inhrntlyunstabl
Apr 25, 03:58 PM
I always wonder what people are thinking...
"Apple <or insert any evil corporation or government entity> has 100s millions of customers, but I bet they've singled me out for tracking with the black helicopters and vans because I make $25,000 a year and have access to the a state of the art Camry and have 2.5 kids."
or
"Those bastards at Apple <or insert again> are trying to figure out what I like to buy with their Genius tracking the songs I download, ads I click on, etc. to try to target ads and future products at me! Those sons of bitches!"
People, 1984 was long ago. You have no privacy unless you don't live in society, e.g unabomber. Get over yourself, you are not so special Apple is paying any specific attention to you. They want to know how many 1000s of people are at your Starbucks, but not you. Otherwise, encrypt your backups, chain your iPhone, iPad, Macs and PCs to your wrist, and shoot at anyone that looks over your shoulder.
Besides, the iPhone Software License Agreement is pretty solid on this front. The only hole to fill is why it might still be logging when Location Services is disabled. But at end of the day, this is a tiny tiny aspect of a much much larger issue - we use technology that will track what we do, influence us, etc. We have to learn to accept this. It's going to be impossible to stop this. Get over it.
"Apple <or insert any evil corporation or government entity> has 100s millions of customers, but I bet they've singled me out for tracking with the black helicopters and vans because I make $25,000 a year and have access to the a state of the art Camry and have 2.5 kids."
or
"Those bastards at Apple <or insert again> are trying to figure out what I like to buy with their Genius tracking the songs I download, ads I click on, etc. to try to target ads and future products at me! Those sons of bitches!"
People, 1984 was long ago. You have no privacy unless you don't live in society, e.g unabomber. Get over yourself, you are not so special Apple is paying any specific attention to you. They want to know how many 1000s of people are at your Starbucks, but not you. Otherwise, encrypt your backups, chain your iPhone, iPad, Macs and PCs to your wrist, and shoot at anyone that looks over your shoulder.
Besides, the iPhone Software License Agreement is pretty solid on this front. The only hole to fill is why it might still be logging when Location Services is disabled. But at end of the day, this is a tiny tiny aspect of a much much larger issue - we use technology that will track what we do, influence us, etc. We have to learn to accept this. It's going to be impossible to stop this. Get over it.
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
svenas1
Jul 15, 04:55 AM
The thing that perplexes me is the relocation of the Power Supply to the top. This is either bogus info or they know something they aren't letting on about all the Liquid Cooling problems that have been arising lately in the repair world.
Plus would this not put a strain on the power cord since the cord would have its own weight hanging down on it instead of how it currently comes out of the back of the tower and immediately lays on the floor or desk surface? Something's fishy about this.
what if the plug is still at the bottom, and the connection to the actual power unit is internal? high voltage connection through the case innards - is that possible ?
Plus would this not put a strain on the power cord since the cord would have its own weight hanging down on it instead of how it currently comes out of the back of the tower and immediately lays on the floor or desk surface? Something's fishy about this.
what if the plug is still at the bottom, and the connection to the actual power unit is internal? high voltage connection through the case innards - is that possible ?
Lord Blackadder
Mar 24, 01:07 PM
Oh. So when a person criticizes Obama for keeping us in Afghanistan, Iraq, and/or Libya, just level an accusation of racism.
Got it.
The vast majority of conservatives are WASP-ish, and almost all of the people who question Obama's religion/nationality are self-described conservatives. Furthermore, conservatives as a group refuse to admit that this is the case. Got that?
Got it.
The vast majority of conservatives are WASP-ish, and almost all of the people who question Obama's religion/nationality are self-described conservatives. Furthermore, conservatives as a group refuse to admit that this is the case. Got that?
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
citizenzen
Mar 22, 01:18 PM
Bush was attacked endlessly about conducting a war for oil, and that it was really the U.S. alone, because his coalition was small/weak.
One difference here is that there was a U.N. resolution backing this use of force. So while the coalition of forces might be small, you'd have to in some sense include all the nations who voted for the resolution as backing this effort.
I wonder what the list would look like then?
Brazil, China, Germany, India, Russian Federation abstained from voting. However, if my memory serves, either China and Russia could have vetoed the measure with a no vote, yet did not. Which is a tacit form of approval.
Bosnia, Colombia, Gabon, Germany, India, Lebanon, Nigeria, Portugal and South Africa all cast yes votes along with France the U.K. and the U.S. This for all intents and purposes increases the number of nations in your coalition to include these countries as well.
