bousozoku
Aug 7, 05:27 PM
I'm glad that Leopard will be completely (that's what they say, at least) 64-bit. I'm not sure why it's important to go on about the applications as if they were important to the operating system itself. Increased integration like what was displayed would cause the anti-trust machine to whip into action, if it was Microsoft instead of Apple.
Time Machine is not exactly revolutionary, considering that there were a few 3rd party products available--Rewind comes to mind--that journaled changes and allowed them to be restored. Still, it should stop the various threads "I accidentally deleted..." :)
Hopefully, the features not mentioned will include a better kernel that actually performs well. It would be nice to see operating system benchmarks that don't make me cringe when I look at the Mac OS X results.
Xcode version 3.0 looks good but they still haven't provided many details.
Time Machine is not exactly revolutionary, considering that there were a few 3rd party products available--Rewind comes to mind--that journaled changes and allowed them to be restored. Still, it should stop the various threads "I accidentally deleted..." :)
Hopefully, the features not mentioned will include a better kernel that actually performs well. It would be nice to see operating system benchmarks that don't make me cringe when I look at the Mac OS X results.
Xcode version 3.0 looks good but they still haven't provided many details.
kdarling
Apr 6, 03:01 PM
But he then said after how well it would work on the phone, they put the tablet project on the shelf and focused on the phone as it was more important. Which means it was a tablet and no just a touch screen device in the beginning.
Sure, it could've been a full tablet. It just didn't have iOS, is my point.
People misremember a lot. You know how it goes: a story always gets better as time goes by :)
For example, in the later tablet version we are told that seeing kinetic scrolling on the demo made him want for Apple to build a touch phone:
“I had this idea about having a glass display, a multitouch display you could type on with your fingers. I asked our folks: could we come up with a multitouch display that we could type on? And six months later, they came back with this prototype display. And I gave it to one of our really brilliant UI guys and he called me back a few weeks later and had intertial scrolling working and I thought, ‘my God, we can build a phone with this!’ So we put the tablet on the shelf… and we went to work on the iPhone.”
Yet, years before in one of the first iPhone articles in we were told that kinetic scrolling came later on:
"At one point, Mr. Jobs got a call from one of the iPhone engineers with an idea: Why not allow iPhone users to navigate through both song collections and contacts stored on the device by simply flicking their fingers up and down across the surface of the touch-screen? The engineer gave Mr. Jobs a demonstration of the technology, and the Apple chief executive signed off on it immediately, according to a person familiar with the process."
I'd love one day for a definitive history to come out, so we can know the full timing, and also credit those unsung engineers who actually invented it all.
Sure, it could've been a full tablet. It just didn't have iOS, is my point.
People misremember a lot. You know how it goes: a story always gets better as time goes by :)
For example, in the later tablet version we are told that seeing kinetic scrolling on the demo made him want for Apple to build a touch phone:
“I had this idea about having a glass display, a multitouch display you could type on with your fingers. I asked our folks: could we come up with a multitouch display that we could type on? And six months later, they came back with this prototype display. And I gave it to one of our really brilliant UI guys and he called me back a few weeks later and had intertial scrolling working and I thought, ‘my God, we can build a phone with this!’ So we put the tablet on the shelf… and we went to work on the iPhone.”
Yet, years before in one of the first iPhone articles in we were told that kinetic scrolling came later on:
"At one point, Mr. Jobs got a call from one of the iPhone engineers with an idea: Why not allow iPhone users to navigate through both song collections and contacts stored on the device by simply flicking their fingers up and down across the surface of the touch-screen? The engineer gave Mr. Jobs a demonstration of the technology, and the Apple chief executive signed off on it immediately, according to a person familiar with the process."
I'd love one day for a definitive history to come out, so we can know the full timing, and also credit those unsung engineers who actually invented it all.
whatever
Jul 20, 12:10 PM
Hmm, would make for an awesome rev b. MacPro on or around MWSF (probably "around" as MWSF is really a big consumer event).
Bring on the serious grunt!!
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
Bring on the serious grunt!!
