hvfsl
Aug 26, 05:38 PM
I have just ordered a mbp :( It wasn't supposed to ship until Monday but it shipped early :( If the rumors are true will I be able to send it back and get the new one? Has anyone had any experience in returning unwanted stuff to apple as time is not on my side (leave for uni on the 16th Sept)
The only change is likely to be the cpu. The rest of the MBP will probably be kept the same and if you look at the yonah vs merom benchmarks at places like AnandTech, it probably isn't worth sending it back.
The only change is likely to be the cpu. The rest of the MBP will probably be kept the same and if you look at the yonah vs merom benchmarks at places like AnandTech, it probably isn't worth sending it back.
afrowq
Apr 8, 11:03 PM
Coming from a full-time, multimedia/journalism/photography/etc professional I have to totally and completely
AGREE!
I've seen a huge decline in Apple's interest in the professional market, and I don't even mean high end pro, we're talking SMB and SOHO type stuff here. The last revision of FCP was just not worth it unless you were buying new or buying to ensure you didn't have any left over bugs.
Avid Media Composer and Premier have gained massive leads on FCP in terms of workflow and speed. Once the younger college students start seeing how fast they can delivery a product with Adobe or Avid, they'll start wondering why the small houses switched to FCP in the first place, and start wanting to learn what the industry is working with . . . Avid, After Effects, ProTools, etc. And the iMovie Pro will be left to indie filmmakers and consumers with deep pockets
** disclaimer ** I have nothing against the indie segment . . . I am in it and love it. But Apple makes it harder with every update to justify staying with a company that has too much on it's plate, and not enough staff to keep up with the rest of the market.
Apple will always claim that "no one's buying it" rather than, "we didn't make it marketable and desirable" when they go to axe some hardware or software title.
Careful, some trolls will insist that your opinion is only relevant to your narrow world view and that you need itemized spreadsheets to prove that you know what you're talking about.
AGREE!
I've seen a huge decline in Apple's interest in the professional market, and I don't even mean high end pro, we're talking SMB and SOHO type stuff here. The last revision of FCP was just not worth it unless you were buying new or buying to ensure you didn't have any left over bugs.
Avid Media Composer and Premier have gained massive leads on FCP in terms of workflow and speed. Once the younger college students start seeing how fast they can delivery a product with Adobe or Avid, they'll start wondering why the small houses switched to FCP in the first place, and start wanting to learn what the industry is working with . . . Avid, After Effects, ProTools, etc. And the iMovie Pro will be left to indie filmmakers and consumers with deep pockets
** disclaimer ** I have nothing against the indie segment . . . I am in it and love it. But Apple makes it harder with every update to justify staying with a company that has too much on it's plate, and not enough staff to keep up with the rest of the market.
Apple will always claim that "no one's buying it" rather than, "we didn't make it marketable and desirable" when they go to axe some hardware or software title.
Careful, some trolls will insist that your opinion is only relevant to your narrow world view and that you need itemized spreadsheets to prove that you know what you're talking about.
drsmithy
Sep 14, 10:05 AM
On the server side.
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
Couldn't be farther from the truth. I have no problem with Microsoft or Windows, evident by the fact that I've ran their operating systems for the last 10 years. I have a problem with all the crap they're putting in Vista, but otherwise - Win2k and XP Pro have left me primarily trouble-free.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
Couldn't be farther from the truth. I have no problem with Microsoft or Windows, evident by the fact that I've ran their operating systems for the last 10 years. I have a problem with all the crap they're putting in Vista, but otherwise - Win2k and XP Pro have left me primarily trouble-free.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
THX1139
Aug 21, 02:09 AM
I stopped by the Apple store tonight to play with a Macpro. I'm getting ready to buy and thought I'd get some hands on experience to see how it performed with Finalcut Pro. I was especially interested in how it handles playback of uncompressed footage.
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.
kresh
Aug 26, 04:41 AM
If you haven't been reading the comments, it would appear MOST people are complaining about the more recent models. I would agree with most that the Powermac G5's have had serious issues and now recent macbook's... Apple needs to do one of the following ... Higher Quality Assurance testing OR better support cause right now they're missing both.
I'm 40 years old and literally can't remember how many computers I have purchased for personal use. I normally only keep a computer for 5 or 6 months before getting something newer. I know I had to have purchased 50 or 60 computers for personal use.
My very first Apple product was a 1.25GHz G4 Mac Mini. (March 2005 I think) On advice from a friend, I purchased this computer and he helped me over-clock it to 1.58GHz and upgrade to 1GB ram.
