ukrainian easter eggs colouring pages
xxavier
Aug 5, 09:31 PM
With the iSight and IR sensor rumored to be integrated into the new line of Cinema Displays, i guess apple's gonna adopt HDMI as the IO interface, making Apple one of the first corps to do so. Plus with a HDMI enabled Mac Pro and Leopard fully support it. Why? HDMI is just like ADC, plus its an industry standard port. U need only one cable to have all the communications (FW+USB+Sound+...) going, without having to clutter yr desktop with multiple cables. I see it coming!
Texas04
Nov 28, 06:29 PM
That would add already to the money that they get from the purchased music.. Apple will not allow this... at least they shouldnt, and wouldnt Universal be happy as is?
Microsoft started this and it is a good hit into Apple... but Apple has a agreement and will not break that agreement... especially to get rid of the ease of 99 cent standard pricing
Microsoft started this and it is a good hit into Apple... but Apple has a agreement and will not break that agreement... especially to get rid of the ease of 99 cent standard pricing
vansouza
Nov 28, 09:59 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Reuters reports (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2006-11-28T213349Z_01_N28267036_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-SUMMIT-UNIVERSALMUSIC-IPOD.xml&WTmodLoc=TechNewsHome_C2_technologyNews-1) that Universal Music Group Chief Executive said on Tuesday that they may seek a royalty from Apple for iPod sales:
Universal made news earlier this month (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/11/20061109124909.shtml) when it was reported that Microsoft had agreed to pay Universal Music a fee for every new Zune Music Player sold. Music studios, of course, currently get a cut from every song sold, but do not get any percentage of iPod sales.
Perhaps the pencil makers should demand a payment from the pen makers... and if you have a pen and paper you must be copying documents so paper producers should pay book dealers... I could live never buying another Universal song on iTunes... thank you very much Bill Gates... his check to Universal is what may be $900. for all Zunes sold... what a joke...
Reuters reports (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2006-11-28T213349Z_01_N28267036_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-SUMMIT-UNIVERSALMUSIC-IPOD.xml&WTmodLoc=TechNewsHome_C2_technologyNews-1) that Universal Music Group Chief Executive said on Tuesday that they may seek a royalty from Apple for iPod sales:
Universal made news earlier this month (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/11/20061109124909.shtml) when it was reported that Microsoft had agreed to pay Universal Music a fee for every new Zune Music Player sold. Music studios, of course, currently get a cut from every song sold, but do not get any percentage of iPod sales.
Perhaps the pencil makers should demand a payment from the pen makers... and if you have a pen and paper you must be copying documents so paper producers should pay book dealers... I could live never buying another Universal song on iTunes... thank you very much Bill Gates... his check to Universal is what may be $900. for all Zunes sold... what a joke...
rmwebs
Mar 26, 04:54 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
This might explain the shambles that is 10.6.7.
Last release before Lion - semi-brick your machine to force an upgrade.
iOS 4.3, last release before iPhone 5 - murder your battery to force an upgrade.
You've guessed it, I'm not very happy with Apple at the moment. So which is it; underhand tactics, sloppy Q&A or declining standards?
Probably all three ;) The QA team has gradually got worse and worse over the last few years. Apple have become more and more greedy, and you can bet the Mac OS coders cant be bothered to work on its ancient codebase when across the office a group of people get to play with the newer (granted still based on Mac OS) iOS.
This might explain the shambles that is 10.6.7.
Last release before Lion - semi-brick your machine to force an upgrade.
iOS 4.3, last release before iPhone 5 - murder your battery to force an upgrade.
You've guessed it, I'm not very happy with Apple at the moment. So which is it; underhand tactics, sloppy Q&A or declining standards?
Probably all three ;) The QA team has gradually got worse and worse over the last few years. Apple have become more and more greedy, and you can bet the Mac OS coders cant be bothered to work on its ancient codebase when across the office a group of people get to play with the newer (granted still based on Mac OS) iOS.
Evangelion
Apr 8, 05:03 AM
[B]Until Apple can get more of its own stores it needs BB more than BB needs it. So I doubt Apple went all hurt or p.o.'d girlfriend on them.
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
Yankee617
Apr 8, 08:11 AM
Weird... I think there's more involved in this than we can imagine.
One thing that comes to my mind is the possibility they were holding their stock to sell it outside the country, as there's been a high demand and higher value to sell overseas.
Yeah... BB could put the extra iPad's up on Ebay and pocket the extra cash.
