dernhelm
Nov 29, 07:53 PM
I'm glad that he confirmed this. Otherwise Macworld in January would be memorable for all the wrong reasons.
Mr. Jobs finished his keynote with the startling admission that there is nothing left: "That's all folks! We've got nothing else in development. See you in 2010."
:D
I'm tellin' ya! I'm in the wrong business. Forget all this deadline - get product out carp. Get in to journalism where all you need to do is restate the obvious with a few well-placed typos, and Bob's your uncle.
Ahhh! I'm blind!
:rolleyes:
Mr. Jobs finished his keynote with the startling admission that there is nothing left: "That's all folks! We've got nothing else in development. See you in 2010."
:D
I'm tellin' ya! I'm in the wrong business. Forget all this deadline - get product out carp. Get in to journalism where all you need to do is restate the obvious with a few well-placed typos, and Bob's your uncle.
Ahhh! I'm blind!
:rolleyes:
sluthy
Jan 2, 06:35 PM
Did that not just happen ... :cool:
Likely:
Speed bump to one or more Mac lines
...
Less likely:
....
Major upgrade to Mac mini (video card upgrade) or MacBook Pro
New Displays
...
Unlikely:
...
Major upgrade to any line other than mini or MBP
...
:( How long ago were the MBPs updated? Because I'm looking to buy Jan/Feb and I'm not confident that the current spec is competitive. It at least needs a HD screen.
Likely:
Speed bump to one or more Mac lines
...
Less likely:
....
Major upgrade to Mac mini (video card upgrade) or MacBook Pro
New Displays
...
Unlikely:
...
Major upgrade to any line other than mini or MBP
...
:( How long ago were the MBPs updated? Because I'm looking to buy Jan/Feb and I'm not confident that the current spec is competitive. It at least needs a HD screen.
gr8whtd0pe
Jan 23, 11:19 PM
yup 89 accord with 42,000 miles in it, 5 speed manual :D
HA! that's not to shabby off of a hood ornament.
HA! that's not to shabby off of a hood ornament.
Irishman
May 3, 02:48 PM
The 6950m and 6970m are also available in 2gb models. That would help with the larger resolution of the 27" display. Let's hope for that as well!
Well, you got what you wanted on the 2GB 6970m! At least as a BTO option.
Well, you got what you wanted on the 2GB 6970m! At least as a BTO option.
cohen777
Apr 12, 10:19 PM
What about updates to DVD Studio Pro, Soundtrack, and Motion?
viggin
Apr 12, 11:43 PM
Here's the deal...(and I just realized that the way this is written might make it look like I have earlier posts in this thread. I don't. I'm jumping in right here.)
The reason that I think pros fear "dumbed down" isn't so much because they want something that is difficult to use, but rather because sometimes making difficult things easy makes things that were previously easy difficult, or impossible.
So just this week I had to help somebody with an iMovie problem. There was a part where they had 3 overlapping audio tracks. Movie audio, voiceover, and music. Try as they might, and try as I might, we could not get the movie audio to actually go away -- even though we had set it's volume level to "0%."
Oh...and did I mention that they're on a white iBook? Fine machine, but a little slow. So I copy their iMovie stuff onto an external drive so we can look at it on my Core i7 iMac instead.
Except iMovie on my iMac won't recognize the project on an external drive. I know that supposedly iMovie is supposed to...but it won't work. So I have to copy the files onto my iMac, and then iMovie magically sees them...because they're in the spot that iMovie wants files to be in.
Well the only way to get the clips to work right that I could come up with, was to actually run all their clips through Quicktime 7 and just delete the audio track off them. Voila! No audio track for iMovie to play, when it's not supposed to.
My point is that I spent 30 minutes dinking around with the "Easy" iMovie to do what would have taken me 10 seconds to do in Final Cut. (Select audio. Delete.)
And that's pretty much my experience every time I get lulled into trying to run a quick project through iMovie. Everything seems to be going well, I'm even sort of enjoying myself (Don't tell anyone), then I hit a snag or a wall...bump up into some limitation of iMovie that there isn't a very good work-around to...and wish that I'd just used Final Cut to begin with.
