bibbz
Jun 9, 11:41 PM
You mean Wal-Mart or something else? I've never heard of Wally World. Is that a chain back east? :confused:
Walmart, lol
Walmart, lol
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 10:05 AM
And I don't see the point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the opposite sex, but since society tells me it's "normal" I live with it nonetheless. It's all a matter of perception and experience. You have yours, I have mine and they're both normal to us.
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
![call of duty 4 free cheats undetected wallhack cod4 cheat hack aimbot. CS 1.6 / CSS HACK UNDETECTED 6-22-2010!!! 0:57. www.mediafire.com revamped and also works with CSS. have fun :] www.Immune-Cheats.com - Aimbot Footage](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_tfV5Fn7v-WfdcKDkX4g6d0s9SvoYQVl7NUzefPI3at_VizmnAo7R09cFArZpe0LdoFV0-tsoi6SwfADyBCWrOiPKaao4d9iai4=s0-d "CS 1.6 / CSS HACK UNDETECTED 6-22-2010!!! 0:57. www.mediafire.com revamped and also works with CSS. have fun :] www.Immune-Cheats.com - Aimbot Footage")
dernhelm
Aug 26, 07:13 PM
I'm Really hoping for a new iMac this Tues. But I might jump on a Core 2 Duo mini if they offer that instead...
Anyone have any idea if they'll be using "laptop chips" in the iMac and mini still - or if they'll move the iMac to a "desktop" chip instead?
Anyone have any idea if they'll be using "laptop chips" in the iMac and mini still - or if they'll move the iMac to a "desktop" chip instead?
Thunderhawks
Apr 6, 02:25 PM
Motorola not selling any units of a crappy product? Huh... who'd have thought.
No need to brag IMO and did you really try a Xoom and put it through it's paces?
I didn't, but tried an ipad 1 and it wasn't doing all I would want it for, plus I never buy a first gen Apple product. (That little rule has served me well since 1984)
Apple is waaayyyyyyy ahead at the moment and the copy cats are playing catch up.
But, I like that there will be a race forcing each manufacturer to make the product better and better.
While Apple is not ignoring what the competition does, their philosophy of making their own products better and better seems to be successful.
So, why change that formula or shake in your boots , just because somebody launches a new copy?
No need to brag IMO and did you really try a Xoom and put it through it's paces?
I didn't, but tried an ipad 1 and it wasn't doing all I would want it for, plus I never buy a first gen Apple product. (That little rule has served me well since 1984)
Apple is waaayyyyyyy ahead at the moment and the copy cats are playing catch up.
But, I like that there will be a race forcing each manufacturer to make the product better and better.
While Apple is not ignoring what the competition does, their philosophy of making their own products better and better seems to be successful.
So, why change that formula or shake in your boots , just because somebody launches a new copy?
NoNameBrand
Jul 21, 08:26 AM
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
Now you're not thinking like a competitive company that needs to continue to make money.
Sun is on the ropes and Apple now has a chance to soar in and take a lot of business from them.
How does Apple releasing an eight-way workstation prevent them from competing with Sun in the server market, again? I must have missed that part.
Now you're not thinking like a competitive company that needs to continue to make money.
Sun is on the ropes and Apple now has a chance to soar in and take a lot of business from them.
How does Apple releasing an eight-way workstation prevent them from competing with Sun in the server market, again? I must have missed that part.
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?
Xenious
Jul 14, 05:27 PM
Dual drive slots are cool, but the design is boring. Don't get me wrong I love my G5 powermac I was just hoping for a new or different design for the next ones...Maybe the same but square or smaller or something. Oh well it doesn't matter I'm still buying. :)
rwilliams
Jun 8, 09:22 PM
Hell yeah. There's a Radio Shack about 5 minutes from my house. This should keep me from having to stand in ridiculously long lines at the Apple Store. I hope that Best Buy does this too, if only because I've never had a bad phone activation experience there, and I can rack up the Reward Zone points.
Bilbo63
Apr 19, 02:45 PM
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
Thanks for posting that Yamcha. Xerox's engineers were seriously brilliant.
Edit... stripped out the images... no need to show them again. My bad.
Thanks for posting that Yamcha. Xerox's engineers were seriously brilliant.