Not a big deal if its just done at one or two stores, but if its organized at the
corporate level (with lots of creative accounting/reporting in-between) they
could have millions of dollars going straight to their bottom line (or lining
some unscrupulous executive's pockets).
Were those above-quota iPad's being held in-store and sold the next day,
or were they being forwarded/rerouted to another BB location?
I'm still planning to buy my iPad from my local Apple store.
One thing that comes to my mind is the possibility they were holding their stock to sell it outside the country, as there's been a high demand and higher value to sell overseas.
Yeah... BB could put the extra iPad's up on Ebay and pocket the extra cash.
Not a big deal if its just done at one or two stores, but if its organized at the
corporate level (with lots of creative accounting/reporting in-between) they
could have millions of dollars going straight to their bottom line (or lining
some unscrupulous executive's pockets).
Were those above-quota iPad's being held in-store and sold the next day,
or were they being forwarded/rerouted to another BB location?
I'm still planning to buy my iPad from my local Apple store.
noahtk
Apr 6, 01:55 PM
WE CAN ONLY HOPE!!! A price drop would be nice too.
snouter
Apr 6, 11:09 AM
Umm... You do realise clock speed is not everything don't you?
I hope you don't think a C2D is better then a SB Core i5
True.
Clock for clock the Arrandales are faster than C2D and Sandy Bridge is clock for clock faster than the Arrandales.
So a 1.4 Sandy Bridge will be quite a bit faster than than a 1.4 C2D within the same power envelope.
I hope you don't think a C2D is better then a SB Core i5
True.
Clock for clock the Arrandales are faster than C2D and Sandy Bridge is clock for clock faster than the Arrandales.
So a 1.4 Sandy Bridge will be quite a bit faster than than a 1.4 C2D within the same power envelope.
Reach9
Apr 11, 02:21 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; de-de) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
Lol, Power of Hardware? Then where is the android Retina Display device?
I Don't Care about dual Core mobile processors. And neither do the 90% Not-Nerd-customers.
Personally, a bigger screen > Retina Display.
Lol, Power of Hardware? Then where is the android Retina Display device?
I Don't Care about dual Core mobile processors. And neither do the 90% Not-Nerd-customers.
Personally, a bigger screen > Retina Display.
bobthedino
Apr 27, 09:14 AM
I know of no cell tower or wifi device that works up to 100 miles away.
No-one has said this. Apple said the database contains the location of cell towers and Wi-Fi hotspots around your current location.
A bit of research reveals that iOS not only downloads location data for the cell tower or Wi-Fi hotspot nearest you, but also for hundreds of others in the area around you. This is so that when you move location it doesn't have to re-query Apple's location database over the internet. This is what the cache is for - to enable the device to look up locations stored locally instead of having to waste battery and talk to Apple again over the internet. In addition it enables Wi-Fi only devices to still be able to locate themselves even when they have no internet connection.
No-one has said this. Apple said the database contains the location of cell towers and Wi-Fi hotspots around your current location.
A bit of research reveals that iOS not only downloads location data for the cell tower or Wi-Fi hotspot nearest you, but also for hundreds of others in the area around you. This is so that when you move location it doesn't have to re-query Apple's location database over the internet. This is what the cache is for - to enable the device to look up locations stored locally instead of having to waste battery and talk to Apple again over the internet. In addition it enables Wi-Fi only devices to still be able to locate themselves even when they have no internet connection.
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 10:41 AM
Well let's just check we are 'on the same page then'..
Ok, lets.
You agree Samsung have copied Apple, but only on things that you think don't really matter, while on the other hand anything where they don't look the same is terribly important..
I agree that the pictures in the media do show some ressemblance, but since I know better, I waited for a full claims analysis. The complaint is broad and to not seperate it in parts and claim a "black or white" answer is quite disingenuous.
In the many claims, the trademark icons remain to be seen by a court how much ressemblance/confusion there is. There is no point in arguing this since all it is at the end of the day is hot air. This one is up to a judge. Are these trademarks even registered ? If they are, what are they registered as and is Samsung's design really infringing on this ?
Not matters we'll settle here anyway.
As for the trade dress, again as I have stated, Apple claims a wide array of devices, yet the media have only posted pictures of the I9000. Other models don't share the ressemblances claimed here and it is baffling why Apple would put down their claims on all models. I question the validity of this one as it applies as broadly as the media paints it. Do I question for the I9000 ? Depends on the angle. In person, the phones are quite hard to confuse.
