notjustjay
Apr 8, 12:22 AM
I do not intend to be rude, but there is a difference in HDMI cables, no matter what the Internet tells you. Conductors, shielding materials/layers and the way the connectors are put together are a few differentiators. An AudioQuest Coffee cable, for example, which is several hundred dollars ($600 I believe for a 1.5m) is made of pure silver starting with the tips and going the length of the cable. This is not the same as a no name $5 dollar HDMI cable from Amazon.
Sure there is a difference, but is it noticable? Is it worth the cost?
A Ferrari costs a lot more than a Ford Fiesta. It's better built and has a lot more power under the hood. But if all you're ever doing is driving at 20 mph, then it doesn't matter, the Fiesta has all the power you need and you'll save a pile of money. Now, you don't want to go rock bottom and buy a junker that might break down, but as long as it runs smoothly at 20 mph, any car will do the job.
You don't want ultra-cheap crappy cables that can develop loose connections or come poorly shielded, as that can cause dropouts. But neither do you need pure silver or oxygen-free shielding or whatever. Any HDMI cable will either fail outright or do the exact same job as any other for the given application.
Sure there is a difference, but is it noticable? Is it worth the cost?
A Ferrari costs a lot more than a Ford Fiesta. It's better built and has a lot more power under the hood. But if all you're ever doing is driving at 20 mph, then it doesn't matter, the Fiesta has all the power you need and you'll save a pile of money. Now, you don't want to go rock bottom and buy a junker that might break down, but as long as it runs smoothly at 20 mph, any car will do the job.
You don't want ultra-cheap crappy cables that can develop loose connections or come poorly shielded, as that can cause dropouts. But neither do you need pure silver or oxygen-free shielding or whatever. Any HDMI cable will either fail outright or do the exact same job as any other for the given application.
leekohler
Feb 28, 09:45 PM
Correct I have no idea what causes homosexuality, neither do scientists.
I wanted to know what he expected from me, he doesn't necessarily have to know the cause(s). I don't remember saying you could not live with the person you love. Also one can not infer what "that" means from your paragraph.
I seem to recall you agreeing with this post:
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
And by "living with" I mean having sex and having a family as well.
I wanted to know what he expected from me, he doesn't necessarily have to know the cause(s). I don't remember saying you could not live with the person you love. Also one can not infer what "that" means from your paragraph.
I seem to recall you agreeing with this post:
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
And by "living with" I mean having sex and having a family as well.
MacBoobsPro
Jul 20, 08:43 AM
I got it...
Octopros :D
Octopros :D
yfile
Apr 6, 11:38 AM
What do you mean true 3D? Motion 3 integrated 3D reflection, shadows, depth of field, etc.. It was around that time I stopped using After Effects. There are still things that AE can do that Motion can't, but that's mostly due to 3rd party plugins.
I mean 3D objects with materials, textures, shaders, better lighting, better shadows, no crashing several times a day...
3D like ProAnimator FX or Kinemac at least. No plugin required.
I mean 3D objects with materials, textures, shaders, better lighting, better shadows, no crashing several times a day...
3D like ProAnimator FX or Kinemac at least. No plugin required.
bigandy
Jul 27, 09:42 AM
this makes me happy. jumping up and down for wwdc...
:) :) :)
:) :) :)
hobo.hopkins
Apr 25, 02:21 PM
Is it really? Is it open for people to look at how it is accessed? I don't think so. If that were the case, it would have been revealed earlier and more easily.
Apple needs to do the right thing and be transparent in this process.
The information is private. It is only accessible to you and anyone with direct access to your devices. I agree that Apple should provide details as to why these locations are being cached, or possibly a way to opt-out for those who are concerned. To say that this is a privacy invasion is simply not true because the information is still private.
It is not an invasion of privacy, it is an unnecessary (and unpublicised) risk to your privacy.
Any company that stores sensitive data of yours, eg, a CC number, is expected and to some degree legally bound to take any reasonable precautions to keep your data private (eg, by securing their servers). Apple simply failed to take reasonable precautions (by clearing the cache). Not on something extremely serious but an oversight for which they could except some slight scolding.