But personally, I don't support this intervention. Protecting people against genocide is one thing. But intervening in a civil war is another. As a general rule I believe that it's best for a country to work these issues out themselves ... provided once again, that issues of genocide don't arise.
One difference here is that there was a U.N. resolution backing this use of force. So while the coalition of forces might be small, you'd have to in some sense include all the nations who voted for the resolution as backing this effort.
I wonder what the list would look like then?
Brazil, China, Germany, India, Russian Federation abstained from voting. However, if my memory serves, either China and Russia could have vetoed the measure with a no vote, yet did not. Which is a tacit form of approval.
Bosnia, Colombia, Gabon, Germany, India, Lebanon, Nigeria, Portugal and South Africa all cast yes votes along with France the U.K. and the U.S. This for all intents and purposes increases the number of nations in your coalition to include these countries as well.
But personally, I don't support this intervention. Protecting people against genocide is one thing. But intervening in a civil war is another. As a general rule I believe that it's best for a country to work these issues out themselves ... provided once again, that issues of genocide don't arise.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 04:34 PM
Good lord. Whatever happened to simplicity? It looked like a three ring circus up there today.
Now come on. Time machine? With a picture of outer space and stars? This looks so gimmicky. They are getting to be like Microsoft and just adding new features instead of making things easier and streamlined. Why not just improve the Backup program that comes with .Mac or include it for free? Do we really need another interface? To me it looks like form over function.
Exactly my thoughts!! Looks like a Trekie (how do you write that??) was let loose :D
Now come on. Time machine? With a picture of outer space and stars? This looks so gimmicky. They are getting to be like Microsoft and just adding new features instead of making things easier and streamlined. Why not just improve the Backup program that comes with .Mac or include it for free? Do we really need another interface? To me it looks like form over function.
Exactly my thoughts!! Looks like a Trekie (how do you write that??) was let loose :D
maclaptop
Apr 12, 07:41 AM
Again I am amazed at how many people here think a 4" screen is the wave of the future. It is not.
A 4" display is already the standard size.
Just because Apple has not progressed is no indicator of their plans for the upcoming model. To continue to lag behind the rest of the pack with a little display would be sad.
A 4" display is already the standard size.
Just because Apple has not progressed is no indicator of their plans for the upcoming model. To continue to lag behind the rest of the pack with a little display would be sad.
Chundles
Jul 20, 09:44 AM
Just stating 'I knew that' I just used it as an example. Chundles gets confused easily so I have to make things simple. Hi Chundles :D
You'll keep...:p
You'll keep...:p
milo
Jul 28, 09:37 AM
Apple had better step its game up compared to the prices/specs rumored last week.
That list was probably something some random guy threw together, it didn't come from a real source and AI only posted it because it's been floating around (saying they didn't believe it).
Actually I like the one with 2 slots. Perfect for all those people wanting 2 drives. :-)
But it would make way more sense to lose the "slot" and go with a standard tray loading drive. It's very impractical to give users the ability to add an optical drive...but require it to be a laptop model.
you can't make a statement like that. that's like saying "i hate general electric air conditioners." what the heck? all CPU's (and air conditioners) do the same thing.
You don't think there's a significant difference between different models of CPU? :eek:
How about Mac Midi?
I've thought about Mac Mid, but just doesn't seem quite right. Mac Midi is funny, but would confuse music guys (unless it actually had midi ports).
So if the new iMacs are using 64-bit merom or conroe chips, what is the likelihood of them offering 4Mb of RAM?
Current macs can handle 4 gigs of ram, if you get the expensive 2 gig chips. 32 bit limits you to 4 gig, doubt iMacs will handle more than that for a while.
That list was probably something some random guy threw together, it didn't come from a real source and AI only posted it because it's been floating around (saying they didn't believe it).
Actually I like the one with 2 slots. Perfect for all those people wanting 2 drives. :-)
But it would make way more sense to lose the "slot" and go with a standard tray loading drive. It's very impractical to give users the ability to add an optical drive...but require it to be a laptop model.
you can't make a statement like that. that's like saying "i hate general electric air conditioners." what the heck? all CPU's (and air conditioners) do the same thing.
You don't think there's a significant difference between different models of CPU? :eek:
How about Mac Midi?
I've thought about Mac Mid, but just doesn't seem quite right. Mac Midi is funny, but would confuse music guys (unless it actually had midi ports).