Courts will tell again.
Okay, got it!
At least wait for me to validate your "on the same page" before you get it. That is what good faith discussion is about. ;)
Ok, lets.
You agree Samsung have copied Apple, but only on things that you think don't really matter, while on the other hand anything where they don't look the same is terribly important..
I agree that the pictures in the media do show some ressemblance, but since I know better, I waited for a full claims analysis. The complaint is broad and to not seperate it in parts and claim a "black or white" answer is quite disingenuous.
In the many claims, the trademark icons remain to be seen by a court how much ressemblance/confusion there is. There is no point in arguing this since all it is at the end of the day is hot air. This one is up to a judge. Are these trademarks even registered ? If they are, what are they registered as and is Samsung's design really infringing on this ?
Not matters we'll settle here anyway.
As for the trade dress, again as I have stated, Apple claims a wide array of devices, yet the media have only posted pictures of the I9000. Other models don't share the ressemblances claimed here and it is baffling why Apple would put down their claims on all models. I question the validity of this one as it applies as broadly as the media paints it. Do I question for the I9000 ? Depends on the angle. In person, the phones are quite hard to confuse.
Courts will tell again.
Okay, got it!
At least wait for me to validate your "on the same page" before you get it. That is what good faith discussion is about. ;)
admanimal
Mar 22, 12:52 PM
Meanwhile, Apple is drowning in orders and battling light leaks (http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/03/22/buyers.complain.of.multiple.faulty.replacements/) in displays. If the quality cannot be improved expeditiously, would-be customers may investigate the competition. :(
Yeah, with problems like that they are destined to fail. :rolleyes:
Yeah, with problems like that they are destined to fail. :rolleyes:
Some_Big_Spoon
Aug 26, 09:21 PM
May have been said, but ship dates on iMacs are 7-10 days.
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:36 PM
You're wrong. Apple is losing marketshare for over 2 years now. Just because they are selling MORE iPhones doesn't mean they are gaining marketshare. The market grows much faster than the iPhone sales. Have a look at Nokia: In Q4/10 Nokia sold almost 7 million more smartphones but they lost about 10% marketshare. In Q1/11 Apple lost about 2% marketshare despite the fact that they sold about 2.5 million more iPhones.
Ya right. :rolleyes:
Ya right. :rolleyes:
ergle2
Sep 21, 03:17 PM
I had the pleasure of meeting Jef Raskin at his home in Pacifica a year before he passed away. He loved to play musical instruments and performed a short recital on his piano. Later that evening, after showing his Apple I in a wooden box, he encouraged me to read his book The Humane Interface and let him know what I thought about it. Sadly, I wasn't able to do that in time. But the conversation we had made it clear that he was not a fan of Steve Jobs. They both had strong opinions on various aspects of UI design. Even though I rather like OS X, Raskin politely argued against the inefficiencies of that design.
It was some time ago and I don't remember all the details from that night, but Raskin, I think, was more scientific in his approach. He preferred to study user response rates, time-to-decision, amount of eye movement, amount of pointer movement, number of mouse clicks, and various other factors that might contribute to 'dead' or wasted time.
It doesn't surprise me he was no fan of Jobs, especially given the history of the original Mac. From people I know who've worked with Jobs, he's not always easy to get along with.
From what I've read, the Mac was fundamentally quite different from Raskin's original vision after Jobs took over the project, though some of his ideas were obviously incorporated into it. (I believe Raskin wanted to go with the cheaper but obviously slower 6809).
His book's been one I've meant to track down for some time now. You know how it is, so many things to do/see...
The Archy interface modelled on his concepts is quite interesting, too.
I was sorry when we lost Jef, I feel he was one of those people striving to make the world a better place.
What did you think of The Humane Design?
It was some time ago and I don't remember all the details from that night, but Raskin, I think, was more scientific in his approach. He preferred to study user response rates, time-to-decision, amount of eye movement, amount of pointer movement, number of mouse clicks, and various other factors that might contribute to 'dead' or wasted time.
It doesn't surprise me he was no fan of Jobs, especially given the history of the original Mac. From people I know who've worked with Jobs, he's not always easy to get along with.
From what I've read, the Mac was fundamentally quite different from Raskin's original vision after Jobs took over the project, though some of his ideas were obviously incorporated into it. (I believe Raskin wanted to go with the cheaper but obviously slower 6809).
His book's been one I've meant to track down for some time now. You know how it is, so many things to do/see...
