Anonymous Freak
Jul 15, 02:22 PM
You mean like how the MacBook Pro was 2.0 GHz at the top end on release?
I have a feeling if 2.66 is the top-end 'stock' model, it will be upgradeable to 3.0 GHz as a user-configurable option, much the way the MacBook Pro was at 2.0 GHz upgradeable to 2.16 GHz.
With SPEC benchmarks showing The 3.0 GHz Woodcrest as the absolute fastest processor on the market for both floating point and integer (it has a 50% lead over the second-place integer chip!) it's a good bet Apple will offer it, at least as an option.
I'm actually truly excited about a processor launch. The last time was the G5 intro. (Before that, it was the original PowerPC introduction.)
I have a feeling if 2.66 is the top-end 'stock' model, it will be upgradeable to 3.0 GHz as a user-configurable option, much the way the MacBook Pro was at 2.0 GHz upgradeable to 2.16 GHz.
With SPEC benchmarks showing The 3.0 GHz Woodcrest as the absolute fastest processor on the market for both floating point and integer (it has a 50% lead over the second-place integer chip!) it's a good bet Apple will offer it, at least as an option.
I'm actually truly excited about a processor launch. The last time was the G5 intro. (Before that, it was the original PowerPC introduction.)
Astro7x
Apr 7, 02:54 PM
It's easy. The average person isn't watching blu-rays on a 27 inch or less screen. They get them for their big 50-60 inch TVs. And the sales of Macs are rising despite the lack. True professionals do what is needed to get the job done. Including buying a stand alone drive and 3rd party software if the simple menus in DVD Studio Pro are not enough
I disagree. I would argue that the reason people are not watching Blurays on their computers is because they CAN'T watch them on a computer. Blowing up a regular DVD to full screen on an Apple 27 inch cinema display looks horrible, and the alternative is a highly compressed H264 that looks amazing in comparison. I guarantee that if every Mac shipped with a Bluray drive, I'd have more clients requesting Bluray discs. Clients seem to love DVDs because they are dummy proof. Bluray? The smart ones will have to wait to watch it until they get home where they can put it on their PS3 or something. The others will stick it in their MacBook and then send me an E-mail saying that the DVD they received doesn't work.
Apple has to see financial benefits in not including Bluray in their computers. The professionals will add a drive to their MacPros so they can burn them. But consumers? Apple would no doubt take somewhat of a hit in profit for every Bluray drive that goes into a Mac. They'd also rather sell the HD media through the iTunes Store and make a profit there too. I'll admit it, one of the reasons I haven't switched completely over to buying Bluray Discs is because I can't watch them on my Laptop.
I disagree. I would argue that the reason people are not watching Blurays on their computers is because they CAN'T watch them on a computer. Blowing up a regular DVD to full screen on an Apple 27 inch cinema display looks horrible, and the alternative is a highly compressed H264 that looks amazing in comparison. I guarantee that if every Mac shipped with a Bluray drive, I'd have more clients requesting Bluray discs. Clients seem to love DVDs because they are dummy proof. Bluray? The smart ones will have to wait to watch it until they get home where they can put it on their PS3 or something. The others will stick it in their MacBook and then send me an E-mail saying that the DVD they received doesn't work.
Apple has to see financial benefits in not including Bluray in their computers. The professionals will add a drive to their MacPros so they can burn them. But consumers? Apple would no doubt take somewhat of a hit in profit for every Bluray drive that goes into a Mac. They'd also rather sell the HD media through the iTunes Store and make a profit there too. I'll admit it, one of the reasons I haven't switched completely over to buying Bluray Discs is because I can't watch them on my Laptop.
CaoCao
Feb 28, 06:47 PM
Wow. I have never, ever in my life been so tempted to troll a MacRumors thread, nor have I ever been so infuriated by the use of a set of double quotation marks.
Gay marriage is not "marriage." Gay marriage is marriage.
Gay people are not "gay." They are gay.