So if the new iMacs are using 64-bit merom or conroe chips, what is the likelihood of them offering 4Mb of RAM?
Current macs can handle 4 gigs of ram, if you get the expensive 2 gig chips. 32 bit limits you to 4 gig, doubt iMacs will handle more than that for a while.
twoodcc
Jul 27, 10:59 PM
Could Shadowfax or Shawnce or someone else who knows describe a little more about the implications of the upgrade from Yonah to Merom? I'm trying to decide whether to get a Macbook or wait, I'm not that worried about the minor speed boost, but I am more concerned about longer term compatibility (say with mac OS or Windows). If there's going to be a point in a couple of years where the difference between Yonah and Merom is the difference between running the latest version of the OS or not, then I might wait. But if it's only speed and heat, I'll probably go for the Yonah (after WWDC) and live with not having the speed and lower heat that the upgrade brings.
i want to know the exact same thing
i want to know the exact same thing
tjwaido
Apr 6, 10:28 AM
When they revamped Logic Pro they cut the price from $999 to $499.....fingers crossed for FCP.
I think you mean Final Cut Studio. Back when I first started editing it was $999 for Final Cut Pro, alone.
I think you mean Final Cut Studio. Back when I first started editing it was $999 for Final Cut Pro, alone.
TangoCharlie
Jul 21, 06:04 AM
How about Super Mac :D[snip]
I've already got one. A SuperMac C500 to be precise! (Well, actually it's an Apus 2000, but in the US it was the C500).
SuperMac was the brandname UMAX used for thier Mac clones. Check out
http://home.earthlink.net/~supermac_insider/
:)
I've already got one. A SuperMac C500 to be precise! (Well, actually it's an Apus 2000, but in the US it was the C500).
SuperMac was the brandname UMAX used for thier Mac clones. Check out
http://home.earthlink.net/~supermac_insider/
:)
Kevin Monahan
Apr 5, 06:20 PM
At present we have to re-encode a lot of our footage (7D / Minicam etc), and you don't need to do that in Premiere, it just plays on the timeline - however editing in that is quite frankly an exercise in sheer frustration and strange bugs.
I don't find it frustrating, in fact, it runs circles around FCP and I worked at Apple on 2 versions of the software, wrote a book and founded the first FCPUG.
As for strange bugs, please let me know what they are. Our users aren't complaining about anything strange.
If you do find something, please report it: Submit bugs to http://www.adobe.com/go/wish . More on how to give feedback: http://bit.ly/93d6NF
Best,
Kevin
I don't find it frustrating, in fact, it runs circles around FCP and I worked at Apple on 2 versions of the software, wrote a book and founded the first FCPUG.
As for strange bugs, please let me know what they are. Our users aren't complaining about anything strange.
If you do find something, please report it: Submit bugs to http://www.adobe.com/go/wish . More on how to give feedback: http://bit.ly/93d6NF
Best,
Kevin
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 10:19 PM
The U.N. Security Council perhaps, but not the entire assembly. It would have been interesting to open that issue up to debate and seen how all the members would have voted.
The security council, not the general assembly, is the organ tasked with authorizing UN military action. The point of the security council is to enable the UN to make rapid strategic decisions without a general debate. It's an imperfect system to be sure, but I don't think requiring a full debate in the general assembly would be an efficient way to respond to this sort of situation.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
We could have responded simply with economic sanctions.
Based on Gaddafi's treatment of the initial protests (not to mention his tendencies over 40 years of autocratic rule), I strongly question whether economic sanctions are going to apply sufficient pressure to Gaddafi to relinquish power. Like Mubarak, he is a political strongman who is not easily cowed by threats.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
I agree that war should be considered a last resort. I also think that the US government is generally too quick to undertake armed intervention. But in this case we took sides in a war that was already in progress. The UN's choices were either non-intervention, non-military intervention, or direct military intervention in some form.
I suppose the point at which "all other options have failed" is a debatable one, since everyone has different opinions on what constitutes a valid option. There are many questions without simple answers. How do we judge failure? Is the purpose of the intervention (military or otherwise) to aid the rebels? Or is it merely to prevent Gaddafi killing civilians? If the latter is the case, does allowing him to remain in power serve that cause? If not, what should we do about it?
At the bottom of all this though, the goal of current foreign intervention (military or otherwise) is clear to me - to remove Gaddafi from power and recognize the rebel transitional government as the legitimate government of Libya.