I'll be the first to admit that I'm not a power user, but I absolutely love this little computer. It's the best piece of electronics I have ever purchased, and it's the longest time I have ever kept a computer. I just can't imagine using any other operating system, for ANY reason.
My whole household is now all macs, my wife and 4 kids each have one. The 6 mac mini's that we have in our house are unconditionally flawless.
I was going to put my Mini on eBay this weekend and get a MacBook Saturday at the Apple store in Raleigh. I was assuming the MacBook was a Mini in a notebook case, but now I'm scared of doing so. If the MacBook is not as nice and reliable as my mini, I would be extremely upset.
Sorry to ramble on so, but it is really rare for me to find a product, or anything, that has impressed me as much as my Mini has.
After the long story, would any of you really recommend the MacBook vs my Mini (knowing that I love it so)?
I'm 40 years old and literally can't remember how many computers I have purchased for personal use. I normally only keep a computer for 5 or 6 months before getting something newer. I know I had to have purchased 50 or 60 computers for personal use.
My very first Apple product was a 1.25GHz G4 Mac Mini. (March 2005 I think) On advice from a friend, I purchased this computer and he helped me over-clock it to 1.58GHz and upgrade to 1GB ram.
I'll be the first to admit that I'm not a power user, but I absolutely love this little computer. It's the best piece of electronics I have ever purchased, and it's the longest time I have ever kept a computer. I just can't imagine using any other operating system, for ANY reason.
My whole household is now all macs, my wife and 4 kids each have one. The 6 mac mini's that we have in our house are unconditionally flawless.
I was going to put my Mini on eBay this weekend and get a MacBook Saturday at the Apple store in Raleigh. I was assuming the MacBook was a Mini in a notebook case, but now I'm scared of doing so. If the MacBook is not as nice and reliable as my mini, I would be extremely upset.
Sorry to ramble on so, but it is really rare for me to find a product, or anything, that has impressed me as much as my Mini has.
After the long story, would any of you really recommend the MacBook vs my Mini (knowing that I love it so)?
kenypowa
Apr 27, 08:19 AM
Wow. That's surprising. This whole time people downplayed it because there was no evidence that apple was actually transmitting this data. It wasn't a big deal because the db file was local only. Now when Apple addresses it they had to not only admit that the file exists but that they actually were transmitting data.
Ah well, still not a big deal. :p
It was never a big deal. Either you are holding it wrong or there is a misunderstanding. Apple never makes mistakes, didn't you get the memo? ;)
Ah well, still not a big deal. :p
It was never a big deal. Either you are holding it wrong or there is a misunderstanding. Apple never makes mistakes, didn't you get the memo? ;)
FreeState
Feb 28, 08:23 PM
They still can not have valid sacramental marriage
Fornication doesn't matter if the person doesn't care about the religious connotations of marriage
Here let me fix that for you:
They Gays and lesbians still can not have a valid sacramental Catholic marriage.
Fornication doesn't matter if the person doesn't care about the religious connotations of marriage Catholicism view of fornication and marriage.
---
There are Christian Churches that perform marriage for any loving couple, regardless of orientation. The Catholic Church does not dictate doctrine for all Christians.
Fornication doesn't matter if the person doesn't care about the religious connotations of marriage
Here let me fix that for you:
They Gays and lesbians still can not have a valid sacramental Catholic marriage.
Fornication doesn't matter if the person doesn't care about the religious connotations of marriage Catholicism view of fornication and marriage.
---
There are Christian Churches that perform marriage for any loving couple, regardless of orientation. The Catholic Church does not dictate doctrine for all Christians.
regan
Aug 26, 05:58 PM
This sounds good to me. I am waiting/saving up for a new laptop replacement for my recently departed(moment of silence) ibook.
Even if i had the money, I was going to wait for the 2nd generation of the macbooks.
Santa Rosa sounds cool, but if the macbooks got the merom along with the MBPs in September, then I wouldn't wait for Santa Rosa and just nab one now.
However, if they don't go 64bit....then I may just wait till January, and get by without a laptop(gulp) for another 4-5 months.
Even if i had the money, I was going to wait for the 2nd generation of the macbooks.
Santa Rosa sounds cool, but if the macbooks got the merom along with the MBPs in September, then I wouldn't wait for Santa Rosa and just nab one now.
However, if they don't go 64bit....then I may just wait till January, and get by without a laptop(gulp) for another 4-5 months.
BVeritas
Mar 31, 07:39 PM
As an Apple fanboy, I'm disappointed to post this, but Android will continue to win despite the huge fragmentation problem.
