Umbongo
Apr 21, 06:00 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/21/apple-developing-narrower-rackmountable-mac-pro-prototypes/
It makes a lot of sense. Quietly cooling two CPUs, a high-end GPU, 8 DIMMs and multiple drives in such a form factor makes me a little dubious. That and it seems pure hearsay on the part of 9 to 5 mac.
Mods please don't lock this, discussion of Mac Pro related articles in the main news section is really hard to have as 90% of the posts are by people who have little interest or knowledge in the topic.
It makes a lot of sense. Quietly cooling two CPUs, a high-end GPU, 8 DIMMs and multiple drives in such a form factor makes me a little dubious. That and it seems pure hearsay on the part of 9 to 5 mac.
Mods please don't lock this, discussion of Mac Pro related articles in the main news section is really hard to have as 90% of the posts are by people who have little interest or knowledge in the topic.
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 11, 02:31 AM
IF that TiVo rumor is true, it will be a dream come to life!
Proud owner of a Mac....and a Tivo w/DVD burner.
I can't see how Apple can begin an sell movies and not also sell a Media Mac.
It would be like iTMS and no iPods... how well would that work? :rolleyes:
Proud owner of a Mac....and a Tivo w/DVD burner.
I can't see how Apple can begin an sell movies and not also sell a Media Mac.
It would be like iTMS and no iPods... how well would that work? :rolleyes:
bloodycape
Apr 18, 04:55 PM
Apple brings out the 'App Store'.. everyone copies them....It's generic.
except the appstore is/was nothing new. They just took what handango website was doing and made it into a convenient app instead of going to a website.
except the appstore is/was nothing new. They just took what handango website was doing and made it into a convenient app instead of going to a website.
PBF
Apr 23, 10:01 PM
I love retinal operating systems. It's so freakin' futuristic.
Demoman
Aug 4, 09:12 AM
Who voted negative????? You want it slower, eh? Give the man a G3! No, a 601!
I have been wondering the same thing. No matter how good the news is, there are still a bunch of negative votes. It just re-inforces my belief there is an organized effort to discredit Apple on this site. If it was just individuals, I would wonder why waste time on an Apple website if you did not like Apple? It makes no sense in that scenario. I do believe the PC establishment is worried about the possibility of Apple gaining more of a foothold in corporate America.
I have been wondering the same thing. No matter how good the news is, there are still a bunch of negative votes. It just re-inforces my belief there is an organized effort to discredit Apple on this site. If it was just individuals, I would wonder why waste time on an Apple website if you did not like Apple? It makes no sense in that scenario. I do believe the PC establishment is worried about the possibility of Apple gaining more of a foothold in corporate America.
baryon
Apr 23, 04:52 PM
Wow... Imagine an 11 inch MacBook Air with the resolution of a much bigger monitor... Or imagine a MacBook Pro that can display all of Photoshop's annoying panels without having to collapse them all the time... Or simply viewing photos with loads more detail! Good stuff!
EricNau
May 3, 09:48 PM
I don't have the time to write an exhaustive response to this magnum opus, but I'm going to leave with a few concluding points:
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
I believe the discussion of body temperature has reached a senseless level. I disagree with your claim that body temperatures in celsius are more difficult to remember, and I don't believe there's any substatial evidence to support this claim. Regardless, Celsius seems to work just fine for the entire world (...practically), unless you know something about European mothers that I don't.
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
I see no reason why baking with a scale is impractical. It's not what you're used to, but that doesn't reflect upon the merits of a metric system.
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
Written weights are more accurate. What's problematic is that there's an additional requirement for measuring volumes of dry goods. Flour must be measured after sifting, brown sugar must be packed, etc. Not only does weighing dry goods eliminate the need to standardization of volume, but it's always going to be more accurate.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
As balmaw explained, it doesn't really matter what you call a pint of beer at a bar. Every culture and language has their own name for it.
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
If you ask for a "cup of water" at a restaurant, will you be given exactly 8oz? I don't think so.
Most cups hold more than a cup. So, in the absence of a measuring cup, there's really no need for such a designation. So, assuming we do away with the customary system, why do you need a word to describe 8oz of water? You would stop thinking in cups and start thinking in quarter liter intervals (which is equally, if not more, convenient).
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
I believe milk in Germany is bought by the liter, though I'm sure European members here could elaborate on that.
You might find purchasing milk by the liter cumbersome, but it works well for them.
