zedsdead
Apr 12, 05:10 AM
http://www.avid.com/US/specialoffers/fcppromotion?intcmp=AV-HP-S3
Avid is holding a great promotion to switch over to Media Composer if you are an FCP user. I am considering it based on what Apple shows us today.
Avid is holding a great promotion to switch over to Media Composer if you are an FCP user. I am considering it based on what Apple shows us today.
fastlane1588
Aug 5, 05:35 PM
iMac - No.
iPod - No.
MacBook - No.
MacBook Pro - No.
MacPro - Yes.
Xserve - Yes.
Displays - Yes.
Leopard Preview - Yes.
iPhone - Ha ha ha ha ha ha.
Ramsay: quot;Tana is my wife,
The wife of cheating Tiger
will be revealed at the
Peter Andre will not meet with
And by his side will be wife
within Will be given at
Fay Ripley#39;s praise will be
Topics will range from the
It will take a mighty strong
I will make a post about
that ex-wife Jordan will
A full write up will be posted
Michael Jackson#39;s will #39;names
My wife#39;s name is Jamie and
book will prove useful to
quot;sleeping with the wife of
Anything penned by Kay Mellor
iPod - No.
MacBook - No.
MacBook Pro - No.
MacPro - Yes.
Xserve - Yes.
Displays - Yes.
Leopard Preview - Yes.
iPhone - Ha ha ha ha ha ha.
ChazUK
Apr 20, 11:18 AM
The Galaxy S phone with the closest and most striking resemblance to the iPhone is easily the international i9000 version.
newtonrj
Mar 31, 03:55 PM
It has been said here before but is worth repeating - How does Moto, HTC and all the others differentiate? Obviously, they can't or if they can, it will cost them and the change will be slight.
If you are a carrier, what do you think of your portfolio now? Why so many Androids - Aren't they all the same now?
Who wins - Android wins because of uniformed updates and backward compatibility with screens, memory and installs of apps.
Who loses - Any of say 2 massive cell-phone countries that have +1B potential handset users. Andy Rubin knows this and is putting the brakes on in order to control the OS.
If you are a carrier, what do you think of your portfolio now? Why so many Androids - Aren't they all the same now?
Who wins - Android wins because of uniformed updates and backward compatibility with screens, memory and installs of apps.
Who loses - Any of say 2 massive cell-phone countries that have +1B potential handset users. Andy Rubin knows this and is putting the brakes on in order to control the OS.
KnightWRX
Apr 8, 08:21 PM
Intel is not forcing anything.
Intel forced nVidia out of the chipset business. :p Which is what led to this whole GPU downgrade for Sandy Bridge equipped Macs with IGPs.
Intel forced nVidia out of the chipset business. :p Which is what led to this whole GPU downgrade for Sandy Bridge equipped Macs with IGPs.
gugy
Nov 28, 06:39 PM
it won't happen. This Universal dude is just trying to be smart ass.
Steve just will say F••• off!
I look forward to the day artists will be their own labels and ditch those huge greedy companies. It's amazing that they don't learn. CD's should cost $5 bucks by now, but because their greed is almost $20. Manufacture costs are so low and it's just the price we pay to fill the pockets of those bastards.:mad:
and they wonder how unfair is people downloading illegal music. If they listened the consumer this would be not a big deal.
Steve just will say F••• off!
I look forward to the day artists will be their own labels and ditch those huge greedy companies. It's amazing that they don't learn. CD's should cost $5 bucks by now, but because their greed is almost $20. Manufacture costs are so low and it's just the price we pay to fill the pockets of those bastards.:mad:
and they wonder how unfair is people downloading illegal music. If they listened the consumer this would be not a big deal.
Simiber
Apr 25, 02:17 PM
IANAL, but AFAIK, here in America, having rights infringed upon is reason for sueing. That, in itself, is a "damage". Hence why Apple is being sued. They apparently are infringing upon the consumers' rights to privacy.
But how would a judge or jury quantify the size of the claim..? And surely the settlement should go to everyone who has had their right infringed upon, hence why a regulatory body should be responsible for protecting the people's rights so that any fine imposed by the regulator can be further used to protect peoples right to privacy when using a mobile..?