So while I agree that there are those who want pro tools to be difficult simply for the sake of having a high barrier of entry...
...I also think there are a ton of us that are just afraid that the cost of these new and handy features will be that some of the things we rely on doing, especially things that are a little "hackish," will become difficult/impossible. In the name of simplicity.
It's like my iPhone. I love it to pieces, and I don't plan to have any other type of phone any time soon, but sometimes I wish for a few more advanced features...features that are available (Usually through third-party tools) on Android. Instead I'm stuck hoping and wishing and praying that Apple will implement them.
The reason that I think pros fear "dumbed down" isn't so much because they want something that is difficult to use, but rather because sometimes making difficult things easy makes things that were previously easy difficult, or impossible.
So just this week I had to help somebody with an iMovie problem. There was a part where they had 3 overlapping audio tracks. Movie audio, voiceover, and music. Try as they might, and try as I might, we could not get the movie audio to actually go away -- even though we had set it's volume level to "0%."
Oh...and did I mention that they're on a white iBook? Fine machine, but a little slow. So I copy their iMovie stuff onto an external drive so we can look at it on my Core i7 iMac instead.
Except iMovie on my iMac won't recognize the project on an external drive. I know that supposedly iMovie is supposed to...but it won't work. So I have to copy the files onto my iMac, and then iMovie magically sees them...because they're in the spot that iMovie wants files to be in.
Well the only way to get the clips to work right that I could come up with, was to actually run all their clips through Quicktime 7 and just delete the audio track off them. Voila! No audio track for iMovie to play, when it's not supposed to.
My point is that I spent 30 minutes dinking around with the "Easy" iMovie to do what would have taken me 10 seconds to do in Final Cut. (Select audio. Delete.)
And that's pretty much my experience every time I get lulled into trying to run a quick project through iMovie. Everything seems to be going well, I'm even sort of enjoying myself (Don't tell anyone), then I hit a snag or a wall...bump up into some limitation of iMovie that there isn't a very good work-around to...and wish that I'd just used Final Cut to begin with.
So while I agree that there are those who want pro tools to be difficult simply for the sake of having a high barrier of entry...
...I also think there are a ton of us that are just afraid that the cost of these new and handy features will be that some of the things we rely on doing, especially things that are a little "hackish," will become difficult/impossible. In the name of simplicity.
It's like my iPhone. I love it to pieces, and I don't plan to have any other type of phone any time soon, but sometimes I wish for a few more advanced features...features that are available (Usually through third-party tools) on Android. Instead I'm stuck hoping and wishing and praying that Apple will implement them.
toughboy
Oct 23, 06:40 AM
Fire'em Steve
dongmin
Aug 6, 11:41 PM
Hey, since we're all posting picts, a blast from the past:
http://www.macminute.com/images/db/tiger1
http://www.macminute.com/images/db/tiger2
http://www.macminute.com/images/db/tiger1
http://www.macminute.com/images/db/tiger2
steadysignal
Apr 10, 07:04 PM
manual cars are easy to drive - like riding a bike, you never forget it...
PlayballTim
Jan 2, 12:54 PM
I can't see Apple coping with carriers and competitors like Nokia, and Motorola, but CAN see Apple chasing the 100,000,000 user plus PTP phone market with a wifi phone. I've got a dozen other reasons, but it adds up to 1,200 words that can't fit here. But check out the rationale on my blog, CogentPassion (http://cogentpassion.blogspot.com/2007/01/its-gonna-be-wi-fiphone-apple-wi-fi.html):
triceretops
Mar 22, 10:49 PM
The chance that the iPod Classic is updated to 220GB is zero. Apple has no plans to ever update a hard drive based non-touch portable device (they would not waste their time), and they've shown even less interest in increasing the capacity of any device beyond even 64GB flash.