Unlike Windoze based computers, cell phone users expect to replace their phones minimally every two years. So for the most part these users just don't care whether the manufacturers bother to upgrade the OS or whether the few apps they've found need to be repurchased.
When they go shopping and see a brand new Android phone running a better OS with more apps than they had before, they will simply buy it. Especially since there will continue to be two for one offers and lots of competition.
Like Apple computers, iPhones will be superbly engineered, but that hasn't mattered in the computer arena and it won't matter in the cell phone arena.
BTW, I expect Apple to eventually command 20% of the world's computer, cell phone, and tablet market with 50% (or more) of the profits, so it's not like Apple won't be successful. It's like combining all of the luxury cars together under one manufacturer.
Unlike Windoze based computers, cell phone users expect to replace their phones minimally every two years. So for the most part these users just don't care whether the manufacturers bother to upgrade the OS or whether the few apps they've found need to be repurchased.
When they go shopping and see a brand new Android phone running a better OS with more apps than they had before, they will simply buy it. Especially since there will continue to be two for one offers and lots of competition.
Like Apple computers, iPhones will be superbly engineered, but that hasn't mattered in the computer arena and it won't matter in the cell phone arena.
BTW, I expect Apple to eventually command 20% of the world's computer, cell phone, and tablet market with 50% (or more) of the profits, so it's not like Apple won't be successful. It's like combining all of the luxury cars together under one manufacturer.
Denarius
Mar 22, 03:22 PM
A government in power is responding against a rebellion.
If a rebellion sprang up in the United States, our government would respond with force as well.
"Slaughtering his own people" sounds a little propogandish to me. Are you saying that Qaddafi is taking people who have no connection to the rebellion at all and slaughtering them?
How can any government meet armed internal rebellion without qualifying as "slaughtering their own people"?
It wasn't a rebellion when it first started, it was an unarmed march protesting against the number of people in Benghazi that had just disappeared in Benghazi over many years. They had some footage from the start of the protests on BBC's Panorama last night showing the march. Some guys in yellow builder's hats came in with a mixture of sticks and guns and started killing people at random, which is when it started escalating into a full-blown rebellion.
If a rebellion sprang up in the United States, our government would respond with force as well.
"Slaughtering his own people" sounds a little propogandish to me. Are you saying that Qaddafi is taking people who have no connection to the rebellion at all and slaughtering them?
How can any government meet armed internal rebellion without qualifying as "slaughtering their own people"?
It wasn't a rebellion when it first started, it was an unarmed march protesting against the number of people in Benghazi that had just disappeared in Benghazi over many years. They had some footage from the start of the protests on BBC's Panorama last night showing the march. Some guys in yellow builder's hats came in with a mixture of sticks and guns and started killing people at random, which is when it started escalating into a full-blown rebellion.
babyj
Sep 19, 07:07 AM
It amazes me that people can get so worked up about a processor that was only officially released three weeks ago.
It never ends either. As soon as Merom chips are in the MacBook range everyone will just move on to the next thing. When are Apple going to put quad cores in their high end products? When are the Macbooks going to be updated with Santa Rosa? When are we going to get nand cache?
I'm even more amazed that some people seem ready to move computer platforms just to get a speed increase a few weeks earlier. By the time you've finished moving everything over to a Windows laptops the new Macbooks will of been available for a few weeks.
It never ends either. As soon as Merom chips are in the MacBook range everyone will just move on to the next thing. When are Apple going to put quad cores in their high end products? When are the Macbooks going to be updated with Santa Rosa? When are we going to get nand cache?
I'm even more amazed that some people seem ready to move computer platforms just to get a speed increase a few weeks earlier. By the time you've finished moving everything over to a Windows laptops the new Macbooks will of been available for a few weeks.
afrowq
Apr 8, 11:05 PM
Everything depends on your work and needs right? For me...I'm short format and tweak every frame.
In terms of full disclosure I own FCP 4 suite and CS 5 master suite and own all the major Apple products (hardware and software). I also run Windows 7 in bootcamp.
Short format work is all about After Effects. Motion is 5 years behind and offers an incomplete feature set in comparison. After Effects marries up well with the tools from big 3d players, like Maxon and C4D. Its a great pipeline.
I'll watch with interest the announcements next week, but the release of an "iMovie Pro" won't interest me...and it seems like that's where Apple is headed. They now are fixated on Consumers Lite and Consumers Plus.
Apple is also doing everything to push me away from it's platform, with it's anti-Flash crusade, and it's complete inability to support Any (I mean ANY of the top 5-7) professional GPUs.