The security council, not the general assembly, is the organ tasked with authorizing UN military action. The point of the security council is to enable the UN to make rapid strategic decisions without a general debate. It's an imperfect system to be sure, but I don't think requiring a full debate in the general assembly would be an efficient way to respond to this sort of situation.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
We could have responded simply with economic sanctions.
Based on Gaddafi's treatment of the initial protests (not to mention his tendencies over 40 years of autocratic rule), I strongly question whether economic sanctions are going to apply sufficient pressure to Gaddafi to relinquish power. Like Mubarak, he is a political strongman who is not easily cowed by threats.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
I agree that war should be considered a last resort. I also think that the US government is generally too quick to undertake armed intervention. But in this case we took sides in a war that was already in progress. The UN's choices were either non-intervention, non-military intervention, or direct military intervention in some form.
I suppose the point at which "all other options have failed" is a debatable one, since everyone has different opinions on what constitutes a valid option. There are many questions without simple answers. How do we judge failure? Is the purpose of the intervention (military or otherwise) to aid the rebels? Or is it merely to prevent Gaddafi killing civilians? If the latter is the case, does allowing him to remain in power serve that cause? If not, what should we do about it?
At the bottom of all this though, the goal of current foreign intervention (military or otherwise) is clear to me - to remove Gaddafi from power and recognize the rebel transitional government as the legitimate government of Libya.
Multimedia
Sep 14, 05:56 PM
:eek: :eek: What's planned after 8 core processors? 16 cores on a chip? Seriously?? :confused: :confused:Not sure about beyond 8 which can be paired into a 16 core Mac. Perhaps. Too far out to tell although it is casually mentioned in the roadmap.
davelanger
Apr 14, 04:54 PM
Opinion is not fact. This works on both sides of the argument, I concede.
Still, you cannot say the iPhone is the best smartphone on the market, just as someone else can't say the Atrix is the best. Different strokes for different folks!
You can however state the iphone is the best smartphone on the market for my needs.
Still, you cannot say the iPhone is the best smartphone on the market, just as someone else can't say the Atrix is the best. Different strokes for different folks!
You can however state the iphone is the best smartphone on the market for my needs.
McKellar
Sep 19, 02:04 AM
What is wrong with you people? Meroms in other brands of laptops haven't, or are only *just* starting to ship, and you people wail that Apple is doomed, when in the worst case scenario, they'll be a few days behind Dell. If they don't ship by next month, then sure, complain, but really, most of those who moan that Apple is "OMG SO OUTDATED MEROM MBPS SHOULD HAVE BEEN RELEASED 2 MONTHS AGO!!!" are out of touch with reality.
Sydde
Mar 17, 01:04 PM
�Change� means nothing ... you don�t want to deal with the monetary/financial crisis in this country, you want to keep the system together for the benefit of the banks and the big corporations and the politicians...When you voted for 'change' in you really voted for more of the same.
As opposed to voting for breaking the system down for the benefit of banks and big corporations? We have seen the actions of neo-liberals like Scott Walker: if he gets his way, the whole state will belong to Cargill and Schneider and Bergstrom and Johnsonville, etc, with no government left to protect citizens and businesses from corporate interests. Paul is cut from the same cloth. Put him in the Whitehouse and there will be millions of people protesting full time in DC, because they will have nothing else to do with their time.
Paul wants to shut down government. All that would be left is the few peace officers needed to protect business from millions of poor people. That is the neo-liberal utopia, as envisioned by Alisa Rosenbaum. This kind of policy has clearly been shown to be a recipe for potentially violent revolution:In his Brief History of Neoliberalism, the eminent social geographer David Harvey outlined "a theory of political economic practices that proposes that human well-being can best be advanced by liberating individual entrepreneurial freedoms and skills within an institutional framework characterised by strong private property rights, free markets, and free trade." Neoliberal states guarantee, by force if necessary, the "proper functioning" of markets; where markets do not exist (for example, in the use of land, water, education, health care, social security, or environmental pollution), then the state should create them.
Guaranteeing the sanctity of markets is supposed to be the limit of legitimate state functions, and state interventions should always be subordinate to markets. All human behavior, and not just the production of goods and services, can be reduced to market transactions.