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
Beer is served in metric quantities all over the world. ...And there are plenty of names for it that aren't "pint." Additionally, I assure you that an American pint of beer is served with less precision than 25ml from bar to bar.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
And metric units, too, are used the world over to describe household amounts.
Also, dividing 300ml (though, I find it interesting that you keep choosing to compare metric units to customary units, since this is counter-productive) can easily be rounded to 38 or even 40ml, which is precise enough even for baking.
Though it's entirely a moot point. Metric recipes are normalized to "easy" measurements, just like American recipes are normalized to the nearest cup or 1/2 for items like flour and sugar.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
I don't find the customary system practical. To the contrary, I find it convoluted with no consistency.
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
I've witnessed many students struggle with it. When you grow up using Fahrenheit, feet, miles, inches, cups, teaspoons, etc. you get a sense of what each one means; you can "feel" it. The same can't be said about the metric system for most Americans, and it's extremely difficult to teach yourself what each unit intuitively represents as a high school student, for example.
It's something many of us will never get. Kilometers, Celsius, liters, centimeters, etc. will always "feel" foreign because of the units we were raised with at home. We owe our kids better.
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
I believe the discussion of body temperature has reached a senseless level. I disagree with your claim that body temperatures in celsius are more difficult to remember, and I don't believe there's any substatial evidence to support this claim. Regardless, Celsius seems to work just fine for the entire world (...practically), unless you know something about European mothers that I don't.
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
I see no reason why baking with a scale is impractical. It's not what you're used to, but that doesn't reflect upon the merits of a metric system.
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
Written weights are more accurate. What's problematic is that there's an additional requirement for measuring volumes of dry goods. Flour must be measured after sifting, brown sugar must be packed, etc. Not only does weighing dry goods eliminate the need to standardization of volume, but it's always going to be more accurate.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
As balmaw explained, it doesn't really matter what you call a pint of beer at a bar. Every culture and language has their own name for it.
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
If you ask for a "cup of water" at a restaurant, will you be given exactly 8oz? I don't think so.
Most cups hold more than a cup. So, in the absence of a measuring cup, there's really no need for such a designation. So, assuming we do away with the customary system, why do you need a word to describe 8oz of water? You would stop thinking in cups and start thinking in quarter liter intervals (which is equally, if not more, convenient).
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
I believe milk in Germany is bought by the liter, though I'm sure European members here could elaborate on that.
You might find purchasing milk by the liter cumbersome, but it works well for them.
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
Beer is served in metric quantities all over the world. ...And there are plenty of names for it that aren't "pint." Additionally, I assure you that an American pint of beer is served with less precision than 25ml from bar to bar.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
And metric units, too, are used the world over to describe household amounts.
Also, dividing 300ml (though, I find it interesting that you keep choosing to compare metric units to customary units, since this is counter-productive) can easily be rounded to 38 or even 40ml, which is precise enough even for baking.
Though it's entirely a moot point. Metric recipes are normalized to "easy" measurements, just like American recipes are normalized to the nearest cup or 1/2 for items like flour and sugar.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
I don't find the customary system practical. To the contrary, I find it convoluted with no consistency.
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
I've witnessed many students struggle with it. When you grow up using Fahrenheit, feet, miles, inches, cups, teaspoons, etc. you get a sense of what each one means; you can "feel" it. The same can't be said about the metric system for most Americans, and it's extremely difficult to teach yourself what each unit intuitively represents as a high school student, for example.
It's something many of us will never get. Kilometers, Celsius, liters, centimeters, etc. will always "feel" foreign because of the units we were raised with at home. We owe our kids better.
rjohnstone
Apr 18, 03:40 PM
The iPhone 1 was announced before the Prada phone. Patent dates showed iPhone implementation of a capacitive touchscreen phone at least a year before LG showed their Prada phone in 2006. The Prada shipped in small shipments before the iPhone, so that is their only claim that it was technically released before the iPhone even though real shipments occurred months later. Technically, if Apple wanted to, they could have sued LG.
Also, the Prada isn't a smartphone. It can't load apps. It doesn't even have a qwerty keyboard. You input text through the phone dialer like old school SMS.
Irrelevant argument from a "look and feel" standpoint as NOBODY outside of Apple knew what the iPhone looked like.
So either the design was logical or LG was frikkin clairvoyant and could see into the future.
The patent filings are moot.
Loading apps are moot as the original iPhone didn't permit that either.
The virtual qwerty keyboard existed before the iPhone as well.
Seriously do 10 seconds of research before posting.