You mean like the MacBook Air?:D
You mean like the MacBook Air?:D
tech4all
Nov 27, 01:58 PM
I hope this is true. This would be great for the Mac mini. Consumers really don't need a 20" + screen. A 17" screen (4:3 or wide) would be nice, and nice (low) price would be even nicer! Since the 20" and 23" are have the same difference is size as the 17" and 20" would (3"), and the 20" cost $699 and the 23" $999, so the 23" is $300 more, following that logic the 17" would cost $399. Hopefully it'll be cheaper than that though since you can get a Dell 17" LCD for cheaper....maybe a price drop for the whole line. :)
lordonuthin
Jan 6, 05:17 PM
We are now in 56th place!
And mc68k should be over 10 million about now! Congrats! Happy new year :D
And mc68k should be over 10 million about now! Congrats! Happy new year :D
celticpride678
Apr 1, 11:02 PM
Use the dev version instead. A lot more stable than the beta one.
Which is kind of ironic.
Google is likely going to be updating the dev build of Chrome to work with Lion has they have been doing over the past month, rather than the stable or beta builds.
Which is kind of ironic.
Google is likely going to be updating the dev build of Chrome to work with Lion has they have been doing over the past month, rather than the stable or beta builds.
nilk
Mar 25, 01:50 PM
You can upgrade to the latest 5870 card if you wanted to right now. It might not be 'officially' supported but you can still do it.
Supposedly the 5870 won't work on Mac Pro 1,1 with specific firmware (MP11.005C.B08 won't work).
From a comment at store.apple.com:
With regard to the Mac Pro 1,1, it apparently depends on your system's firmware and your version of Mac OS X. If your firmware version is MP11.005C.B00 or MP11.005D.B00, it should work. If your Mac Pro's firmware version is MP11.005C.B08, it will NOT work. If you have the correct firmware, you must have at least Snow Leopard 10.6.4 to use the card to its fullest.
Supposedly the 5870 won't work on Mac Pro 1,1 with specific firmware (MP11.005C.B08 won't work).
From a comment at store.apple.com:
With regard to the Mac Pro 1,1, it apparently depends on your system's firmware and your version of Mac OS X. If your firmware version is MP11.005C.B00 or MP11.005D.B00, it should work. If your Mac Pro's firmware version is MP11.005C.B08, it will NOT work. If you have the correct firmware, you must have at least Snow Leopard 10.6.4 to use the card to its fullest.
Lollypop
Jul 20, 07:47 AM
What makes you think that you have to do that?
have you ever used Linux? Application-installation in any modern Linux-distro is VERY smooth. If I want to install an app in Ubuntu (the previous distro I used), how do I do that? Well, I load a package-manager, which gives me a list of apps. I select the app I want to install, and click "Install". And that's it. How much simpler could it be? Why does everyone think that loading a web-browser, searching the app with Google, browsing to the website, downloading the installer (assuming that the apps is free. Usually with Mac, it's not) and running the installer is somehow "easier" that launching an app, selecting the app to be installed from a list and clicking "install"? Seriously?
What do you mean by "unified front"? The GUI? Most distros use either KDE or GNOME (usually alloweing the user to choose which one he prefers), so they are in fact quite unified.
I have used Linux before, admit that I gave up with linux with Suse 9. The point I was trying to make with the package manager is that its not easy to go out and find something, every time you either have to find a package for your specific distribution or have it "built" for your distro. If you look at the way the mac works now I can drag the aduim icon to a remote drive, and from almost any machine that meets the basic specs I can then double click that app, even if its on a network drive, it will run, can you say the same for Linux?
By unification I meant giving a constant user experience with singal points of administration, management ect. Some of my previous sessions with linux the applications did not always fully adhere to guidelines that were set out by KDE, whatever theme i choose, it didnt adapt to it for example. I fully admit im not a linux guru, and that things very likely have changed, but my perception is that every distro comes with a boat load of software on the DVD or via download, if you want to get something thats not listed it becomes a bit more difficult. There is the issue of building your own kernel and then software for it but other than bulding the kernel i have no knowlede of any related issues.
The mac advantage is that its a bit easier to get, install and run applications than windows, and IMO linux as well. Thats a advantage apple should leverage and try and sell more if they are going to sell more machines and increase the market share of the entire platform.