I understand the fact that the people who sue are taking the risk and costs of the lawsuit, but surely there are times when people's rights are being infringed but because nobody is prepared to sue, nothing ever gets done... If it was primarily the responsibility of a regulatory body to protect the consumer, then people's right to privacy would be protected not only when someone felt they had a case that they could make money out of :/
But how would a judge or jury quantify the size of the claim..? And surely the settlement should go to everyone who has had their right infringed upon, hence why a regulatory body should be responsible for protecting the people's rights so that any fine imposed by the regulator can be further used to protect peoples right to privacy when using a mobile..?
I understand the fact that the people who sue are taking the risk and costs of the lawsuit, but surely there are times when people's rights are being infringed but because nobody is prepared to sue, nothing ever gets done... If it was primarily the responsibility of a regulatory body to protect the consumer, then people's right to privacy would be protected not only when someone felt they had a case that they could make money out of :/
mcrain
Mar 22, 08:26 AM
Are you suggesting that Obama has gotten comparable treatment from the media as compared to Bush? The double standard is hilariously transparent... Obama justified, Bush not. Obama builds strong coalition, Bush doesn't. Obama trying to save people, Bush going after the oil. Obama savior, Bush satan.
The hypocrisy coming from the left in the media on this issue is palpable... all the talk about Obama's great coalition and how its a justifiable war.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
If you actually want change, vote for Ron Paul, vote for fiscal responsibility, vote for small government and non intervention. Vote for the destruction bailouts, stimulus, subsidies, and all other forms of crony-capitalism. I can't imagine him being nominated to run for president by the GOP. Did you see that "ghostwritten" pamphlet put out by his campaign? I'm sure he never approved of it, but against the 1st black president? With a son who tripped all over the Civil Rights Act? I hope he mounts a third party campaign. With Palin as VP, or better yet, Palin as a fourth party candidate.
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition: I know, I don't get it either. But, again this is the first week. The only ones "touting" are the white house, and it's already falling on deaf ears and criticism. Already!
The hypocrisy coming from the left in the media on this issue is palpable... all the talk about Obama's great coalition and how its a justifiable war.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
If you actually want change, vote for Ron Paul, vote for fiscal responsibility, vote for small government and non intervention. Vote for the destruction bailouts, stimulus, subsidies, and all other forms of crony-capitalism. I can't imagine him being nominated to run for president by the GOP. Did you see that "ghostwritten" pamphlet put out by his campaign? I'm sure he never approved of it, but against the 1st black president? With a son who tripped all over the Civil Rights Act? I hope he mounts a third party campaign. With Palin as VP, or better yet, Palin as a fourth party candidate.
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition: I know, I don't get it either. But, again this is the first week. The only ones "touting" are the white house, and it's already falling on deaf ears and criticism. Already!
Kevin Monahan
Apr 6, 03:28 PM
Yes, many of the crashes I've experienced have to do with Matrox cards, but not all of them. My boss is on the Abode and Matrox beta teams, so I will let him deal with the feedback. I think the machines are primarily i7's with 8+GB RAM on Windows 7 64-bit...I don't know for sure though, I'm not well versed in Windows based machines.
Ah, Matrox cards, eh? Sounds like it might be the culprit. The machines you mention are definitely up to the task. Make sure you are updated to 5.0.3. That fixes a lot of problems.
Thanks for the feedback Michael.
Ah, Matrox cards, eh? Sounds like it might be the culprit. The machines you mention are definitely up to the task. Make sure you are updated to 5.0.3. That fixes a lot of problems.
Thanks for the feedback Michael.
Pared
Apr 6, 02:02 PM
Honda sells a TON more cars than BMW by a huge factor...I'd rather drive a BMW, I guess you're all happy with the Hondas :)
And I guess it works both ways. If the iPad is a Honda, the Xoom is a Hyundai, or more and more of late, a Kia.
Just enjoy a device for what it is... these child-like torts are silly. Both are nice. The only true differentiating factor is the AppStore right now.
And I guess it works both ways. If the iPad is a Honda, the Xoom is a Hyundai, or more and more of late, a Kia.