What Apple did was made a phone that contained a lot of EXISTING technology and wrapped it into a single package.
And did a good job doing it too.
Show me something that works as well BEFORE Apple demoed the iPhone.
Technology =/= usability.
Irrelevant. Most of the tech in the iPhone predates it.
Also, the Prada isn't a smartphone. It can't load apps. It doesn't even have a qwerty keyboard. You input text through the phone dialer like old school SMS.
Irrelevant argument from a "look and feel" standpoint as NOBODY outside of Apple knew what the iPhone looked like.
So either the design was logical or LG was frikkin clairvoyant and could see into the future.
The patent filings are moot.
Loading apps are moot as the original iPhone didn't permit that either.
The virtual qwerty keyboard existed before the iPhone as well.
Seriously do 10 seconds of research before posting.
What Apple did was made a phone that contained a lot of EXISTING technology and wrapped it into a single package.
And did a good job doing it too.
Show me something that works as well BEFORE Apple demoed the iPhone.
Technology =/= usability.
Irrelevant. Most of the tech in the iPhone predates it.
stp2112
Mar 31, 08:18 AM
Ok reading through this I see it is getting off track. The new release of Lion is good and stable, a few quirks but not bad, I am running it as my primary OS. Would be nice to see some intelligent posts on here in line with the topic.
Blacklabel34
Mar 30, 03:31 AM
So the factory is fine but the loading dock is damaged? And they had to shut down the factory because they can't figure out another way to bring in the supplies? :confused:
Sounds like we are not getting the whole story...
Sounds like we are not getting the whole story...
Nuvi
May 6, 03:40 AM
And let's not forget one thing: Apple moved from 680x0 to PPC and PPC to Intel because each time, the new CPU series offered a major improvement from the previous one. Today, Intel is the biggest innovator across the board in high-end CPUs - for desktop, server and laptops. There is no one on the horizon who can meet or beat Intel.
My thoughts exactly. Even more so, when Apple left PPC they had huge problems getting faster processors from IBM. PowerBook G5 anyone? Windows based Intel systems were crushing Mac's like crazy and Apple couldn't do anything about it. Hence, the switch to Intel. Now we have zero problems so why switch to something that makes no sense.
My thoughts exactly. Even more so, when Apple left PPC they had huge problems getting faster processors from IBM. PowerBook G5 anyone? Windows based Intel systems were crushing Mac's like crazy and Apple couldn't do anything about it. Hence, the switch to Intel. Now we have zero problems so why switch to something that makes no sense.
mrkramer
Apr 16, 12:37 PM
How do you feel about inflation? To me, inflation is the most regressive tax.
There is also the incorrect notion that "spending" is what drives an economy, that if a rich person doesn't "spend" their money then he or she is not benefiting the economy. What our economy currently needs is less spending and more saving. Savings and investments create jobs, not consumption.
First of all, some inflation is ok, and normal as long as it doesn't get too high. And how does money sitting in a bank account, or under my mattress create jobs? If nobody is buying anything then the economy goes down, that has been shown many times.
I'd almost agree but if you look at the Forbes flat income tax plan, the plan has a very generous initial income exemption before the no-deductions flat income tax kicks in (somewhere between US$42,000 to US$44,000 for a family of two adults and two dependents). As such, that right there makes this plan progressive, since low-income households are no longer subject to income tax.
And best of all, with essentially all those complex deductions, exemptions, credits, etc. no longer in the tax code, it means income tax forms will be simple enough that the whole thing for most taxpayers will be not much more than a postcard! :D Just the savings in income tax compliance costs would mean potentially hundreds of billions of dollars now can be used for more productive purposes.
ok, so maybe it could work with a high enough exemption, although I think $44,000 is a little too low. But you said get rid of all income tax and replace it with a consumption tax, that is even more regressive than a flat tax unless you limit it to only certain items at which point it doesn't bring in enough money to be viable.
There is also the incorrect notion that "spending" is what drives an economy, that if a rich person doesn't "spend" their money then he or she is not benefiting the economy. What our economy currently needs is less spending and more saving. Savings and investments create jobs, not consumption.
First of all, some inflation is ok, and normal as long as it doesn't get too high. And how does money sitting in a bank account, or under my mattress create jobs? If nobody is buying anything then the economy goes down, that has been shown many times.
I'd almost agree but if you look at the Forbes flat income tax plan, the plan has a very generous initial income exemption before the no-deductions flat income tax kicks in (somewhere between US$42,000 to US$44,000 for a family of two adults and two dependents). As such, that right there makes this plan progressive, since low-income households are no longer subject to income tax.