The Archy interface modelled on his concepts is quite interesting, too.
I was sorry when we lost Jef, I feel he was one of those people striving to make the world a better place.
What did you think of The Humane Design?
PBF
Mar 25, 11:10 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)
Yes, ipad3 will run os x lion! MBA will have a touch screen!!
As soon as MBA gets a multitouch display, I'm ditching my iPad. haha
Yes, ipad3 will run os x lion! MBA will have a touch screen!!
As soon as MBA gets a multitouch display, I'm ditching my iPad. haha
Chupa Chupa
Apr 8, 06:17 AM
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
My point is that Apple sells BB more products than the iPad. If it gets pissy about how the iPad is sold and holds units back then it's going to strain the relationship and right now Apple needs BBs floor space to show off its other products b/c there are lots of gaps in Apple Store locations.
As I said this story is fantasy and B.S.
My point is that Apple sells BB more products than the iPad. If it gets pissy about how the iPad is sold and holds units back then it's going to strain the relationship and right now Apple needs BBs floor space to show off its other products b/c there are lots of gaps in Apple Store locations.
As I said this story is fantasy and B.S.
iLilana
Apr 8, 01:19 AM
bestbuy (and futureshop..same company) insist apple purchasers buy their own over priced ****** extended warranty on apple products. I'm not sure its allowed by apple or not but it seems a bit shady. I hate shopping in those places.
Indo
Aug 26, 11:43 PM
actually when i was in india i read an article saying the center was shut down because the employees were demanding higher wages or something like that.
HecubusPro
Aug 27, 09:56 AM
What makes you say Nintendo sucks so much?
-Zadillo
Because, just as there are Mac fanboys, there are also Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony fanboys. As much as we'd like to think our platform of choice is clearly the best, in all actually, each one has something unique to offer that the other may lack.
Whether we like to believe it or, the same goes for PC vs. Mac, OSX vs. Windows, ATI vs. Nvidia, etc. I've had macs off and on since I was a kid. I've also had several other types of computers other than Windows machines (mostly Commodore systems--man I loved my Amiga 500 with it's upgrade to 1 whole MB of ram :cool:.)
I was first in line to buy the original iMac. I bought it day one. I upgraded it's graphics card, which supposedly was not supposed to be upgradable, so I could play Unreal. Then I began to religiously follow the tragic saga of the Half-Life port to the Mac OS. The guy who was doing it (yes, a one man team), after months of receiving very little support from anyone, eventually threw his hands in the air and gave up. I was distraught, and, as a huge gamer (not fat, just a video game fan :p ), that's when I decided I needed to get a PC with Windows. It was a tough choice, but I knew I had to do it if I wanted to play the latest, greatest PC games. Apple has sorely lacked in porting games to their OS's.
While I did eventually buy a used iBook about 4 or 5 years ago (which I recently sold to help fund my new MBP), I always promised, "I will buy a mac again when I can play any games that a PC can play." Well, now I'm putting my money where my mouth is. I'm jumping head first into the mac market once more, and I thank the Intel switch for allowing it to happen.
While I know I probably won't be able to respectably play games like Crysis and Unreal Tournament 2007 on my MBP, I've become content with having console systems (Xbox 360, soon Wii, much later PS3 when price drops ;).) At this point in my life, I'm trying to simplify. I'm tired of having the huge tower system and massive monitor taking up so much room in my life, so I decide to go with the MBP. I want to be able to move from my desk to the living room, from the house to work, from state to state, etc. with ease and with all I need computer-wise.
So I'm back and I'm happy to be here. Of course, how I managed to get off on a self-rant from someone responding to a perceived Nintendo insult I have no idea. Sorry about that. :D
Did I say I can't wait to get my MBP? :o
-Zadillo
Because, just as there are Mac fanboys, there are also Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony fanboys. As much as we'd like to think our platform of choice is clearly the best, in all actually, each one has something unique to offer that the other may lack.
Whether we like to believe it or, the same goes for PC vs. Mac, OSX vs. Windows, ATI vs. Nvidia, etc. I've had macs off and on since I was a kid. I've also had several other types of computers other than Windows machines (mostly Commodore systems--man I loved my Amiga 500 with it's upgrade to 1 whole MB of ram :cool:.)