The only people for whom Egyptian neoliberalism worked "by the book" were the most vulnerable members of society, and their experience with neoliberalism was not a pretty picture. Organised labor was fiercely suppressed. The public education and the health care systems were gutted by a combination of neglect and privatization. Much of the population suffered stagnant or falling wages relative to inflation. Official unemployment was estimated at approximately 9.4% last year (and much higher for the youth who spearheaded the January 25th Revolution), and about 20% of the population is said to live below a poverty line defined as $2 per day per person.
For the wealthy, the rules were very different. Egypt did not so much shrink its public sector, as neoliberal doctrine would have it, as it reallocated public resources for the benefit of a small and already affluent elite. Privatization provided windfalls for politically well-connected individuals who could purchase state-owned assets for much less than their market value, or monopolise rents from such diverse sources as tourism and foreign aid. Huge proportions of the profits made by companies that supplied basic construction materials like steel and cement came from government contracts, a proportion of which in turn were related to aid from foreign governments.source (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/02/201122414315249621.html)
Except, Americans are not likely to wait 30 years before fighting back.
As opposed to voting for breaking the system down for the benefit of banks and big corporations? We have seen the actions of neo-liberals like Scott Walker: if he gets his way, the whole state will belong to Cargill and Schneider and Bergstrom and Johnsonville, etc, with no government left to protect citizens and businesses from corporate interests. Paul is cut from the same cloth. Put him in the Whitehouse and there will be millions of people protesting full time in DC, because they will have nothing else to do with their time.
Paul wants to shut down government. All that would be left is the few peace officers needed to protect business from millions of poor people. That is the neo-liberal utopia, as envisioned by Alisa Rosenbaum. This kind of policy has clearly been shown to be a recipe for potentially violent revolution:In his Brief History of Neoliberalism, the eminent social geographer David Harvey outlined "a theory of political economic practices that proposes that human well-being can best be advanced by liberating individual entrepreneurial freedoms and skills within an institutional framework characterised by strong private property rights, free markets, and free trade." Neoliberal states guarantee, by force if necessary, the "proper functioning" of markets; where markets do not exist (for example, in the use of land, water, education, health care, social security, or environmental pollution), then the state should create them.
Guaranteeing the sanctity of markets is supposed to be the limit of legitimate state functions, and state interventions should always be subordinate to markets. All human behavior, and not just the production of goods and services, can be reduced to market transactions.
The only people for whom Egyptian neoliberalism worked "by the book" were the most vulnerable members of society, and their experience with neoliberalism was not a pretty picture. Organised labor was fiercely suppressed. The public education and the health care systems were gutted by a combination of neglect and privatization. Much of the population suffered stagnant or falling wages relative to inflation. Official unemployment was estimated at approximately 9.4% last year (and much higher for the youth who spearheaded the January 25th Revolution), and about 20% of the population is said to live below a poverty line defined as $2 per day per person.
For the wealthy, the rules were very different. Egypt did not so much shrink its public sector, as neoliberal doctrine would have it, as it reallocated public resources for the benefit of a small and already affluent elite. Privatization provided windfalls for politically well-connected individuals who could purchase state-owned assets for much less than their market value, or monopolise rents from such diverse sources as tourism and foreign aid. Huge proportions of the profits made by companies that supplied basic construction materials like steel and cement came from government contracts, a proportion of which in turn were related to aid from foreign governments.source (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/02/201122414315249621.html)
Except, Americans are not likely to wait 30 years before fighting back.
princealfie
Nov 29, 12:30 PM
Why yes, she does!
Got a few people from the SLC here I see...
I promise to buy her album then. Spasiba!
Got a few people from the SLC here I see...
I promise to buy her album then. Spasiba!
Michael383
Apr 8, 05:34 AM
Why anyone would ever choose to buy an Apple product at Best Buy over the Apple Store is beyond me. :confused:
Because the price points at the Apple store and the Best Buy where I bought my MBP were the same.
Because the price points at the Apple store and the Best Buy where I bought my MBP were the same.
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.
2IS
Apr 8, 08:24 PM
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.
Well then allow me to be the broken record...
Intel isn't forcing anything. Mac Book pro's are using Sandy Bridge AND have a separate graphics chipset. :rolleyes:
Well then allow me to be the broken record...
Intel isn't forcing anything. Mac Book pro's are using Sandy Bridge AND have a separate graphics chipset. :rolleyes:
bobsentell
Apr 7, 11:32 PM
Meh. Makes room for HP's inventory. You know, the company that sells more computers than any other company. :D