So a few things:
1) Deal with it.
2) Gays are going to keep on getting married. Whether that means that they have to leave your ass-backwards country to come to a real civilization to do so, or write their own damn marriage contract and hire a rational person to perform the ceremony, they will.
3) As Lee said, what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes (hell, anywhere, in fact) is their own damn business.
4) The claim by Bill McEnaney that gay people living together "should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another" is outrageous. (NB that this person had just said they must live "as siblings" which is weird, given that platonic love is only reservation from physical romance, not emotional romance...)
5) If you are going to pull the "protect the sanctity of marriage" card on me, think very hard about the institutions of divorce and annulment.
6) Many people (and many of the small number who claim to anyway) do not share your beliefs. Catholics have sex. In and out of marriage. *See Point One.*
7) Please try to be just a smidgen more cultured in your attitudes, and a little less abrasive in sharing them. Though I try to reserve judgment, I am currently not alone in thinking that you are completely insane just by your posts in this thread.
I feel better now. :)
2) okay, they can pretend to get married
3) We don't care what they are doing in there
5) Divorce is a terrible and tragic thing
6) The Catholic Church doesn't pretend that the people in it are perfect.
A) Maybe your feelings on the situation would be different if you actually had a girlfriend.
B) I'm interested to learn what exactly the physical and psychological risks of non-marital sex are?
You're kidding. Right?
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornication
You can pretend that particular fornication sessions are sacred because some guy wearing a white collar said so.
Definitions are useful
No, it's called "living a human lifestyle".
Why should your hang-ups be of any relevance to anybody else? Perhaps you need to deal with your own perceptions instead of relying on some dusty tome to tell you what to think. You know that Plato was a repressed homosexual, don't you? He spent hours at the gymnasium ogling naked young men, and perhaps like S/Paul, spent a lot of effort telling other people how to love to expiate his guilty feelings.
You are extraordinarily keen to prescribe what other people should do. What's it got to do with you?
You sound like a real catch, but hey, what you choose to do is up to you.
So, you assert that a married non-Christian couple can do nothing but fornicate? What an appallingly demeaning attitude! Do you regard any couple you meet as probable fornicators by default? Do you question them about whether they use birth control, or whether they were married, and if so whether it was in a Catholic church with the proper sacraments? You clearly swallow Catholic dogma hook, line and sinker, so choosing righteous friends must be a real PITA.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?
That is because to a Christian they aren't married. He probably doesn't because a marriage between two non-Catholic Christians is generally valid.
Lee, I agree with you about what you say, but he clearly did say that this was only his opinion. People are allowed that, even if it is hateful and exclusionist.
inclusivism is not inherently good and that position holds no hatred or malice
They decided not to rehire him, so?
Gay marriage is not "marriage." Gay marriage is marriage.
Gay people are not "gay." They are gay.
So a few things:
1) Deal with it.
2) Gays are going to keep on getting married. Whether that means that they have to leave your ass-backwards country to come to a real civilization to do so, or write their own damn marriage contract and hire a rational person to perform the ceremony, they will.
3) As Lee said, what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes (hell, anywhere, in fact) is their own damn business.
4) The claim by Bill McEnaney that gay people living together "should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another" is outrageous. (NB that this person had just said they must live "as siblings" which is weird, given that platonic love is only reservation from physical romance, not emotional romance...)
5) If you are going to pull the "protect the sanctity of marriage" card on me, think very hard about the institutions of divorce and annulment.
6) Many people (and many of the small number who claim to anyway) do not share your beliefs. Catholics have sex. In and out of marriage. *See Point One.*
7) Please try to be just a smidgen more cultured in your attitudes, and a little less abrasive in sharing them. Though I try to reserve judgment, I am currently not alone in thinking that you are completely insane just by your posts in this thread.
I feel better now. :)
2) okay, they can pretend to get married
3) We don't care what they are doing in there
5) Divorce is a terrible and tragic thing
6) The Catholic Church doesn't pretend that the people in it are perfect.