I was first in line to buy the original iMac. I bought it day one. I upgraded it's graphics card, which supposedly was not supposed to be upgradable, so I could play Unreal. Then I began to religiously follow the tragic saga of the Half-Life port to the Mac OS. The guy who was doing it (yes, a one man team), after months of receiving very little support from anyone, eventually threw his hands in the air and gave up. I was distraught, and, as a huge gamer (not fat, just a video game fan :p ), that's when I decided I needed to get a PC with Windows. It was a tough choice, but I knew I had to do it if I wanted to play the latest, greatest PC games. Apple has sorely lacked in porting games to their OS's.
While I did eventually buy a used iBook about 4 or 5 years ago (which I recently sold to help fund my new MBP), I always promised, "I will buy a mac again when I can play any games that a PC can play." Well, now I'm putting my money where my mouth is. I'm jumping head first into the mac market once more, and I thank the Intel switch for allowing it to happen.
While I know I probably won't be able to respectably play games like Crysis and Unreal Tournament 2007 on my MBP, I've become content with having console systems (Xbox 360, soon Wii, much later PS3 when price drops ;).) At this point in my life, I'm trying to simplify. I'm tired of having the huge tower system and massive monitor taking up so much room in my life, so I decide to go with the MBP. I want to be able to move from my desk to the living room, from the house to work, from state to state, etc. with ease and with all I need computer-wise.
So I'm back and I'm happy to be here. Of course, how I managed to get off on a self-rant from someone responding to a perceived Nintendo insult I have no idea. Sorry about that. :D
Did I say I can't wait to get my MBP? :o
milo
Aug 17, 09:21 AM
You're right. I'm extremely unimpressed that the fastest xeon only days old is actually slower mhz for mhz than a G5 that is pushing 4 year old technology. Really sad.
But overall it's not. Whenever you change chips, you'll probably always find a benchmark that favors the old one. Just because one app isn't faster doesn't mean the new chip is slower.
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
What are you talking about? The xeon is faster in every native benchmark, the only exception is one render where the slower xeon tied the G5. If you do indeed look at the average specs, the xeons blow away the G5.
Looks like the Xeons got killed by the G5 in Word in their tests.
Because it's running under rosetta, ram has nothing to do with it.
It's odd, seeing as Mac's are still the choice for many musicians that some kind of specs are never given that would be of interest to musicians. The released figures don't do much for me. I'd like to know the polyphony improvements say for Kontakt under both systems in Digital Performer 5.
There have been Logic benchmarks elsewhere, and they're pretty impressive. 1.4-1.5x improvements, pretty nice considering how fast the quad is already for audio plugins.
But overall it's not. Whenever you change chips, you'll probably always find a benchmark that favors the old one. Just because one app isn't faster doesn't mean the new chip is slower.
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
What are you talking about? The xeon is faster in every native benchmark, the only exception is one render where the slower xeon tied the G5. If you do indeed look at the average specs, the xeons blow away the G5.
Looks like the Xeons got killed by the G5 in Word in their tests.
Because it's running under rosetta, ram has nothing to do with it.
It's odd, seeing as Mac's are still the choice for many musicians that some kind of specs are never given that would be of interest to musicians. The released figures don't do much for me. I'd like to know the polyphony improvements say for Kontakt under both systems in Digital Performer 5.
There have been Logic benchmarks elsewhere, and they're pretty impressive. 1.4-1.5x improvements, pretty nice considering how fast the quad is already for audio plugins.
Surreal
Aug 27, 02:11 PM
jeez, i thought the thread might cool off in a day or so, but there is no sign of that happening, is there?
well, i have wondered for some time, how many people have had problems with the 17" mavbook pros?
i have one...it's fine. i heard a few small scale problems about it, but nothing on the scale of the 15"
well, i have wondered for some time, how many people have had problems with the 17" mavbook pros?
i have one...it's fine. i heard a few small scale problems about it, but nothing on the scale of the 15"
THX1139
Aug 21, 02:09 AM
I stopped by the Apple store tonight to play with a Macpro. I'm getting ready to buy and thought I'd get some hands on experience to see how it performed with Finalcut Pro. I was especially interested in how it handles playback of uncompressed footage.
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.
Multimedia
Jul 24, 05:54 PM
So you don't expect the Mac Pro at WWDC?? Or only a dual core version using Conroe?
I agree single Woodcrest doesn't make sense. So we have two options for Quad core - Dual Woodcrest and single Kentsfield. Of course 2xWodcrest is going to be more expensive but I wonder by how much more. I am guessing $400. But, if you do that, you have the same motherboard across the Mac Pro (and possibly shared with XServe as well) and for that $400 you also get FB-DIMM and higher RAM ceiling. Also, the same platform can be used with Clovertown to scale to 8 core workstation early Q1'07. If Kentsfield is used then 4 core is the end of the line.