I agree with kalisphoenix to an extent when he says that the linux people dont want a single unified distro, the linux crowd doesnt want a true singular unfied platform, why is there a few big distros out there after years of linux development, why are there so many niche ones, and why do linux users argue with others over their favorite distro? Diversity and flexability is one of the strenghts of Linux, its users know that, and having a single distro that does everything will counter that strength, they also know that.
Im not taking on linux, to the contrary I believe linux has a critical place, I personally believe that its diversity/flexibility is one of the reasons it hasnt concored the desktop market, (peolpe want the plain and simple windows thing, to much options makes it overly complex), diversity/flexibility is the same reason linux has concored the server market.
have you ever used Linux? Application-installation in any modern Linux-distro is VERY smooth. If I want to install an app in Ubuntu (the previous distro I used), how do I do that? Well, I load a package-manager, which gives me a list of apps. I select the app I want to install, and click "Install". And that's it. How much simpler could it be? Why does everyone think that loading a web-browser, searching the app with Google, browsing to the website, downloading the installer (assuming that the apps is free. Usually with Mac, it's not) and running the installer is somehow "easier" that launching an app, selecting the app to be installed from a list and clicking "install"? Seriously?
What do you mean by "unified front"? The GUI? Most distros use either KDE or GNOME (usually alloweing the user to choose which one he prefers), so they are in fact quite unified.
I have used Linux before, admit that I gave up with linux with Suse 9. The point I was trying to make with the package manager is that its not easy to go out and find something, every time you either have to find a package for your specific distribution or have it "built" for your distro. If you look at the way the mac works now I can drag the aduim icon to a remote drive, and from almost any machine that meets the basic specs I can then double click that app, even if its on a network drive, it will run, can you say the same for Linux?
By unification I meant giving a constant user experience with singal points of administration, management ect. Some of my previous sessions with linux the applications did not always fully adhere to guidelines that were set out by KDE, whatever theme i choose, it didnt adapt to it for example. I fully admit im not a linux guru, and that things very likely have changed, but my perception is that every distro comes with a boat load of software on the DVD or via download, if you want to get something thats not listed it becomes a bit more difficult. There is the issue of building your own kernel and then software for it but other than bulding the kernel i have no knowlede of any related issues.
The mac advantage is that its a bit easier to get, install and run applications than windows, and IMO linux as well. Thats a advantage apple should leverage and try and sell more if they are going to sell more machines and increase the market share of the entire platform.
I agree with kalisphoenix to an extent when he says that the linux people dont want a single unified distro, the linux crowd doesnt want a true singular unfied platform, why is there a few big distros out there after years of linux development, why are there so many niche ones, and why do linux users argue with others over their favorite distro? Diversity and flexability is one of the strenghts of Linux, its users know that, and having a single distro that does everything will counter that strength, they also know that.
Im not taking on linux, to the contrary I believe linux has a critical place, I personally believe that its diversity/flexibility is one of the reasons it hasnt concored the desktop market, (peolpe want the plain and simple windows thing, to much options makes it overly complex), diversity/flexibility is the same reason linux has concored the server market.
jeznav
Apr 12, 10:05 PM
$299... but this isn't studio
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 02:50 PM
OpenCL are COMPUTE tasks. If you can't do them on the GPU, you would need a HUGELY powerful CPU. That's why having true OpenCL means you have a better "CPU".
In one or two months after Bobcat Fusion was introduced there are already 50 Fusion-oriented Windows apps.
I'm not taking about DirectX 11 concerning games, but concerning OpenCL.
OpenCL /DirectCompute are COMPUTE tasks that hardly anything currently supports(both of which support hardware before DX11, completely eradicating the point of even bringing that up in the first place). You do not have a better CPU. In theory and vaporware tests you could outperform Sandy Bridge by itself. But Sandy Bridge with a discrete GPU will smoke Llano with a discrete GPU any day of the week.
In one or two months after Bobcat Fusion was introduced there are already 50 Fusion-oriented Windows apps.