Edit... stripped out the images... no need to show them again. My bad.
chrono1081
Apr 27, 10:07 AM
Hopefully this announcement makes the tin foil hat brigade go away...of course after only reading a few comments I see people crying that "Apple is lying!". Stupid people.
dadoftwogirls
Apr 6, 04:07 PM
Like someone an early poster said, you want a little competition to keep Apple moving forward. But 100k in two months? Apple's motto seems to be defeat, crush and humiliate your opponents then dominate. It's going to be hard for competition facing that.
Silentwave
Jul 15, 01:12 AM
What about 4 SATA II Drives? This way I can have a mirrored 1TB RAID [clicks heals]
The speed of a RAID with the security of mirroring.. it doesn't get mucho better :)
You mean SATA 3Gbps? Sata II is often confused with Sata 3Gbps and has not been brought to market yet, unfortunately. the sata people even have a page explaining the difference on their site :confused: . the good part though is they're planning 6Gbps and IIRC 12 as well.
I want sata3g or SAS or both.
The speed of a RAID with the security of mirroring.. it doesn't get mucho better :)
You mean SATA 3Gbps? Sata II is often confused with Sata 3Gbps and has not been brought to market yet, unfortunately. the sata people even have a page explaining the difference on their site :confused: . the good part though is they're planning 6Gbps and IIRC 12 as well.
I want sata3g or SAS or both.
Timepass
Jul 15, 10:57 AM
I disagree. Using ATX power supplies is a stupid idea. I am sure Apple uses higher quality power supplies than you would pick up at your local CompUSA.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause too many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
Well I wouldnt worry about that in the case of a mac. Only people who are really going to replace there PSU are going to be people who know something about computers. A lot of people replace there ram. PSU are not upgraded very offen if ever at all.
Also the people who do replace PSU most of them know dont cheap out on them. Among home builder comminty a thing most agree on is NEVER cheap out on a PSU. Go name brand. Reason being is why would you build a 1k system and then risk it all with a cheap PSU (rule can be cut if pretty much using dirt cheap parts to begin with and trying to go as cheaply as possible (less than 500 and in old spare parts). My own PC rig using an Antec True Power PSU in it (that i pick up from compUSA oddly enough).
I think going ATX is a good thing because it means Apple is going to be using more standardized parts so it will be cheaper for apple to get them.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause too many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
Well I wouldnt worry about that in the case of a mac. Only people who are really going to replace there PSU are going to be people who know something about computers. A lot of people replace there ram. PSU are not upgraded very offen if ever at all.
Also the people who do replace PSU most of them know dont cheap out on them. Among home builder comminty a thing most agree on is NEVER cheap out on a PSU. Go name brand. Reason being is why would you build a 1k system and then risk it all with a cheap PSU (rule can be cut if pretty much using dirt cheap parts to begin with and trying to go as cheaply as possible (less than 500 and in old spare parts). My own PC rig using an Antec True Power PSU in it (that i pick up from compUSA oddly enough).
I think going ATX is a good thing because it means Apple is going to be using more standardized parts so it will be cheaper for apple to get them.
chrmjenkins
Apr 27, 10:32 AM
I'm a little confused at the magnitude of people's reaction here.
Cell phone companies already do this. This is how they track potential crime victims locations'. They can access the cellular provider's database and get a ping with a cell tower and location. This is also timestamped. Your cellular provider already has more information than Apple ever had.
Cell phone companies already do this. This is how they track potential crime victims locations'. They can access the cellular provider's database and get a ping with a cell tower and location. This is also timestamped. Your cellular provider already has more information than Apple ever had.
Tones2
Apr 19, 03:58 PM
Funny, I'm a Dallas Cowboy fan, the fans are fanatics and everyone who is not a Dallas fan HATES the Cowboys. I feel the same heat being an Apple fanatic. The fans are loyal and defending of the brand while every other tech fan hates us. I need a big white Apple logo with a blue Dallas Cowboy star in it. I might be shot!!!! lol
Dallas fans will criticize the Cowboys if they play poorly. Apple fanboys will not. It's not like being a fan, it's like being indoctrinated, with no real vested interest. It make no sense whatsover.
Dallas fans will criticize the Cowboys if they play poorly. Apple fanboys will not. It's not like being a fan, it's like being indoctrinated, with no real vested interest. It make no sense whatsover.
rickjs
Apr 6, 03:06 PM
The Xoom is a great tablet. I'm willing to bet that the majority of you who have discredited it haven't even used it. And it DOES have 3.0 Honeycomb, which IS made for tablets. The iPad 2 is still a better tablet, but is it not possible some of the iPad 2's sales have come from just the Apple name? People will buy an Apple product even if it didn't have a feature.
afields
Aug 5, 06:02 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.