A) Maybe your feelings on the situation would be different if you actually had a girlfriend.
B) I'm interested to learn what exactly the physical and psychological risks of non-marital sex are?
You're kidding. Right?
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornication
You can pretend that particular fornication sessions are sacred because some guy wearing a white collar said so.
Definitions are useful
No, it's called "living a human lifestyle".
Why should your hang-ups be of any relevance to anybody else? Perhaps you need to deal with your own perceptions instead of relying on some dusty tome to tell you what to think. You know that Plato was a repressed homosexual, don't you? He spent hours at the gymnasium ogling naked young men, and perhaps like S/Paul, spent a lot of effort telling other people how to love to expiate his guilty feelings.
You are extraordinarily keen to prescribe what other people should do. What's it got to do with you?
You sound like a real catch, but hey, what you choose to do is up to you.
So, you assert that a married non-Christian couple can do nothing but fornicate? What an appallingly demeaning attitude! Do you regard any couple you meet as probable fornicators by default? Do you question them about whether they use birth control, or whether they were married, and if so whether it was in a Catholic church with the proper sacraments? You clearly swallow Catholic dogma hook, line and sinker, so choosing righteous friends must be a real PITA.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?
That is because to a Christian they aren't married. He probably doesn't because a marriage between two non-Catholic Christians is generally valid.
Lee, I agree with you about what you say, but he clearly did say that this was only his opinion. People are allowed that, even if it is hateful and exclusionist.
inclusivism is not inherently good and that position holds no hatred or malice
They decided not to rehire him, so?
Bill McEnaney
Mar 1, 05:00 AM
What I do is none of your damn business. And your opinion has no bearing on my life. Why you feel the need to tell others what to do is beyond me. Take care of your own house, let me take care of mine.
I don't want to know what Lee does. I've said what I believe. I haven't told anyone to do anything.
I don't want to know what Lee does. I've said what I believe. I haven't told anyone to do anything.
skunk
Mar 24, 01:43 PM
Bringing race into this discussion is going nowhere except downhill. All dogs are four-legged animals, but not all four-legged animals are dogs.
evilgEEk
Aug 11, 08:55 PM
Why not just ring someone and ask where you are? Or wait for the guy on the seat next to you to ring his girlfriend?
If you don't know where you are, how is someone else going to know where you are? And what if the guy next to you just dumped his girlfriend? Then you're in real trouble! ;)
My next phone will be GPS capable as well. If the iPhone doesn't have GPS then I probably won't get it.
If you don't know where you are, how is someone else going to know where you are? And what if the guy next to you just dumped his girlfriend? Then you're in real trouble! ;)
My next phone will be GPS capable as well. If the iPhone doesn't have GPS then I probably won't get it.
suneohair
Sep 13, 06:26 PM
clock speed isn't everything. workload dependant of course.
You are right. However, you try to tell consumers "Well we are moving to 2.4Ghz chips" after you just had 2.66Ghz and 3.0Ghz chips. It isnt going to work.
If today, Dell decided to move there whole line back to 1Ghz processors, nobody would buy. Unfortunetly the Ghz myth is a strong as its ever been. Taking a step backward is not an option.
Another example would be this: Today Apple decides to go back to plain, bulky ipods, no color, no photos. Just monochrome and music. Would anybody go for it? Probably not. You just can't step back in tech today.
Don't get me wrong, I am sure the octo core would out perform the current quad anyday given the right apps. But when people see that Ghz number go down...
You are right. However, you try to tell consumers "Well we are moving to 2.4Ghz chips" after you just had 2.66Ghz and 3.0Ghz chips. It isnt going to work.
If today, Dell decided to move there whole line back to 1Ghz processors, nobody would buy. Unfortunetly the Ghz myth is a strong as its ever been. Taking a step backward is not an option.