I'm not taking about DirectX 11 concerning games, but concerning OpenCL.
OpenCL /DirectCompute are COMPUTE tasks that hardly anything currently supports(both of which support hardware before DX11, completely eradicating the point of even bringing that up in the first place). You do not have a better CPU. In theory and vaporware tests you could outperform Sandy Bridge by itself. But Sandy Bridge with a discrete GPU will smoke Llano with a discrete GPU any day of the week.
camelsnot
Apr 2, 08:20 PM
have one but that commercial makes me want to puke. Once you use one and realize it's limitations, it's not so magical. It's a fun consumption device which you can get some work done on, but without real multitasking, it's lack of real technology actually hinders and isn't so magical.
With apple it was never about the hardware technology. They have at least that right in the commercial (the only thing right).
Job$, instead of waxing philosophical with your over-inflated ego in embarrassingly inaccurate commercials, how about trying to innovate. iOS should've had REAL multitasking years ago. Quit pandering cheap to make speed bumps at the same prices, as something magical. DO something magical. You built iOS off a phone, morphed into an ipod touch and now an ipad (yes.. a larger version of the touch, but in a better form factor). That was just smart business. ALWAYS repurpose what you can. BUS101. Now do something magical with the OS.
With apple it was never about the hardware technology. They have at least that right in the commercial (the only thing right).
Job$, instead of waxing philosophical with your over-inflated ego in embarrassingly inaccurate commercials, how about trying to innovate. iOS should've had REAL multitasking years ago. Quit pandering cheap to make speed bumps at the same prices, as something magical. DO something magical. You built iOS off a phone, morphed into an ipod touch and now an ipad (yes.. a larger version of the touch, but in a better form factor). That was just smart business. ALWAYS repurpose what you can. BUS101. Now do something magical with the OS.
Branskins
Apr 1, 12:58 PM
Wow this dev preview runs amazingly well! I cannot wait until Lion is released!
firewood
Mar 25, 07:31 PM
naysayers are probably more concerned with the fact that you can't look at the tv screen while fumbling for the touch controls on the ipad; physical buttons enable the player to just feel for the controls, without having to look down and miss the action on tv.
Clear plastic with cut-outs would enable a player to feel for touch controls without having to look. Attach by suction or something. Some company makes a variation already. I expect more to.
Clear plastic with cut-outs would enable a player to feel for touch controls without having to look. Attach by suction or something. Some company makes a variation already. I expect more to.
HecubusPro
Sep 6, 06:06 PM
Personally, I wouldn't want to DL a large movie file without the option of being able to burn it to DVD so I can have that tangible hard copy that makes me feel safe and warm. Then I wouldn't have a problem deleting it off of my hard drive.
I could be wrong, but I don't see them dealing with rentals. Most people still don't have fast enough connections to warrant downloading a big movie file when they can just have it delivered to their door via Netflix or they can head down to their local Blockbuster and have it right away. Same goes for purchases. I like having the retail box. It just makes me a little bit happier. :) Now, if they offered HD downloads, I'd definitely be interested in that, even if it is a super big file.
I could be wrong, but I don't see them dealing with rentals. Most people still don't have fast enough connections to warrant downloading a big movie file when they can just have it delivered to their door via Netflix or they can head down to their local Blockbuster and have it right away. Same goes for purchases. I like having the retail box. It just makes me a little bit happier. :) Now, if they offered HD downloads, I'd definitely be interested in that, even if it is a super big file.
donbadman
Sep 6, 05:50 AM
The layout for the mini page on the uk store is different to usa with lots of white space on the right hand side, might be a new model?
SamEllens
Apr 12, 09:14 PM
Does anyone else think there will also be an update to QT X as well? Probably one of the most useless tools on the Mac right now. QTPro is still more useful for work. Just the idea that the buttons cover up the picture at all makes QTX pretty useless. I hope to see a real QTPro X. Bring back the FRAME counter (not just time) and get those controls OFF the picture!!!
YES! Frame counter AND source TC! I still use QT Pro for everything.
YES! Frame counter AND source TC! I still use QT Pro for everything.