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
janstett
Oct 23, 11:44 AM
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
twoodcc
Aug 5, 07:20 PM
To me the answer to the whole IR/Mac Pro/Front Row thing is obvious - put an integrated IR receiver into the keyboard. The keyboard would come with the Mac Pro (unlike the display) and is rarely under the desk. :)
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
that's actually a good idea....;)
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
that's actually a good idea....;)
GorillaPaws
Aug 7, 03:49 PM
I was impressed w/ the new iChat features. It will really help me troubleshoot w/ my mom, who is less-than-tech-savy. I'm a good two hours away from her when I'm up at school, so it'll be nice to be able to show her stuff. Plus with the new backgrounds she won't be able to see how filthy my apartment is :D .
Time machine was cool looking, although I'm not sure how often I'll truly use it.
The other thing that popped out at me (after just glancing at the website) was the really cool core animation vid they had up. That would be an amazing screen-saver, I hope they add that in to Leopard for impressing my PC friends. I'm still not sure what the potential uses are for developers are, other than eye candy. I haven't seen many apps that take advantage of core video yet so i wonder how useful this will be to developers. I'd love to hear what you all think about core animation and if it will have any utility.
Time machine was cool looking, although I'm not sure how often I'll truly use it.
The other thing that popped out at me (after just glancing at the website) was the really cool core animation vid they had up. That would be an amazing screen-saver, I hope they add that in to Leopard for impressing my PC friends. I'm still not sure what the potential uses are for developers are, other than eye candy. I haven't seen many apps that take advantage of core video yet so i wonder how useful this will be to developers. I'd love to hear what you all think about core animation and if it will have any utility.
twoodcc
Jul 20, 08:30 AM
this can be only good news, as long as Apple keeps up with the pc world and put these processors in their computers when they are released. i sure hope that they do
iPhil
Apr 27, 12:53 PM
Who is NOBama? I looked up that name on Wikipedia but haven't found anything.
Robert Pattinson#39;s Shots for
Robert+pattinson+vanity+
Robert+pattinson+vanity+
robert pattinson vanity fair
robert pattinson vanity fair
Under robert pattinson
yg17
Apr 27, 08:26 AM
He shouldn't have given in to the racists. But it's out there.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42779923/ns/politics-white_house/
http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/3050/08c2e64746f7486daac794e.png
Now will Donald Trump and all of these other racists please shut the hell up?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42779923/ns/politics-white_house/
http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/3050/08c2e64746f7486daac794e.png
Now will Donald Trump and all of these other racists please shut the hell up?
JS77
Apr 10, 03:28 AM
wow. You'd think a fcp users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic...
+1,000,000
+1,000,000
mccldwll
Apr 27, 08:34 AM
I think it was not a bug, nut data waiting to be sent to Apple for profit generating purposes.
Well........in Full of's case, nut data certainly was accurate.
Well........in Full of's case, nut data certainly was accurate.
TangoCharlie
Jul 28, 05:17 AM
Ensoniq, thanks so much for the useful corrections. How significant do you think that 64-bit capability will be in the future compared to not having it(say, 2-3 years time)?
AFAIK, the Merom CPUs have an improved SpeedStep technology, so that
on average the heat generation may infact be lower for Merom.
AFAIK, the Merom CPUs have an improved SpeedStep technology, so that
on average the heat generation may infact be lower for Merom.
Deefuzz
Aug 11, 08:20 PM
Using TimeMachine, Steve is going to release it two years ago.
LOL...the gem of the thread! Thanks for the laugh :D
LOL...the gem of the thread! Thanks for the laugh :D
MacRumors
Apr 5, 04:43 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/05/apple-to-introduce-new-final-cut-pro-on-april-12th/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/02/23/003359-FCP.jpg
robert pattinson vanity fair
robert pattinson vanity fair
robert pattinson 0000wxr3
Robert+pattinson+vanity+
robert pattinson vanity fair
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/02/23/003359-FCP.jpg
DesmoPilot
Aug 10, 06:06 PM
And they aint half brilliant. GT reminds me of a casualised WTCC (or at least the rally tracks). It's a very serious toy for very serious sim drivers.
GTR1/2 are brilliant games and the definition of Sim racing.
