tekmoe
Aug 26, 04:34 PM
hoping for a 13" mbp but it's doubtful...
madmax_2069
Dec 12, 04:57 PM
It's not a bad game but it could have been a lot better
Yeah for the amount of developing time and the money that went into GT5 yes it could have been way better then how it turned out. many things can be fixed with patches, but it should not have needed to on release. i can see a few bugs and such but not like when it first came out.
Yeah for the amount of developing time and the money that went into GT5 yes it could have been way better then how it turned out. many things can be fixed with patches, but it should not have needed to on release. i can see a few bugs and such but not like when it first came out.
OutThere
Apr 27, 01:29 PM
Don't jack up America for those of us who love it for what it was founded on.
(insert here where some smart-A responds with "slavery?" or something equally inapplicable)
I don't know about you, but I love America because it was founded on stolen native land. Just makes me so proud of my forefathers, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
(insert here where some smart-A responds with "slavery?" or something equally inapplicable)
I don't know about you, but I love America because it was founded on stolen native land. Just makes me so proud of my forefathers, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
Consultant
Mar 31, 03:09 PM
So Google is becoming big brother of the open wasteland? :D
cyberdogl2
Aug 27, 05:20 PM
I see where you're coming from.
So does this mean there will be no Powerbook G5s next tuesday?
So does this mean there will be no Powerbook G5s next tuesday?
boncellis
Jul 14, 11:32 PM
School House Rock - "Oh, I'm just a bill, a lonely old bill, sitting here on Capitol Hill" (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1569494088/002-8458341-9463244?redirect=true)
I prefer the Simpsons' parody of that cartoon:
"...and I'll make Ted Kennedy pay, if he fights back I'll say that he's gay."
But seriously, the $1799 price point is a step in the right direction. If we could get it down to $1599 or <gasp> $1499, then that would be the de facto mini tower so many have clamored for. I would like a redesigned case, but that'll come eventually.
Sometimes the right price can make a person forget about what might have been.
I prefer the Simpsons' parody of that cartoon:
"...and I'll make Ted Kennedy pay, if he fights back I'll say that he's gay."
But seriously, the $1799 price point is a step in the right direction. If we could get it down to $1599 or <gasp> $1499, then that would be the de facto mini tower so many have clamored for. I would like a redesigned case, but that'll come eventually.
Sometimes the right price can make a person forget about what might have been.
Marx55
Aug 27, 04:10 AM
This is what we NEED:
1. Computer with no fan. Quiet. Silent. CRITICAL.
2. Modular computer to add a gorgeous Apple Cinema Display.
3. At lesat two FireWire 800 ports.
Then all the rest (power, etc).
1. Computer with no fan. Quiet. Silent. CRITICAL.
2. Modular computer to add a gorgeous Apple Cinema Display.
3. At lesat two FireWire 800 ports.
Then all the rest (power, etc).
bibbz
Jun 15, 11:36 AM
Se after some clarification, heres the process...
We cant guarantee you a phone, but if you "reserve" and have a pin number, you will get a phone. We just cant make a promise, guarantee, or anything like that per apple.
The same still applies, if we take 10 pins, we get 10 phones.
We cant guarantee you a phone, but if you "reserve" and have a pin number, you will get a phone. We just cant make a promise, guarantee, or anything like that per apple.
The same still applies, if we take 10 pins, we get 10 phones.
smiddlehurst
Mar 31, 02:53 PM
Thats not at all what this article is saying. The Android project is still going to be "open source".
Umm, not by Andy Rubin's own definition it's not:
the definition of open: “mkdir android ; cd android ; repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git ; repo sync ; make”
The problem here is Google aren't playing fair with their partners and they really ought to get grief over it. Good lord, remember the absolute storm of hate that went Apple's way when the subscription details were announced? This is actually far worse for those that depend on the Android OS yet geeks are scrambling to praise Google for doing it....
Now here's the thing... at the end of the day this is probably the right move for Android from a consumer point of view. It's likely to make it easier to get a device that you can update and that isn't drowning in crapware. The problem is they should have done it a year ago when the problem first became obvious. They haven't, they've got a LOT of companies heavily invested in Android and now they're radically changing the rules.
Frankly I wonder if something has gone seriously wrong within Google. Remember when 2.1 came out there were strong hints that they were working on separating the core OS from the GUI to allow far easier, almost device independent updates? We've heard virtually nothing about that since. Honeycomb is, by their own admission, a cludge, albeit a cludge with a lot of potential. I can't help but wonder if they've failed to come up with a software solution that'd let them handle fragmentation and keep a true open philosophy and are falling back on this as plan B. I'd also love to know if Amazon making moves into the App Store space and now launching Cloud Player before Google have an equivalent service have them worried. I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's conditions in those new partnership deals to make things like introducing new App Stores in the default build a lot harder.