And best of all, with essentially all those complex deductions, exemptions, credits, etc. no longer in the tax code, it means income tax forms will be simple enough that the whole thing for most taxpayers will be not much more than a postcard! :D Just the savings in income tax compliance costs would mean potentially hundreds of billions of dollars now can be used for more productive purposes.
ok, so maybe it could work with a high enough exemption, although I think $44,000 is a little too low. But you said get rid of all income tax and replace it with a consumption tax, that is even more regressive than a flat tax unless you limit it to only certain items at which point it doesn't bring in enough money to be viable.
Prom1
Mar 27, 02:10 PM
How is a cloud based system going to work when bandwidth limits for cell phone data is low, and overage fees are high?
I really hope wwdc is going to focus on computers rather than its IOS toys.
Coming from a fellow mobile smartphone enthusiast ... I'm with you on this comment. iOS has its place ... yet with declining revenues/profits from the Desktop/Laptop lineup - despite increasing sales - I have a bad feeling that LION will NOT increase laptop/desktop sales.
LION is just too ... iOS centric focused yet Apple has already stated that touch-screens for laptops just don't make practical sense and that the trackpad is the best interraction for such concepts. I'm worried that their hold and innovation for Education (K12/Universities = iTunes U) will suffer since Mac Server doesn't exist as a separate feature OS vs a combined one. We'll see but I really wonder if this iOS is currupting our computing environment and not accelerating.
I really hope wwdc is going to focus on computers rather than its IOS toys.
Coming from a fellow mobile smartphone enthusiast ... I'm with you on this comment. iOS has its place ... yet with declining revenues/profits from the Desktop/Laptop lineup - despite increasing sales - I have a bad feeling that LION will NOT increase laptop/desktop sales.
LION is just too ... iOS centric focused yet Apple has already stated that touch-screens for laptops just don't make practical sense and that the trackpad is the best interraction for such concepts. I'm worried that their hold and innovation for Education (K12/Universities = iTunes U) will suffer since Mac Server doesn't exist as a separate feature OS vs a combined one. We'll see but I really wonder if this iOS is currupting our computing environment and not accelerating.
rwilliams
Mar 28, 10:31 AM
what an overly dramatic confused statement
You have to consider who's making that statement.
You have to consider who's making that statement.
aliveandknowsit
Apr 26, 03:54 PM
I've watched Apple go from "outsider" to The Big Heavy in The Room, innovating about as quickly as a battleship takes to turn around, focusing on beauty, beauty, beauty as Android allowed its system to be used in some butt-ugly phones that -- hey! -- actually seemed to work pretty well, to the point where they are refined to become exciting looking, versatile systems that JUST GET THINGS DONE. The iPhone has become a Thin Fashion Model, and we are all just paparazzi awaiting her entrance/exit at Cannes each year (San Francisco). I've had it, and will be happy to pick up a great Android system phone this year on Verizon. (Oh yes, and MobileMe was a total bust; after upgrading it wouldn't pick up my contacts anymore....)
NebulaClash
Apr 25, 10:20 AM
I still don't get the outrage of many people.
I can think of four reasons for outrage:
1. People who are scared by the media and do not think it through enough to see the media have it wrong.
2. People who like to stir up trouble for the sake of trouble.
3. People who hate Apple and use any excuse to blast them, true or not.
4. People who are paid to provide misinformation against Apple.
I can think of four reasons for outrage:
1. People who are scared by the media and do not think it through enough to see the media have it wrong.
2. People who like to stir up trouble for the sake of trouble.
3. People who hate Apple and use any excuse to blast them, true or not.
4. People who are paid to provide misinformation against Apple.
Keebler
Aug 7, 04:22 PM
Heres a funny idea, dont put words in peoples mouths. Why do you just assume people dont want a mini because they want to play games? And who the hell do you think you are thinking people want PCI slots only to never use them? Instead of acting like some rich pompous ass you could actually listen to what people need and not assume things based on your secluded little fantasy world where everything is wrong unless it revolves around you. There are a lot of 2D designers/artists, iMacs are not suffecient for obvious reasons and Mac Minis arent either, a Mac Pro is their only option and its a HUGE waste of power and money. Anyone who thinks a quad Xeon will somehow help a 2D worker in Photoshop is an idiot, Photoshop/Illustrator has been absolutely fine for years as long as you have enough ram. The fact is that Apple gave no option for a reasonable proffessional computer, they only gave us an extravagent workstation more suited for professional 3D and video editting. Why the hell should people have to pay several hundred dollars more for things they wont use? Before you run your mouth you need to think about what OTHER people need rather than whatever grand delusions youve come up with about yourself.