GTR1/2 are brilliant games and the definition of Sim racing.
killr_b
Apr 25, 02:06 PM
As a consumer, why should I be subjected to this risk which doesn't benefit me in the slightest? And why should this data be "backed up," secretly, to my computer?
The Wall Street Journal has found, however, that this newly-publicized database is constructed even when location services are turned off entirely.
From the front page of macrumors, for all those who've said to turn off location services.
This IS the type of thing that should be ruled on before a real problem develops.
The Wall Street Journal has found, however, that this newly-publicized database is constructed even when location services are turned off entirely.
From the front page of macrumors, for all those who've said to turn off location services.
This IS the type of thing that should be ruled on before a real problem develops.
NAG
Mar 31, 02:56 PM
If there's any truth to the Google Android prototype phone being Blackberry-like, then Google is merely pulling a Microsoft by copying Apple's success. Otherwise, why wouldn't Google have continued down that path?
What do you mean "if"? (http://www.engadget.com/2007/11/12/a-visual-tour-of-androids-ui/)
What do you mean "if"? (http://www.engadget.com/2007/11/12/a-visual-tour-of-androids-ui/)
bedifferent
Apr 27, 08:39 AM
There's a nuclear disaster in Japan and treacherous weather throughout, people are jobless and homeless and the dollar's in the sh***er and our Supreme Court ruled that companies can give unlimited financial aid to any politician putting business interests in our government and people are worried about Apple possibly tracking them on their iDevice?
Let 'em, my life is BORING, they wouldn't be interested :p
Let 'em, my life is BORING, they wouldn't be interested :p
QCassidy352
Jul 20, 03:53 PM
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
LagunaSol
Apr 20, 01:48 AM
But it's ok for Apple to sue and Australian grocery store because they think the letter W looks like their logo? LMAO. Please.
Why do you keep countering an argument that no one is actually making?
Straw man fail.
Why do you keep countering an argument that no one is actually making?
Straw man fail.
paul4339
Mar 22, 01:00 PM
Unfortunately you're so very right. Until it's in the hand and on the shelves it's vaporware.
...
Yes, I think they should at least have a model that they can 'power on' before they say that it's going to be released on June 8 (that's just over 2 months away to get it working and out the door!)
P.
...
Yes, I think they should at least have a model that they can 'power on' before they say that it's going to be released on June 8 (that's just over 2 months away to get it working and out the door!)
P.
notabadname
Apr 8, 07:28 AM
Isn't apple as equally guilty of this exact accusation against BB? Holding stock back until the next day; or is the difference that they sell everything they have available from the previous day.
Apple isn't holding stock, they are inventorying it the evening they receive it in the drop-shipment. They sell it all in the morning before the store even opens for normal business hours the next day. (At least that is how they have done it every time in Cincinnati)
Apple isn't holding stock, they are inventorying it the evening they receive it in the drop-shipment. They sell it all in the morning before the store even opens for normal business hours the next day. (At least that is how they have done it every time in Cincinnati)
Cougarcat
Mar 26, 02:10 AM
I don't see Apple moving to any version of ReiserFS or ext#, so I think we are stuck with HFS+ and extensions/improvements of it, until the ZFS situation gets clearer.
Apple abandoned ZFS due to licensing and they're working on their own new file system.
Apple abandoned ZFS due to licensing and they're working on their own new file system.
onigami
Apr 10, 08:51 PM
They did it in 2007... I was there.
Back when Myspace was cool. (http://www.myspace.com/studiomusic1/blog/253736149)
Myspace was never cool.
Okay, okay, so they have done NAB (they've never done AES, though, that I'm certain). But still: They pulled out of everything in the last couple years. Why come back to NAB? Why not just do a small-scale announcement outside of NAB's timeframe so as to maximize press?
Also, nobody answered my initial question. Why the idle timer? There's no point!
Back when Myspace was cool. (http://www.myspace.com/studiomusic1/blog/253736149)
Myspace was never cool.
Okay, okay, so they have done NAB (they've never done AES, though, that I'm certain). But still: They pulled out of everything in the last couple years. Why come back to NAB? Why not just do a small-scale announcement outside of NAB's timeframe so as to maximize press?
Also, nobody answered my initial question. Why the idle timer? There's no point!