Just enjoy a device for what it is... these child-like torts are silly. Both are nice. The only true differentiating factor is the AppStore right now.
MacBoobsPro
Jul 20, 08:55 AM
I agree, increasing the number of cores can't be the only solution on long term. In my opinion it's time to rethink CPUs: Single, maybe dual core, high processing* power with extremly low power consumption, much lower than we have nowadays.
* Whatever that exactly means, I don't know.
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
* Whatever that exactly means, I don't know.
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
SuperCachetes
Feb 28, 09:04 PM
What does my post have to do with cinema excellence?
Well, it's certainly sweeping drama based on fiction. Like so many Oscar winners, it's also a bit of vapid fluff that people will view and quickly forget. Frankly, I didn't mean to imply any excellence other than at making completely unfounded generalizations.
Unless influenced otherwise the brain develops heterosexually
Are you saying you think people program themselves to be gay? Or is it based on what cartoons they watch as a kid? Maybe lack of a father figure? Tell us more, Doc!
Well, it's certainly sweeping drama based on fiction. Like so many Oscar winners, it's also a bit of vapid fluff that people will view and quickly forget. Frankly, I didn't mean to imply any excellence other than at making completely unfounded generalizations.
Unless influenced otherwise the brain develops heterosexually
Are you saying you think people program themselves to be gay? Or is it based on what cartoons they watch as a kid? Maybe lack of a father figure? Tell us more, Doc!
Blue Velvet
Mar 22, 11:40 PM
Right, because there can't be any other reason why Blue Velvet, or myself, might support military intervention in Libya, but not Iraq. They are exactly the same situation after all.
Although I backed the implementation of a no-fly zone a few weeks ago, I wouldn't describe my position as one of wholehearted support. More a queasy half-hearted recognition that something had to be done and that all alternatives lead to rabbit holes of some degree or another. When all is said and done, my usual fallback position is an intense weariness at the evil that men do.
For the record, I actually supported (if silence is considered consent) both Gulf wars at the start; I believed in the fictional WMD, I believed it when Colin Powell held his little vial up at the UN... but I, like many was tied down with work and other concerns and was only paying cursory attention to the news at the time. Like Obama, I also initially supported the war in Afghanistan, or at least the idea of it, initiated by a Republican president, but since then it seems to have become a fiasco of Catch-22 proportions.
Slowly discovering the real agenda and true ineptness of the Bush administration was a pivotal point in my reawakening political understanding of US current affairs after reading Hunter Thompson for so many years. Disgusted and appalled at the casual way in which we all were lied to, I'm quite happy to hold my hands up and say 'I was wrong'.
Thing is about Obama, I never had any starry-eyed notion about him being a peace-maker. He's an American president, the incentives are cemented into the role as one of using power and protecting wealth. Not that many conservatives were paying attention at the time, but he stood up in front of the Nobel academy when accepting his Nobel Peace Prize and laid out a justification for war.
Since the second Gulf War, the entire circus has been one of my occasional interests, because I've never seen a political process elsewhere riddled with so many bald-faced liars, grotesque characters and half-baked casual hate speech. What power or the sniff of it does to people, twisting them out of shape, is infinitely more interesting and has more impact on us than any other endeavour, except for possibly the parallel development of technology.
George W. Bush is responsible for another calamity: me posting in PRSI, one of my many occasional weaknesses.
Although I backed the implementation of a no-fly zone a few weeks ago, I wouldn't describe my position as one of wholehearted support. More a queasy half-hearted recognition that something had to be done and that all alternatives lead to rabbit holes of some degree or another. When all is said and done, my usual fallback position is an intense weariness at the evil that men do.
For the record, I actually supported (if silence is considered consent) both Gulf wars at the start; I believed in the fictional WMD, I believed it when Colin Powell held his little vial up at the UN... but I, like many was tied down with work and other concerns and was only paying cursory attention to the news at the time. Like Obama, I also initially supported the war in Afghanistan, or at least the idea of it, initiated by a Republican president, but since then it seems to have become a fiasco of Catch-22 proportions.
Slowly discovering the real agenda and true ineptness of the Bush administration was a pivotal point in my reawakening political understanding of US current affairs after reading Hunter Thompson for so many years. Disgusted and appalled at the casual way in which we all were lied to, I'm quite happy to hold my hands up and say 'I was wrong'.