Another example would be this: Today Apple decides to go back to plain, bulky ipods, no color, no photos. Just monochrome and music. Would anybody go for it? Probably not. You just can't step back in tech today.
Don't get me wrong, I am sure the octo core would out perform the current quad anyday given the right apps. But when people see that Ghz number go down...
ezekielrage_99
Sep 13, 08:14 AM
Do you really need that amount of power? I'm guessing yes ;)
I'd love to see the performance on the Clovertown Mac Pro.
I'd love to see the performance on the Clovertown Mac Pro.
yoak
Apr 12, 04:18 AM
The insufficient content shouldn't pop up at random, or there is a bug. It pops up when there is insufficient content for a transition. Some transitions like crossfade are centered at the end/starting point of a clip. So it expands past/before this point, hence the need of additional content in the file.
I didn't know about that multicore issue with Compressor when launched directly from the timeline. I suspect an issue with your setup. Compressor does make good use of my 4 cores on mpeg2 and I never set up Qmaster.
What Mac are you using?
When I installed FSC3 I had to set up Qmaster to make Compressor use all my cores. It was not easy to make it work, but that was due to the bug that don?t allow you to send directly from FC. This is what took me a while to find out.
We still had some problems making a new Mac Pro making use of all it?s core just this winter.
Have you checked your BAtch Monitor to make sure Compressor really splits up the file and spread it out over all your cores?
For the content bug, I?m not sure it?s a bug. I do know that it comes up when a file is too short for dissolve etc, but sometimes I can?t figure out why it comes up. Could still be my own fault, maybe I presumed it was a bug too easily
I didn't know about that multicore issue with Compressor when launched directly from the timeline. I suspect an issue with your setup. Compressor does make good use of my 4 cores on mpeg2 and I never set up Qmaster.
What Mac are you using?
When I installed FSC3 I had to set up Qmaster to make Compressor use all my cores. It was not easy to make it work, but that was due to the bug that don?t allow you to send directly from FC. This is what took me a while to find out.
We still had some problems making a new Mac Pro making use of all it?s core just this winter.
Have you checked your BAtch Monitor to make sure Compressor really splits up the file and spread it out over all your cores?
For the content bug, I?m not sure it?s a bug. I do know that it comes up when a file is too short for dissolve etc, but sometimes I can?t figure out why it comes up. Could still be my own fault, maybe I presumed it was a bug too easily
flatlined
Jun 9, 09:46 AM
I have a few quick questions for anybody that works at Radio Shack:
I plan on going into a Radio Shack store on Tuesday to look into Appraising my iPhone. Do I need the Original Box? I have the Accessories and the books that came with my iPhone, but don't have the box.
Also can I just get an Appraisal without having to agree to it? and
Does my phone have to be resorted to factory setting and my info wiped off if I'm just going in for an Appraisal?
If I decide to go along with the Appraisal and Pre Order an iPhone 4 does the store take my iPhone that day? Or do I keep it until I get the iPhone 4?
I was also wondering if it makes any difference in the appraisal if the phone is a Refurbished or not? My Girlfriends is a Refurbished one.
Sorry for all the questions.
Thanks!!!
I plan on going into a Radio Shack store on Tuesday to look into Appraising my iPhone. Do I need the Original Box? I have the Accessories and the books that came with my iPhone, but don't have the box.
Also can I just get an Appraisal without having to agree to it? and
Does my phone have to be resorted to factory setting and my info wiped off if I'm just going in for an Appraisal?
If I decide to go along with the Appraisal and Pre Order an iPhone 4 does the store take my iPhone that day? Or do I keep it until I get the iPhone 4?
I was also wondering if it makes any difference in the appraisal if the phone is a Refurbished or not? My Girlfriends is a Refurbished one.
Sorry for all the questions.
Thanks!!!
vincenz
Apr 7, 10:47 PM
Obviously you know little about retail and accounting.
