is no longer as open as people think. Anyway, 'open' was in this context anyway a hyped up buzzword ... I understood the 'open' argument since (with exception of the Nexus) everyone got dependent on what the provider chooses to adopt and what not. It is not good if the provider decides what to remove or add on top of the OS.
iKenny
Aug 7, 11:37 PM
Well I for one was kind of disappointed. Leopard is sort of Apple's chance to prove they can out-Vista Vista, and I'm not really sure what we saw today does it. I've been following Vista somewhat closely, and it really does catch Windows up to OS X in terms of features and prettiness.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
The other thing that has me a little concerned is the huge amount of Vista-bashing that went on. I feel like if Leopard at this point were truly better than Vista, they'd be silent about Vista entirely and let the new system speak for itself. That would be really slick. That's not what happened however, and instead there was a lot of "look what Vista copied from us" and "check out how much better Leopard is." What I saw today, though, makes the former statement sound whiney and the latter sound foolish, since in my eyes, in terms of features, they're about on-par with each other.
I really hope Apple pulls it together. They've got to do this right, because come next year, most of the myriad reasons for switching to a Mac will be nullified by Vista.
BTW: whoever this "Platform Experience" guy is, get him off the stage and go back to Steve.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
The other thing that has me a little concerned is the huge amount of Vista-bashing that went on. I feel like if Leopard at this point were truly better than Vista, they'd be silent about Vista entirely and let the new system speak for itself. That would be really slick. That's not what happened however, and instead there was a lot of "look what Vista copied from us" and "check out how much better Leopard is." What I saw today, though, makes the former statement sound whiney and the latter sound foolish, since in my eyes, in terms of features, they're about on-par with each other.
I really hope Apple pulls it together. They've got to do this right, because come next year, most of the myriad reasons for switching to a Mac will be nullified by Vista.
BTW: whoever this "Platform Experience" guy is, get him off the stage and go back to Steve.
SeaFox
Apr 8, 01:49 AM
Best Buy is now WORST BUY!!!!
2004 called. They want their joke back. :rolleyes:
I think it would be quite hilarious if Best Best lost their iPads and everyone had to go to ToysRUs instead. :D
2004 called. They want their joke back. :rolleyes:
I think it would be quite hilarious if Best Best lost their iPads and everyone had to go to ToysRUs instead. :D
cohen777
Apr 5, 06:55 PM
I hope that the new Final Cut Studio package updates DVDSP to allow for authoring blu-rays.