Thing is about Obama, I never had any starry-eyed notion about him being a peace-maker. He's an American president, the incentives are cemented into the role as one of using power and protecting wealth. Not that many conservatives were paying attention at the time, but he stood up in front of the Nobel academy when accepting his Nobel Peace Prize and laid out a justification for war.
Since the second Gulf War, the entire circus has been one of my occasional interests, because I've never seen a political process elsewhere riddled with so many bald-faced liars, grotesque characters and half-baked casual hate speech. What power or the sniff of it does to people, twisting them out of shape, is infinitely more interesting and has more impact on us than any other endeavour, except for possibly the parallel development of technology.
George W. Bush is responsible for another calamity: me posting in PRSI, one of my many occasional weaknesses.
Sydde
Mar 17, 01:48 PM
Ultra FAIL fear mongering. Libertarian ≠ Anarchist. Small government ≠ no government. Limiting government with constitutional constraints ≠ destruction of government.
He's a common sense constitutional conservative, enemy of tyranny everywhere, and an unfailing defender of fundamental human liberty.
OK, I confess, "shut down" was a slight exaggeration. But as the paragon of neo-liberalism, Paul would wholly gut every little regulatory agency that provides any kind of buffer that protects people and businesses from the depredations of corporate interests, instead electing to enact policies that would protect corporations from the depredations of people. That would be the net effect of his idealism, and if you take five minutes to read the article I linked to, it will become evident that Paul's lasseiz-faire ideals have been proven to fail miserably (unless you are already loaded). Heck, we have seen parallels in the lingering devastation caused by Reagan's policies.
He's a common sense constitutional conservative, enemy of tyranny everywhere, and an unfailing defender of fundamental human liberty.
OK, I confess, "shut down" was a slight exaggeration. But as the paragon of neo-liberalism, Paul would wholly gut every little regulatory agency that provides any kind of buffer that protects people and businesses from the depredations of corporate interests, instead electing to enact policies that would protect corporations from the depredations of people. That would be the net effect of his idealism, and if you take five minutes to read the article I linked to, it will become evident that Paul's lasseiz-faire ideals have been proven to fail miserably (unless you are already loaded). Heck, we have seen parallels in the lingering devastation caused by Reagan's policies.
wmmk
Jul 14, 03:30 PM
You would think they would come out with the fastest chip...
I mean what seperates them from a Dell or HP workstation that is top of the line? OS X (yes), but to the ones on the fence that doesn't justify paying more for less.
A 2.66 Ghz Woodcrest will probably be faster than a 2.93Ghz Conroe. A 1.83Ghz Yonah is faster than a 3.2Ghz Pentium, right?;)
I mean what seperates them from a Dell or HP workstation that is top of the line? OS X (yes), but to the ones on the fence that doesn't justify paying more for less.
A 2.66 Ghz Woodcrest will probably be faster than a 2.93Ghz Conroe. A 1.83Ghz Yonah is faster than a 3.2Ghz Pentium, right?;)
koobcamuk
Apr 8, 01:12 AM
To be fair - Apple themselves were doing the same thing - in the UK at least.
I experienced, on a number of occasions, Apple Stores actually had stock in store available for reservation, but were forcing an entirely unnecessary, half an hour 'unboxing and setup' appointment.
With only a few of these slots available - more often than not - the store would have plenty of iPad 2 stock available, but no appointments, so reservations were stopped and Apple Staff denying (and laughing in my face) that they had any remaining stock.
I dislike Apple staff everywhere except Japan.
I experienced, on a number of occasions, Apple Stores actually had stock in store available for reservation, but were forcing an entirely unnecessary, half an hour 'unboxing and setup' appointment.
With only a few of these slots available - more often than not - the store would have plenty of iPad 2 stock available, but no appointments, so reservations were stopped and Apple Staff denying (and laughing in my face) that they had any remaining stock.
I dislike Apple staff everywhere except Japan.
obeygiant
Mar 17, 01:03 PM
Obeygiant, you have a way of distilling issues down to their core. The funny thing is, I don't think Lee even realizes he's doing it.