I agree with this. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if it was just a leopard preview and mac pro announced. Remember....It's always less than you expect. I would be absolutely *shocked* if anything iphone or ipod related is announced.
iPod - No.
MacBook - No.
MacBook Pro - No.
MacPro - Yes.
Xserve - Yes.
Displays - Yes.
Leopard Preview - Yes.
iPhone - Ha ha ha ha ha ha.
I agree with this. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if it was just a leopard preview and mac pro announced. Remember....It's always less than you expect. I would be absolutely *shocked* if anything iphone or ipod related is announced.
raymondso
Sep 19, 10:24 AM
35 mins til 9......the apple store is still healthy ....new product update unlikely to happen :(
netdog
Aug 11, 10:47 AM
"...Earlier than some may be expecting"??
Wasn't everyone expecting this a year ago?
Using TimeMachine, Steve is going to release it two years ago.
Wasn't everyone expecting this a year ago?
Using TimeMachine, Steve is going to release it two years ago.
AngryCorgi
Apr 6, 04:16 PM
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
Macnoviz
Jul 22, 03:03 AM
So I read in this thread that Kentsfield and Clovertown ARE compatible with Conroe and Woodcrest sockets (respectively) (Cloverton or Clovertown?)
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
ghostlines
Mar 26, 04:21 AM
This post made me laugh. As a developer who is actively testing and reporting bugs I can tell you that without a doubt this is 100% false. My dozen of bug reports combined with a lot of different discussions happening in the developer forums is a pretty clear indicator they have a while to go.
Side note: Really? Techcrunch?
Yeah, I doubt they have a GM that fast, unless they want to have to release 10.7.1 in the same week of release.
I'm liking OS X lion a lot. I particulary like the simple on finger swipe up on a dock icon to expose it's windows. Maybe you can file a "bug report" that 2 finger swipe on a dock icon doesn't automatically invoke the right click command or make a new window :D. The more gestures the better!
Side note: Really? Techcrunch?
Yeah, I doubt they have a GM that fast, unless they want to have to release 10.7.1 in the same week of release.
I'm liking OS X lion a lot. I particulary like the simple on finger swipe up on a dock icon to expose it's windows. Maybe you can file a "bug report" that 2 finger swipe on a dock icon doesn't automatically invoke the right click command or make a new window :D. The more gestures the better!
11thIndian
Apr 11, 11:14 PM
So you really think it's just a handful of people on Macrumors?
Oh, and people I know.
So, how many do you think? Less than 10? Less than 100? What is your definition of "a lot"? Also please note I never said it was any kind of majority of FCP users or anything like that. I never said it was an industry-wide pandemic, although you'd like to put those words into my mouth as well. You'd also like to paint my claim that "a lot of pros are leaving FCP" as "combative", even though it's not. It's just an observation. I don't know why you're taking it so personally.
I'd say 25% of the current user base would be a lot.
Oh, and people I know.
So, how many do you think? Less than 10? Less than 100? What is your definition of "a lot"? Also please note I never said it was any kind of majority of FCP users or anything like that. I never said it was an industry-wide pandemic, although you'd like to put those words into my mouth as well. You'd also like to paint my claim that "a lot of pros are leaving FCP" as "combative", even though it's not. It's just an observation. I don't know why you're taking it so personally.
I'd say 25% of the current user base would be a lot.
DocNo
Apr 11, 10:09 AM
This is a little more out there but my friend has a theory that Apple has let Kevin Smith use the new Final Cut to cut and make his new film that is coming it. The importance of this is that he feels movie making is going the way of music making these days. He believes anything under 20 million is going to be funded independently, not released via movie studios and will sell the movies directly to the theaters.
He feels only the big blockbuster movies like Transformers and stuff will be left the studios, much like many musicians are skipping the record companies and making and releasing music themselves.
And as with the iPhone and iPad, if you are hopelessly behind in a traditional market (i.e. Mac OSX vs. Windows) go create a new one (i.e. iOS)! I have no doubt this is where Apple is going...
He feels only the big blockbuster movies like Transformers and stuff will be left the studios, much like many musicians are skipping the record companies and making and releasing music themselves.
And as with the iPhone and iPad, if you are hopelessly behind in a traditional market (i.e. Mac OSX vs. Windows) go create a new one (i.e. iOS)! I have no doubt this is where Apple is going...