Umm, not by Andy Rubin's own definition it's not:
the definition of open: “mkdir android ; cd android ; repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git ; repo sync ; make”
The problem here is Google aren't playing fair with their partners and they really ought to get grief over it. Good lord, remember the absolute storm of hate that went Apple's way when the subscription details were announced? This is actually far worse for those that depend on the Android OS yet geeks are scrambling to praise Google for doing it....
Now here's the thing... at the end of the day this is probably the right move for Android from a consumer point of view. It's likely to make it easier to get a device that you can update and that isn't drowning in crapware. The problem is they should have done it a year ago when the problem first became obvious. They haven't, they've got a LOT of companies heavily invested in Android and now they're radically changing the rules.
Frankly I wonder if something has gone seriously wrong within Google. Remember when 2.1 came out there were strong hints that they were working on separating the core OS from the GUI to allow far easier, almost device independent updates? We've heard virtually nothing about that since. Honeycomb is, by their own admission, a cludge, albeit a cludge with a lot of potential. I can't help but wonder if they've failed to come up with a software solution that'd let them handle fragmentation and keep a true open philosophy and are falling back on this as plan B. I'd also love to know if Amazon making moves into the App Store space and now launching Cloud Player before Google have an equivalent service have them worried. I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's conditions in those new partnership deals to make things like introducing new App Stores in the default build a lot harder.
Mammoth
Jul 15, 10:14 AM
Looking at PC product offerings by ATI (http://www.ati.com/products/workstation/fireglmatrix.html), you can see that they also offer video cards with two dual-link DVI ports on a single card. You can even get this on a Radeon X1900 series card (http://www.ati.com/products/radeonx1900/radeonx1900xtx/specs.html).
I believe you are wrong (http://www.ati.com/designpartners/media/images/RX1900_Board_lg.jpg).
(Believe)
I believe you are wrong (http://www.ati.com/designpartners/media/images/RX1900_Board_lg.jpg).
(Believe)
mikethebigo
Apr 6, 10:23 AM
Does anyone know if the IGP in these processors is underclocked compared to the variants used in the MacBook Pros?
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
Silentwave
Jul 14, 06:22 PM
320 would be the standard. you could upgrade to a terabyte if there are still two HDD bays.
Heck you could have 1.5TB with the new Seagate 750GB drives!
Heck you could have 1.5TB with the new Seagate 750GB drives!
seenew
Aug 27, 02:49 AM
What do you guys think the new iMac specs will be like?
Let's say on the 17" iMac maybe a 250 gig hard disk, 1 gb ram, upgraded video card, and conroe at some speed who cares what for $1299? Sounds sweet but not outrageously impossible.
I already have those stats, I want to see them drop in a high-end Conroe (~3GHz) so I would know that I could feasibly upgrade my 2GHz Core Duo in the future. It's possible, isn't it? I mean, the G5's were really hot, and the iMac enclosure could handle that, wouldn't the new Intel ones be able to handle the Conroe Extremes?
Let's say on the 17" iMac maybe a 250 gig hard disk, 1 gb ram, upgraded video card, and conroe at some speed who cares what for $1299? Sounds sweet but not outrageously impossible.
I already have those stats, I want to see them drop in a high-end Conroe (~3GHz) so I would know that I could feasibly upgrade my 2GHz Core Duo in the future. It's possible, isn't it? I mean, the G5's were really hot, and the iMac enclosure could handle that, wouldn't the new Intel ones be able to handle the Conroe Extremes?
_thumb%25255B22%25255D.jpg "paper flowers. Tissue paper")
PeterQVenkman
Apr 6, 09:10 AM
Youre aware the newest mbp (high end) 15, and 17 haveva 1gb graphics memory, right?
CUDA is an nVidia technology. The MBP's and Mac Pro's all have ATI/AMD cards. I don't believe the mercury engine works on anything but nVidia cards
Real-time effects with GPU acceleration
Adobe Premiere Pro CS5 requires a 64-bit operating system and works hand-in-hand with NVIDIA� CUDA� technology. The Mercury Playback Engine uses NVIDIA GPU cards to provide a GPU-accelerated 32-bit color pipeline, and most popular effects have been rewritten to run on it � for example, effects like color correction, the Ultra keyer, and motion control all run in real time..