Don't be a troll :rolleyes:
Don't be a troll :rolleyes:
netvvork
Apr 11, 01:27 PM
"the iPhone 5 won't be shipping until Fiscal 2012 (after September 2011)."
now if they could only tell us what comes after sunday.:D
now if they could only tell us what comes after sunday.:D
wpotere
Apr 28, 06:45 AM
Wow, this thread and the ridiculous nature of this issue are hilarious. Seriously, you wonder why the US is going down the pan when the entire nation seems to get caught up in a fight over a bloody birth certificate?
Amusing isn't it?
Amusing isn't it?
netdog
Aug 11, 02:45 PM
I would not consider the entire United States to be just a small pocket on the planet.
In terms of the global mobile market, it is.
The network coverage in America is just awful too. Until I moved to England, I thought that mobile communications were generally problematic. Now I realize that American cellular service just sucks. Even in NYC.
America should have gotten on board with everyone else when networks apportioned and specified that the infrastructure must be GSM. Instead, though bandwidth is not really an open market, but is strictly regulate, they left it up to the providers to implement what they wanted. Now the USA is paying the price as the GSM network is way behind, and Qualcomm's CDMA has been rendered somewhat obsolete given that the rest of the world (other than Taiwan?) has rejected it.
In terms of the global mobile market, it is.
The network coverage in America is just awful too. Until I moved to England, I thought that mobile communications were generally problematic. Now I realize that American cellular service just sucks. Even in NYC.
America should have gotten on board with everyone else when networks apportioned and specified that the infrastructure must be GSM. Instead, though bandwidth is not really an open market, but is strictly regulate, they left it up to the providers to implement what they wanted. Now the USA is paying the price as the GSM network is way behind, and Qualcomm's CDMA has been rendered somewhat obsolete given that the rest of the world (other than Taiwan?) has rejected it.
Merzie
Jun 8, 11:56 PM
edit: last launch.. whoops
milo
Jul 20, 10:12 AM
Anyone else think this is getting out of hand? Two cores, great improvement. Four cores, ehh it's faster but Joe can't tell. Eight cores, now thats just stupid.
No way. It would be stupid for a web surfing machine. But for people who need the power, they're going to absolutely notice when it does things TWICE as fast. I say bring it on (and I'm running a quad and see a *huge* difference).
No way. It would be stupid for a web surfing machine. But for people who need the power, they're going to absolutely notice when it does things TWICE as fast. I say bring it on (and I'm running a quad and see a *huge* difference).
ssk2
Apr 14, 04:20 PM
But the iPhone 4 is still the best smartphone on the market and will continue to be so well past June.
If you want to choose to get an inferior phone because you want to chase after a spec sheet that is on you. That does not change reality.
LOL. Right.
Opinion is not fact. This works on both sides of the argument, I concede.
Still, you cannot say the iPhone is the best smartphone on the market, just as someone else can't say the Atrix is the best. Different strokes for different folks!
If you want to choose to get an inferior phone because you want to chase after a spec sheet that is on you. That does not change reality.
LOL. Right.
Opinion is not fact. This works on both sides of the argument, I concede.
Still, you cannot say the iPhone is the best smartphone on the market, just as someone else can't say the Atrix is the best. Different strokes for different folks!
citizenzen
Mar 22, 11:00 AM
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition:
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:
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:
Buschmaster
Aug 16, 10:36 PM
Was there any doubt it wouldn't be a lot faster? I mean, I know it was already plenty fast, but come on...
janstett
Sep 13, 01:11 PM
Sheesh...just when I'm already high up enough on Apple for innovating, they throw even more leaps and bounds in there to put themselves even further ahead. I can't wait 'til my broke @$$ can finally get the money to buy a Mac and chuck all my Windows machines out the door.
I'm sure we'll see similar efforts from other PC manufacturers eventually, but let's see the software use those extra cores in Windows land. Ain't gonna happen...not on the level of what Apple's doing at least.