I don't want them to clear my cache, and I think most users wouldn't either. If this information has a beneficial purpose (which it very well might) then I don't want it cleared. I agree that there should be a way to clear this if a user so chooses. Apple offers a way to encrypt your backups so I don't see how they haven't taken reasonable precautions.
Apple needs to do the right thing and be transparent in this process.
The information is private. It is only accessible to you and anyone with direct access to your devices. I agree that Apple should provide details as to why these locations are being cached, or possibly a way to opt-out for those who are concerned. To say that this is a privacy invasion is simply not true because the information is still private.
It is not an invasion of privacy, it is an unnecessary (and unpublicised) risk to your privacy.
Any company that stores sensitive data of yours, eg, a CC number, is expected and to some degree legally bound to take any reasonable precautions to keep your data private (eg, by securing their servers). Apple simply failed to take reasonable precautions (by clearing the cache). Not on something extremely serious but an oversight for which they could except some slight scolding.
I don't want them to clear my cache, and I think most users wouldn't either. If this information has a beneficial purpose (which it very well might) then I don't want it cleared. I agree that there should be a way to clear this if a user so chooses. Apple offers a way to encrypt your backups so I don't see how they haven't taken reasonable precautions.
easy4lif
Nov 28, 07:22 PM
steve jobs replied earlier this year to such nonsense
"the music companies are trying to be greedy"
I approve this messsage
"the music companies are trying to be greedy"
I approve this messsage
hvfsl
Aug 26, 05:38 PM
I have just ordered a mbp :( It wasn't supposed to ship until Monday but it shipped early :( If the rumors are true will I be able to send it back and get the new one? Has anyone had any experience in returning unwanted stuff to apple as time is not on my side (leave for uni on the 16th Sept)
The only change is likely to be the cpu. The rest of the MBP will probably be kept the same and if you look at the yonah vs merom benchmarks at places like AnandTech, it probably isn't worth sending it back.
The only change is likely to be the cpu. The rest of the MBP will probably be kept the same and if you look at the yonah vs merom benchmarks at places like AnandTech, it probably isn't worth sending it back.
milo
Sep 13, 07:05 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet.
Not true, according to the article. They said it wasn't easy, but they were able to max out all 8 cores. You can see the Activity Monitor graph all filled up.
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
That's how it is now, at least with multiple apps. I bet it's possible to program for an unspecified number of multiple cores, and there may be apps doing it already.
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
Read the article again, they WERE able to max them out, just not easily. Based on that, OSX seems to be able to scale already. Developers just need to start writing apps that are more MP friendly.
Not true, according to the article. They said it wasn't easy, but they were able to max out all 8 cores. You can see the Activity Monitor graph all filled up.
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
That's how it is now, at least with multiple apps. I bet it's possible to program for an unspecified number of multiple cores, and there may be apps doing it already.
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
Read the article again, they WERE able to max them out, just not easily. Based on that, OSX seems to be able to scale already. Developers just need to start writing apps that are more MP friendly.
studiomusic
Apr 5, 11:09 PM
Already have my tickets... I was looking forward to Kevin Smith and Philip Bloom, but FCP is a welcome announcement.
Hopefully they'll give a bunch of copies of it for the Supermeet Super Raffle.
Hopefully they'll give a bunch of copies of it for the Supermeet Super Raffle.
heisetax
Aug 5, 11:28 PM
Are you "meant" to keep it under your desk? Who says? I had my PowerMac on the desk until I sold it (I will be getting a Mac Pro and I hate to put it on my desk if it's meant to go under it!)
Try your tower below your chair. From there you could point a remote at the correct location. The floor seems like a good place to me. Like you I have mine on my table behind my 30" display. This leaves the computer in an easy to reach place, but it is still out of the way.
Bill the TaxMan
Try your tower below your chair. From there you could point a remote at the correct location. The floor seems like a good place to me. Like you I have mine on my table behind my 30" display. This leaves the computer in an easy to reach place, but it is still out of the way.
Bill the TaxMan
gnasher729
Apr 20, 12:37 PM
No they werent, what apple describes was already shows and build BEFORE iphone. If any apple basicly admits they copied it themselves and should get sued.
Who says? Some people refer to the Samsung F700, but that was shown for the first time a month after the iPhone, and released about five months after the iPhone. (Faked images by Android fanboys won't count in court).