i completely disagree that it's a waste of money for 2d folks.
stability and increased speed of workflow...ie. being able to do things faster and smarter, saves ppl time and that means saves them money and helps them earn more. anyone in that biz, who doesn't want to spend a couple of extra hundred dollars for those reasons which unfortunately don't have an 'upfront' price tag, should rethink their career path.
i can't put a number to it, but i know i save plenty of time working on my macs compared to my pc. things just work faster, smarter and they rarely crash on my macs. now, when i work on my pc...i scream at it..."Why won't you do this!!!! or that!!!! or i hit the wrong keys expecting expose to kick in...instead of i have to click a window there..and there.. etc. .etc..
those are intangibles which people forget. they are truly important.
i completely disagree that it's a waste of money for 2d folks.
stability and increased speed of workflow...ie. being able to do things faster and smarter, saves ppl time and that means saves them money and helps them earn more. anyone in that biz, who doesn't want to spend a couple of extra hundred dollars for those reasons which unfortunately don't have an 'upfront' price tag, should rethink their career path.
i can't put a number to it, but i know i save plenty of time working on my macs compared to my pc. things just work faster, smarter and they rarely crash on my macs. now, when i work on my pc...i scream at it..."Why won't you do this!!!! or that!!!! or i hit the wrong keys expecting expose to kick in...instead of i have to click a window there..and there.. etc. .etc..
those are intangibles which people forget. they are truly important.
Erwin-Br
Apr 21, 04:33 PM
It's not going to happen. If Apple was still interested in offering a rack mountable system they would have redesigned the X-Serve instead of the Mac Pro.
Where is the logic in dropping a perfectly fine rack-mountable system, because apparently it wasn't sold enough, and then convert the Mac Pro workstation to... a rack-mountable system?! They could've dropped the Mac Pro and rebrand X-Serve to Mac Pro instead. Same result.
Where is the logic in dropping a perfectly fine rack-mountable system, because apparently it wasn't sold enough, and then convert the Mac Pro workstation to... a rack-mountable system?! They could've dropped the Mac Pro and rebrand X-Serve to Mac Pro instead. Same result.
archipellago
Apr 26, 04:11 PM
Love it..
swingerofbirch
Jul 30, 01:10 AM
I've been eligible to upgrade my Verizon phone for a while now (new every 2), but have held off because the phones all seem so gimmicky. I like Verizon call quality, but I feel like their phones (all cell phones) are dictated by what the service providers want to be able to sell (Vcast, etc).
So they add cameras and EVDO etc to make more money from the associated services they offer.
The only two feature requests I ever have from a cell phone are: better reception and better battery life.
I have never cared about the other features, because I prefered carrying devices that specialized in those areas, ie a separate digital camera and an iPod.
However, it seems that Apple's major competition going forward will be from cell phone carriers who sell songs (albeit at 3.99/each) directly to cell phones.
The cell phone carriers have the advantage in that a lot of people will be buying these devices whether they want MP3 players or not. You have a cell phone, you've got an MP3 player. And not only that, you don't need a PC to buy music, you do it right from the phone.
Going forward the quality of phones as Mp3 players and cameras and the phones' music store experiences will improve, and Apple obviously realizes this will be their competition (more so I believe than a Wifi enabled Zune).
Perhaps Apple's wild-bet will be a device that is a master of all trades. They could combine iPod with Newton PDA a cell phone and a decent camera (iSight?).
I would imagine that to offer a device like this and not have it hobbled by terrible software and keep it fairly open, Apple will need to create their own wireless network. They do have 9.5 billion.
:)
I think it's where the future is headed. But it's a big bet. But in business it's also a bet not to take a big bet sometimes.
So they add cameras and EVDO etc to make more money from the associated services they offer.
The only two feature requests I ever have from a cell phone are: better reception and better battery life.
I have never cared about the other features, because I prefered carrying devices that specialized in those areas, ie a separate digital camera and an iPod.
However, it seems that Apple's major competition going forward will be from cell phone carriers who sell songs (albeit at 3.99/each) directly to cell phones.
The cell phone carriers have the advantage in that a lot of people will be buying these devices whether they want MP3 players or not. You have a cell phone, you've got an MP3 player. And not only that, you don't need a PC to buy music, you do it right from the phone.