First, this is INTEL innovating, not Apple.
Second, Apple has been the one lagging behind on multiprocessor support. Pre OSX it was a joke of a hack to support multi CPUs in Mac OS and you had to have apps written to take advantage of it with special libraries.
On Windows, the scheduler automatically handles task scheduling no matter how many processors you have, 1 or 8. Your app doesn't have to "know" it's on a single or multiple processor system or do anything special to take advantage of multiple processors, other than threading -- which you can do on a single processor system anyway. Most applications are lazy and unimaginative, and do everything in a single thread (worse, the same thread that is processing event messages from the GUI, which is why apps lock up -- when they end up in a bad state they stop processing events from the OS and won't paint, resize, etc.). But when you take advantage of multithreading, there are some sand traps but it's a cool way to code and that's how you take advantage of multiple cores without having to know what kind of system you are on. I would assume OSX, being based on BSD, is similar, but I don't know the architecture to the degree I know Windows.
In Windows, you can set process "affinity", locking it down to a fixed processor core, through Task Manager. Don't know if you can do that in OSX...
I'm sure we'll see similar efforts from other PC manufacturers eventually, but let's see the software use those extra cores in Windows land. Ain't gonna happen...not on the level of what Apple's doing at least.
First, this is INTEL innovating, not Apple.
Second, Apple has been the one lagging behind on multiprocessor support. Pre OSX it was a joke of a hack to support multi CPUs in Mac OS and you had to have apps written to take advantage of it with special libraries.
On Windows, the scheduler automatically handles task scheduling no matter how many processors you have, 1 or 8. Your app doesn't have to "know" it's on a single or multiple processor system or do anything special to take advantage of multiple processors, other than threading -- which you can do on a single processor system anyway. Most applications are lazy and unimaginative, and do everything in a single thread (worse, the same thread that is processing event messages from the GUI, which is why apps lock up -- when they end up in a bad state they stop processing events from the OS and won't paint, resize, etc.). But when you take advantage of multithreading, there are some sand traps but it's a cool way to code and that's how you take advantage of multiple cores without having to know what kind of system you are on. I would assume OSX, being based on BSD, is similar, but I don't know the architecture to the degree I know Windows.
In Windows, you can set process "affinity", locking it down to a fixed processor core, through Task Manager. Don't know if you can do that in OSX...
technicolor
Sep 19, 08:49 PM
DailyTech (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4217) has a mention of the Core 2 Quadro processors.
Pricing mentioned was a little lower than I expected, but it's processors in the Conroe line rather than the Xeon. Having said that, the 3GHz Xeon is slightly cheaper than the 2.93GHz Conroe.
As expected, the highest rated speed mentioned is 2.67Ghz. This intel crap updates far too frequently...ugh
:mad:
Pricing mentioned was a little lower than I expected, but it's processors in the Conroe line rather than the Xeon. Having said that, the 3GHz Xeon is slightly cheaper than the 2.93GHz Conroe.
As expected, the highest rated speed mentioned is 2.67Ghz. This intel crap updates far too frequently...ugh
:mad:
supremedesigner
Jul 14, 03:39 PM
Make a copy of Toast and use one copy for one drive and the other copy for the other drive.
Ohhhh! That could work. Have anyone tried this before? Thanks! I'll check on it when I get home! :D
Ohhhh! That could work. Have anyone tried this before? Thanks! I'll check on it when I get home! :D
THX1139
Aug 20, 12:11 AM
That's okay. No worries. I just get a little defensive when I spend $5000 on a new system, and then see you posting about how it'll be better with Clovertown. But that's my problem I guess. :rolleyes:
Anyway, it's all cool.