Who says? Some people refer to the Samsung F700, but that was shown for the first time a month after the iPhone, and released about five months after the iPhone. (Faked images by Android fanboys won't count in court).
Miss Terri
Apr 7, 09:24 PM
What is the obsession with back-lit keys?
Do you actually look at the keyboard when you're typing?
Nope, I touch type.
BUT, when I'm just lying around on the couch websurfing or reading something on the screen, then my hand is on the mouse pad, and when I need to reach up to hit a command-key or type a lazy couple of words into chat, or type in a password, or etc. then I LOVE the backlit keyboard. It's amazing how often it comes in handy.
Sure, I can get along without it - my current MBP is the first computer I've had with it. But do I WANT to get along without it? NooOOOooo!
But it's not because I have to look at the keys while normally typing.
MT
Do you actually look at the keyboard when you're typing?
Nope, I touch type.
BUT, when I'm just lying around on the couch websurfing or reading something on the screen, then my hand is on the mouse pad, and when I need to reach up to hit a command-key or type a lazy couple of words into chat, or type in a password, or etc. then I LOVE the backlit keyboard. It's amazing how often it comes in handy.
Sure, I can get along without it - my current MBP is the first computer I've had with it. But do I WANT to get along without it? NooOOOooo!
But it's not because I have to look at the keys while normally typing.
MT
Brandon4692
Jun 22, 02:24 PM
Do these stores you guys are talking about actually have the iPhone in stock already?!?! Cause I just called the two closest ones near me and they still aren't sure if they will receive any for thursday
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.
AppliedVisual
Oct 15, 01:08 PM
How long did macPro delay compared to HPs similar workstation?
HP, Dell and IBM all had dual Core 2 Xeon workstation systems available 2~3 weeks ahead of Apple's Mac Pro release. Apple has yet to release their new Xserve. HP, Dell, IBM and others have had dual (and even some quad CPU configurations) of Core 2 Xeon 1U servers and blades available for months now...
HP, Dell and IBM all had dual Core 2 Xeon workstation systems available 2~3 weeks ahead of Apple's Mac Pro release. Apple has yet to release their new Xserve. HP, Dell, IBM and others have had dual (and even some quad CPU configurations) of Core 2 Xeon 1U servers and blades available for months now...
laidbackliam
Aug 7, 02:34 AM
this is me going out an a limb here.
but do you think the desktop lineup could become this?
Mac mini (2 models)
the Mac
iMac
Mac Pro
"if" this happens, which i find unlikely based on pure speculation, the mac mini could keep yonah processors, the Mac could get conroe, the iMac could get conroe, and the Mac Pro could go balls to the wall with 3.0ghz woodcrests.
the Mac would be the affordable tower that people have been wanting. yet another reason for people to switch. a unit that works, that has an upgrade path, but doesn't cost 1500+.
again, i don't think this will happen at wwdc, but i do think it would be cool
but do you think the desktop lineup could become this?
Mac mini (2 models)
the Mac
iMac
Mac Pro
"if" this happens, which i find unlikely based on pure speculation, the mac mini could keep yonah processors, the Mac could get conroe, the iMac could get conroe, and the Mac Pro could go balls to the wall with 3.0ghz woodcrests.
the Mac would be the affordable tower that people have been wanting. yet another reason for people to switch. a unit that works, that has an upgrade path, but doesn't cost 1500+.
again, i don't think this will happen at wwdc, but i do think it would be cool
Bill McEnaney
Apr 27, 01:51 PM
It's neither moral nor virtuous to be against the rights of your fellow citizens. Just sayin'
What rights: civil ones, human ones, merely legal ones, or moral ones? As I've already said, moral liberty consists of the ability to adopt the means to do the good.[/quote]
One has to wonder why conservatives get so wrapped up in social issues when there are so many other things on the plate. Things like abortion and gays will never go away. It's just as stupid to obsess over them as it is to obsess over Obama's birth certificate. Let's fix the economy and put people back to work. Those are the real problems. Anything else is a distraction.