Going forward the quality of phones as Mp3 players and cameras and the phones' music store experiences will improve, and Apple obviously realizes this will be their competition (more so I believe than a Wifi enabled Zune).
Perhaps Apple's wild-bet will be a device that is a master of all trades. They could combine iPod with Newton PDA a cell phone and a decent camera (iSight?).
I would imagine that to offer a device like this and not have it hobbled by terrible software and keep it fairly open, Apple will need to create their own wireless network. They do have 9.5 billion.
:)
I think it's where the future is headed. But it's a big bet. But in business it's also a bet not to take a big bet sometimes.
sjinsjca
Nov 14, 03:34 PM
You're joking right?!
They are the one of the biggest security product vendors!
I have installed this, no slow down and it doesn't get in the way.
I have it installed as I frequently share files with Windows users and don't want to be a carrier.
+1.
My Mac-using son had a Windows trojan on his memory stick, which he uses at school-- the trojan probably loaded itself there. Its presence was identified by a Windows-using friend's malware scanner when he plugged the stick into his machine. I investigated later: scanned it with fully-up-to-date ClamXAV on my Mac. Clam didn't find anything. So, I downloaded Sophos and let it install it per its defaults. Scanned the stick again, and Sophos alerted me to the issue. It also had links to informative pages on the trojan in question. Turns out it's a Windows-only trojan; at no point were our Macs in danger. But every PC user among my son's friends was at risk from it. It was a nasty one, too, and known for stealing passwords and so forth.
So based on that one test, it seems Sophos is superior to Clam. I've noted no problem running it on my machine so far. Scanning my hard disk, for example, didn't bog the machine down much.
I think I'll keep it. Clam would not automatically scan incoming emails or other potential sources of contagion; Sophos will do so. Given there appears to be little or no performance or stability hit, it seems worthwhile.
They are the one of the biggest security product vendors!
I have installed this, no slow down and it doesn't get in the way.
I have it installed as I frequently share files with Windows users and don't want to be a carrier.
+1.
My Mac-using son had a Windows trojan on his memory stick, which he uses at school-- the trojan probably loaded itself there. Its presence was identified by a Windows-using friend's malware scanner when he plugged the stick into his machine. I investigated later: scanned it with fully-up-to-date ClamXAV on my Mac. Clam didn't find anything. So, I downloaded Sophos and let it install it per its defaults. Scanned the stick again, and Sophos alerted me to the issue. It also had links to informative pages on the trojan in question. Turns out it's a Windows-only trojan; at no point were our Macs in danger. But every PC user among my son's friends was at risk from it. It was a nasty one, too, and known for stealing passwords and so forth.
So based on that one test, it seems Sophos is superior to Clam. I've noted no problem running it on my machine so far. Scanning my hard disk, for example, didn't bog the machine down much.
I think I'll keep it. Clam would not automatically scan incoming emails or other potential sources of contagion; Sophos will do so. Given there appears to be little or no performance or stability hit, it seems worthwhile.
Floris
Apr 20, 01:41 AM
I honestly can not imagine why.
This is the 3gs to the 3th gen iPhone?
Man, imagine just buying one from verizon, don't you feel f* for not waiting a month.
Useless for them to release another one this year. Enjoy the spoils of everybody buying it. And release a 'real worthy' upgrade to iPhone5 for early 2012 release.
This is the 3gs to the 3th gen iPhone?
Man, imagine just buying one from verizon, don't you feel f* for not waiting a month.
Useless for them to release another one this year. Enjoy the spoils of everybody buying it. And release a 'real worthy' upgrade to iPhone5 for early 2012 release.
benhollberg
Nov 9, 01:51 PM
I am curious; I seldom find anything is free. How does Sophos recover his investment in this project?
I believe that it used to cost money but it was mainly for business users. My guess is that now they decided to also go for the average consumer and they probably want to get people to see them and recognize their name at first. I could be completely wrong though.
I believe that it used to cost money but it was mainly for business users. My guess is that now they decided to also go for the average consumer and they probably want to get people to see them and recognize their name at first. I could be completely wrong though.
0815
Mar 28, 11:32 AM
Great news...... for Google.
Really? I won't switch to google just because I would have to way a little bit longer for the iPhone5. Those who (claim they ) would switch because of that probably would have gotten an Android anyway.
Really? I won't switch to google just because I would have to way a little bit longer for the iPhone5. Those who (claim they ) would switch because of that probably would have gotten an Android anyway.