Yeah... me too! LOL!! :D
As for Toast and Handbrake performance... well that's all well and cool, but I have little use for those apps on such extreme level. I can't think of an instance where I would run Toast more than once or twice a week. Maybe I should get netflix and build a library of illegal movies?? Nah... I will be using my Macpro for creative work instead. FCP, Motion, Shake, Lightwave, Maya etc... I realize that comparisions with Handbrake and Toast are being made just to show how the cores are utilized, but frankly, I don't give a damn about those apps. They show me nothing. Now if you get into comparing heavy duty Professional apps that take full advantage of all cores at native speeds, then I'm excited. For example, Newtek Lightwave has been announced as UB "very soon". Lightwave is a fully multicore application that should test the strength of the Macpro when it comes to rendering. I'd love to see those benchmarks compared to G5!
Newtek Press Release (http://www.newtek.com/news/releases/08-01-06f.html)
Anyway, it's all cool.
Yeah... me too! LOL!! :D
As for Toast and Handbrake performance... well that's all well and cool, but I have little use for those apps on such extreme level. I can't think of an instance where I would run Toast more than once or twice a week. Maybe I should get netflix and build a library of illegal movies?? Nah... I will be using my Macpro for creative work instead. FCP, Motion, Shake, Lightwave, Maya etc... I realize that comparisions with Handbrake and Toast are being made just to show how the cores are utilized, but frankly, I don't give a damn about those apps. They show me nothing. Now if you get into comparing heavy duty Professional apps that take full advantage of all cores at native speeds, then I'm excited. For example, Newtek Lightwave has been announced as UB "very soon". Lightwave is a fully multicore application that should test the strength of the Macpro when it comes to rendering. I'd love to see those benchmarks compared to G5!
Newtek Press Release (http://www.newtek.com/news/releases/08-01-06f.html)
nagromme
Aug 7, 03:21 PM
Wow! :eek:
It's amazing how Apple keeps managing BIG updates to OS X. They are moving forward so much more efficiently than Microsoft. Not just polishing little things, but big, useful things. Not to mention some fun ones to attract consumers. I hope the advanced Spotlight features include easy boolean searching.
And now we can all wonder about those OTHER features Steve said they are concealing for now so Microsoft can't make a halfway copy (or attempt to) yet again.
I'm surprised res-independent UI was not discussed, but Apple has already said (http://developer.apple.com/releasenotes/GraphicsImaging/ResolutionIndependentUI.html) that is coming, so maybe it's just not polished enough to bother showing yet. (Or maybe it's better to show when new displays come out? Today's new low prices on Cinema Displays might hint at new displays to come later.)
I've been asking for that background-change effect in iChat for years! Adobe Premiere could do that in the 90s, though not in realtime. Too cool!
Now one question... A new Front Row has been mentioned, but what will it have? PVR, tuner-ready for future Macs or peripherals? At first I also wondered about ["from across the room or across the house"... But I bet they're just talking about sharing iTunes or photos from another Mac, which is old news.
PS, congrats to MR's servers for handling the load :)
It's amazing how Apple keeps managing BIG updates to OS X. They are moving forward so much more efficiently than Microsoft. Not just polishing little things, but big, useful things. Not to mention some fun ones to attract consumers. I hope the advanced Spotlight features include easy boolean searching.
And now we can all wonder about those OTHER features Steve said they are concealing for now so Microsoft can't make a halfway copy (or attempt to) yet again.
I'm surprised res-independent UI was not discussed, but Apple has already said (http://developer.apple.com/releasenotes/GraphicsImaging/ResolutionIndependentUI.html) that is coming, so maybe it's just not polished enough to bother showing yet. (Or maybe it's better to show when new displays come out? Today's new low prices on Cinema Displays might hint at new displays to come later.)
I've been asking for that background-change effect in iChat for years! Adobe Premiere could do that in the 90s, though not in realtime. Too cool!
Now one question... A new Front Row has been mentioned, but what will it have? PVR, tuner-ready for future Macs or peripherals? At first I also wondered about ["from across the room or across the house"... But I bet they're just talking about sharing iTunes or photos from another Mac, which is old news.
PS, congrats to MR's servers for handling the load :)