I'm not obsessing about anything. Maybe abortion and gay rights will never go away. But does that mean I should stop fighting, say, abortion? Think about it, liberals. Each time a doctor aborts a baby, the government forfeits the tax revenue it would have collected from the baby if he survived, grew up, and worked. The U.S. population is aging, and too few babies are being born to maintain the country's population. Whether liberals like it or not, the government me need to shrink when there are too few taxpayers to give it the revenue it demands.
Put nursing home patients on social programs when their families or their friends take care of them instead. As nursing home populations grow, so do tax rates. As tax rates go up, more people lose their low-paying jobs and discover that welfare gives them more money than they earned at their low-paying jobs. As more and more get welfare, taxes go up and up.
Sure, we need to repair the economy. That's partly why we need major tax-cuts and major spending-cuts. The $38 billion is insignificant, especially when government spending offsets it.
Tolerance isn't either approval or indifference. To tolerate something is to endure an evil to prevent a greater evil or to get a great good.
What rights: civil ones, human ones, merely legal ones, or moral ones? As I've already said, moral liberty consists of the ability to adopt the means to do the good.[/quote]
One has to wonder why conservatives get so wrapped up in social issues when there are so many other things on the plate. Things like abortion and gays will never go away. It's just as stupid to obsess over them as it is to obsess over Obama's birth certificate. Let's fix the economy and put people back to work. Those are the real problems. Anything else is a distraction.
I'm not obsessing about anything. Maybe abortion and gay rights will never go away. But does that mean I should stop fighting, say, abortion? Think about it, liberals. Each time a doctor aborts a baby, the government forfeits the tax revenue it would have collected from the baby if he survived, grew up, and worked. The U.S. population is aging, and too few babies are being born to maintain the country's population. Whether liberals like it or not, the government me need to shrink when there are too few taxpayers to give it the revenue it demands.
Put nursing home patients on social programs when their families or their friends take care of them instead. As nursing home populations grow, so do tax rates. As tax rates go up, more people lose their low-paying jobs and discover that welfare gives them more money than they earned at their low-paying jobs. As more and more get welfare, taxes go up and up.
Sure, we need to repair the economy. That's partly why we need major tax-cuts and major spending-cuts. The $38 billion is insignificant, especially when government spending offsets it.
Tolerance isn't either approval or indifference. To tolerate something is to endure an evil to prevent a greater evil or to get a great good.
Dobbs2
Apr 8, 12:57 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)
Well what happened is the following. They received ipads earlier this week. Didn't sell them because the Sunday ad has that Best Buy will have them in stock. Due to bait and switch laws if the ad has it they have to have a certain amount of stock. Apple didn't like it that we didn't sell through them any way and pull the add.
Well what happened is the following. They received ipads earlier this week. Didn't sell them because the Sunday ad has that Best Buy will have them in stock. Due to bait and switch laws if the ad has it they have to have a certain amount of stock. Apple didn't like it that we didn't sell through them any way and pull the add.
rockthecasbah
Aug 7, 11:07 PM
i liked all of the features but picked Time Machine because it just makes it so much easier to back up. Who cares if it isn't the most original thign ever? It's easy to use, integrated, and useful. :)
mgargan1
Nov 29, 12:52 AM
anyone remember this show?
DrRadon
Mar 22, 01:11 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Looking at these specs will be awsome while iPad users actualy have a ******** of Apps to actualy use their specs on. :rolleyes:
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Looking at these specs will be awsome while iPad users actualy have a ******** of Apps to actualy use their specs on. :rolleyes:
nefan65
Apr 25, 02:08 PM
They're suing...doesn't mean it'll go to court. They may find there's not enough grounds for suit, and deny...
princealfie
Nov 29, 08:58 AM
Time for Apple to change the paradigm again. I think it's time for Apple to start putting together a music production house. Offer musicians the ability to go direct to iTunes with all the marketing necessary to promote their catalogs. I'm not very familiar with the music industry, but I "think" Apple is quite prepared to create their own studios, handle their own promotion/marketing and already have a HIGHLY efficient distribution system in place. Granted, they are not supposed to be creating music according to their Apple Music agreement, but if they just bought Apple Music outright it would make a great fit, eh?
B
Perhaps we need to have a iTube website eh?
B
Perhaps we need to have a iTube website eh?