So I don't expect Mac Pro to exclusively use Conroe/Kentsfield. Either two different boards - Conroe/Kentsfield on the low end and Woodcrest/Clovertown on the high end. Or Woodcrest/Clovertown across the board. Given the reasons above, I expect it will be the latter.
Conroe deserves to be in the Apple lineup. I expect it will be in the upgraded (perhaps a larger i.e. 23") iMac. Apple may also release another desktop to fill the gap between the Mini and the Pro. That option has been discussed here as well.Not really. Yorkfield is the 8 core follow on to Kentsfield in the Conroe class motherboard. Should be shipping by next Spring.Next Spring??? Can you please point me to the source of that information.
I don't believe Intel can go to 8 core chip before going to a true 4 core instead of 2 dual cores on the MCM. That may have to wait till the process moves to 45nm and they have the Common System Interface worked out i.e. towards the end of 2007. This is all an educated guess on my part ... nothing concrete.It's in the roadmap listed to follow Kentsfield (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_Microarchitecture).
"Yorkfield, eight-core MCM, 45 nm, 12 MiB L2, successor to Kentsfield"
Since Kentsfield is due Fall I IMAGINED Yorkfield would be ready to roll by Spring 2007. Maybe later? OK maybe later. I have no idea. Just feeling optimistic about Intel's accelerated rollout luck lately.
Well at the very least we will have pairs of Tigertons providing 8 cores by Spring 2007 as a stop-gap on a Woodcrest motherboard. Won't we?
My point wasn't so much exactly when Yorkfield will arrive as much as it was that Kentsfield is not THE END of increasingly more cores on the Conroe front as you had stated as fact.
Anyone else having confusion with all these -field, -town and -ton processor name suffixes? Aparently even the moderators here are. They have mispelled Clovertown in the original news story and post as well as on this forum's web page titles.
I agree single Woodcrest doesn't make sense. So we have two options for Quad core - Dual Woodcrest and single Kentsfield. Of course 2xWodcrest is going to be more expensive but I wonder by how much more. I am guessing $400. But, if you do that, you have the same motherboard across the Mac Pro (and possibly shared with XServe as well) and for that $400 you also get FB-DIMM and higher RAM ceiling. Also, the same platform can be used with Clovertown to scale to 8 core workstation early Q1'07. If Kentsfield is used then 4 core is the end of the line.
So I don't expect Mac Pro to exclusively use Conroe/Kentsfield. Either two different boards - Conroe/Kentsfield on the low end and Woodcrest/Clovertown on the high end. Or Woodcrest/Clovertown across the board. Given the reasons above, I expect it will be the latter.
Conroe deserves to be in the Apple lineup. I expect it will be in the upgraded (perhaps a larger i.e. 23") iMac. Apple may also release another desktop to fill the gap between the Mini and the Pro. That option has been discussed here as well.Not really. Yorkfield is the 8 core follow on to Kentsfield in the Conroe class motherboard. Should be shipping by next Spring.Next Spring??? Can you please point me to the source of that information.
I don't believe Intel can go to 8 core chip before going to a true 4 core instead of 2 dual cores on the MCM. That may have to wait till the process moves to 45nm and they have the Common System Interface worked out i.e. towards the end of 2007. This is all an educated guess on my part ... nothing concrete.It's in the roadmap listed to follow Kentsfield (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_Microarchitecture).
"Yorkfield, eight-core MCM, 45 nm, 12 MiB L2, successor to Kentsfield"
Since Kentsfield is due Fall I IMAGINED Yorkfield would be ready to roll by Spring 2007. Maybe later? OK maybe later. I have no idea. Just feeling optimistic about Intel's accelerated rollout luck lately.
Well at the very least we will have pairs of Tigertons providing 8 cores by Spring 2007 as a stop-gap on a Woodcrest motherboard. Won't we?
My point wasn't so much exactly when Yorkfield will arrive as much as it was that Kentsfield is not THE END of increasingly more cores on the Conroe front as you had stated as fact.
Anyone else having confusion with all these -field, -town and -ton processor name suffixes? Aparently even the moderators here are. They have mispelled Clovertown in the original news story and post as well as on this forum's web page titles.
0 تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق
الاشتراك في تعليقات الرسالة [Atom]
<< الصفحة الرئيسية