Of course, Apple could finally implement Open CL. I've seen some great particle fluid demos in Blender that are based off of OpenCL and ran on AMD cards.
CUDA is an nVidia technology. The MBP's and Mac Pro's all have ATI/AMD cards. I don't believe the mercury engine works on anything but nVidia cards
Real-time effects with GPU acceleration
Adobe Premiere Pro CS5 requires a 64-bit operating system and works hand-in-hand with NVIDIA� CUDA� technology. The Mercury Playback Engine uses NVIDIA GPU cards to provide a GPU-accelerated 32-bit color pipeline, and most popular effects have been rewritten to run on it � for example, effects like color correction, the Ultra keyer, and motion control all run in real time..
Of course, Apple could finally implement Open CL. I've seen some great particle fluid demos in Blender that are based off of OpenCL and ran on AMD cards.
Peace
Aug 5, 03:53 PM
This roundup is missing:
*New Cinema Displays with iSight - Widely Anticipated
*xServe - Almost definitely in my opinion, because without these, Steve cannot say that "the transition is complete".
*"Maps" application in Leopard - according to AppleInsider
There is no way in the world Apple will be putting iSights in the Cinema Displays.
xServe will be updated at WWDC2006.Thats a given.
OS 10.4.7 Server sold with each new xServe.
There will be no standalone DVD sold.
*New Cinema Displays with iSight - Widely Anticipated
*xServe - Almost definitely in my opinion, because without these, Steve cannot say that "the transition is complete".
*"Maps" application in Leopard - according to AppleInsider
There is no way in the world Apple will be putting iSights in the Cinema Displays.
xServe will be updated at WWDC2006.Thats a given.
OS 10.4.7 Server sold with each new xServe.
There will be no standalone DVD sold.
AidenShaw
Aug 23, 08:15 AM
My Quad G5 is dead silent all the time. Those noisy Quads should have been sent off for repair. I was told the Quad in the Santa Clara Apple Store was also very loud. That is not normal. Properly serviced they run very silent.
dbA ? A system with 9 fans isn't going to be silent, period.
Are your systems in a room with a lot of ambient noise? (A wind-tunnel G4 sounds quiet at Best Buy, yet in my den I can clearly hear the fluid-bearing drive in my Yonah dual... ;) )
dbA ? A system with 9 fans isn't going to be silent, period.
Are your systems in a room with a lot of ambient noise? (A wind-tunnel G4 sounds quiet at Best Buy, yet in my den I can clearly hear the fluid-bearing drive in my Yonah dual... ;) )
totoum
Apr 12, 12:31 PM
I use ProRes for almost everything, so this doesn't bother me.
So wait,on the projects you're working on,is everyone using recorders to record direct to prores or do you enjoy having to waste time converting everything you get?
Never had problems with this.
Then I'm guessing you do your cross fades manualy?
edit:and I do get your point,it works,but other competitors over the last couple years have brought improvements that I'd like to also see in FCP
So wait,on the projects you're working on,is everyone using recorders to record direct to prores or do you enjoy having to waste time converting everything you get?
Never had problems with this.
Then I'm guessing you do your cross fades manualy?
edit:and I do get your point,it works,but other competitors over the last couple years have brought improvements that I'd like to also see in FCP
Shagrat
Jul 21, 12:28 AM
You realize there are probably only four people on this board who are old enough to get that joke, right?
5.
:(
5.
:(
ten-oak-druid
Mar 22, 04:19 PM
Competition is good.
Make a case for your argument.
Make a case for your argument.
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 01:53 PM
Pre-order: In-store at 7am EST. He suggested to pre-order as soon as possible
What day? Tomorrow, Tuesday or Thursday?
What day? Tomorrow, Tuesday or Thursday?
jeanlain
Apr 11, 08:46 AM
No kidding!
280734
Where's Picasso when you need him? :-)
Avid image was from here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYw4vvr7Aq4
OMG, these drop-down menus! It burns....:eek:
280734
Where's Picasso when you need him? :-)
Avid image was from here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYw4vvr7Aq4
OMG, these drop-down menus! It burns....:eek:
hismikeness
Apr 6, 01:29 PM
If tablet sales were Little League baseball, the game would be over because of the mercy rule.
HecubusPro
Aug 27, 12:08 PM
But that doesn't make Nintendo (or Microsoft or Sony) suck. Fanboys just make themselves suck by being fanboys. :)
You are correct, sir.:D
You are correct, sir.:D