Yeah I'm pretty sure I'm on his ignore list. lol
Yeah I'm pretty sure I'm on his ignore list. lol
TeamMojo
Apr 7, 11:05 PM
Good for Apple. Best Buy is downright predatory. They often charge $30 for cables you can by elsewhere for $5 or less. And the whole new Fry's like winding checkout line is so lame. I do like to use Best Buy as an Amazon showroom.
MacRumors
Sep 13, 06:49 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
AnandTech took (http://anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=6) a Mac Pro, which comes with two Dual-Core Xeon (Woodcrest) processors and replaced them with samples of two Quad-Core Xeon (Clovertown) processors.
We grabbed a pair of 2.4GHz Clovertown samples and tossed them in the system, and to our pleasure, they worked just fine. Our samples used a 1066MHz FSB, although we're expecting the final chip to use a 1333MHz FSB, but the most important part of the test is that all 8 cores were detected and functional.
The Mac Pro appeared to run fine with the Quad-Core processors, effectively givem them a 8-Core machine. While they are unable to give performance numbers due to non-disclosure agreements, the machine was reportedly stable. It also gives hope for current Mac Pro owners that they will be able to later upgrade the processors on their machine in the future. Clovertown Quad-core processors are expected to be available in late 2006.
AnandTech took (http://anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=6) a Mac Pro, which comes with two Dual-Core Xeon (Woodcrest) processors and replaced them with samples of two Quad-Core Xeon (Clovertown) processors.
We grabbed a pair of 2.4GHz Clovertown samples and tossed them in the system, and to our pleasure, they worked just fine. Our samples used a 1066MHz FSB, although we're expecting the final chip to use a 1333MHz FSB, but the most important part of the test is that all 8 cores were detected and functional.
The Mac Pro appeared to run fine with the Quad-Core processors, effectively givem them a 8-Core machine. While they are unable to give performance numbers due to non-disclosure agreements, the machine was reportedly stable. It also gives hope for current Mac Pro owners that they will be able to later upgrade the processors on their machine in the future. Clovertown Quad-core processors are expected to be available in late 2006.
archurban
Sep 19, 02:08 AM
Mc keller, you're right. there are somebody misunderstand. we're not all geek, OK? I just use mac for my work or entertainment. my macbook will be kept for 2 years. so I don't care until 2008. plus, merom is only 10% better. it's not much different, and gets more hotter. I won't buy it.
rdowns
Apr 28, 05:57 PM
all want to know is was why it always has to go to name calling..be it..wacko christians, teabaggers or racists conservatives..it seems like every thread any of the liberals on the forum posts always goes to calling names at whatever group it is that they have a problem with today.
I'm not a liberal but those sound like apt descriptions of some of the people who call themselves Republicans/Tea Party/Conservative. I long for the Republican Party my family supported.
I'm not a liberal but those sound like apt descriptions of some of the people who call themselves Republicans/Tea Party/Conservative. I long for the Republican Party my family supported.
Blue Velvet
Apr 27, 02:22 PM
1. You opened it in Illustrator, not InDesign.
2. After I opened it in Illustrator like you did it did reveal some interesting things. It seems that fields #20 and #22 are on individual layers.
They're not. The proper file is flat. I downloaded and opened the PDF from the White House. Flat in both Illustrator and Photoshop, just one group on one layer... and no security on the PDF. No embedded fonts.
This is a fraud.
2. After I opened it in Illustrator like you did it did reveal some interesting things. It seems that fields #20 and #22 are on individual layers.
They're not. The proper file is flat. I downloaded and opened the PDF from the White House. Flat in both Illustrator and Photoshop, just one group on one layer... and no security on the PDF. No embedded fonts.
This is a fraud.
dougny
Nov 28, 10:58 PM
Universal has already stated that half of the money will be going to the artists.
robogobo
Apr 8, 05:01 AM
Maybe they ate too much magical unicorn dust and it clouded their judgement. :rolleyes:
Omg unicorn dust that is so funny! Where do you get this awesome material? Hilarious!
Omg unicorn dust that is so funny! Where do you get this awesome material? Hilarious!
No comments:
Post a Comment