For the serious Pro Apple is living on borrowed time and the Steve Jobs reality-distortion field is weakening. Redmond is calling. Increasingly serious content professionals are listening. I never imagined these words coming from my mouth. But it's the truth.
11thindian, do you still think it's only professionals that I know?
In terms of full disclosure I own FCP 4 suite and CS 5 master suite and own all the major Apple products (hardware and software). I also run Windows 7 in bootcamp.
Short format work is all about After Effects. Motion is 5 years behind and offers an incomplete feature set in comparison. After Effects marries up well with the tools from big 3d players, like Maxon and C4D. Its a great pipeline.
I'll watch with interest the announcements next week, but the release of an "iMovie Pro" won't interest me...and it seems like that's where Apple is headed. They now are fixated on Consumers Lite and Consumers Plus.
Apple is also doing everything to push me away from it's platform, with it's anti-Flash crusade, and it's complete inability to support Any (I mean ANY of the top 5-7) professional GPUs.
For the serious Pro Apple is living on borrowed time and the Steve Jobs reality-distortion field is weakening. Redmond is calling. Increasingly serious content professionals are listening. I never imagined these words coming from my mouth. But it's the truth.
11thindian, do you still think it's only professionals that I know?
Virtualball
Apr 19, 02:13 PM
According to Wikipedia It was released in Feb before the iPhone was released..
Please stop spreading FUD. If you knew anything about the history of the iPhone, you would know that it was announced and previewed at MacWorld 2007. That means they showed the world the interface, the phone, and most of the features in January 2007.
Also, http://gizmodo.com/#!234901/samsung-f700-smartphone-looks-awfully-familiar
"Samsung is also trying to one up its competitor [link leads to Apple] with one specific feature... a slide out full-QWERTY keyboard."
Seriously, this is all FUD.
Please stop spreading FUD. If you knew anything about the history of the iPhone, you would know that it was announced and previewed at MacWorld 2007. That means they showed the world the interface, the phone, and most of the features in January 2007.
Also, http://gizmodo.com/#!234901/samsung-f700-smartphone-looks-awfully-familiar
"Samsung is also trying to one up its competitor [link leads to Apple] with one specific feature... a slide out full-QWERTY keyboard."
Seriously, this is all FUD.
aafuss1
Aug 6, 05:48 PM
What about TV Show downloads in the UK? Pleeeeaaaase!!! :rolleyes:
Looking foward to these Mac Pros though, my Dad is definatley going to buy one. :D
Thanks, Joe.
That would be good-if BBC signs up. Aussie's already have TV shows (for $1.99)-but on the Nine Network's nineMSN (http://ninemsn.com.au)site.
Keeping track of WWDC time-use the Extra-Clocks. Not as accurate as a internet updating clock, but does the job for me.
iPod shuffle-not being updated (because of the nano),but at least Apple gave those owners a volume limit.
Looking foward to these Mac Pros though, my Dad is definatley going to buy one. :D
Thanks, Joe.
That would be good-if BBC signs up. Aussie's already have TV shows (for $1.99)-but on the Nine Network's nineMSN (http://ninemsn.com.au)site.
Keeping track of WWDC time-use the Extra-Clocks. Not as accurate as a internet updating clock, but does the job for me.
iPod shuffle-not being updated (because of the nano),but at least Apple gave those owners a volume limit.
balamw
Apr 8, 06:26 AM
I wonder if this has more to do with reward zone coupons and 18 month no interest financing.
Have you ever seen an RZ coupon that didn't say "excludes Apple products" along with Bose and a number of other carveouts. Financing may be a different issue.
B
Have you ever seen an RZ coupon that didn't say "excludes Apple products" along with Bose and a number of other carveouts. Financing may be a different issue.
B
LethalWolfe
Apr 10, 12:45 AM
I'm a little confused...why was Avid presenting at a Final Cut Pro User Group's meeting anyway? Do they just come in and are like "Hey, you've all made a mistake!" or something?
Long story short, because the people that make up the groups want it and the other companies (Adobe, Avid, Canon, AJA, Blackmagic, etc.,) don't want to pass up a chance to talk to their demographic directly. Although still FCP-centric there are many other tools that editors are interested in learning about and the user groups accommodate that. Apple hasn't really been on the ball the last few years and companies like Adobe and Avid have been stepping up their game which, in my comings and goings, has kicked up the most interest in non-Apple software by FCP users I've seen since I first bought FCP 9 years ago.
Sure, there are die-hard fanboys but most editors realize these are just tools and want the best ones for the job and right now there is more competition in the prosumer price range than ever. For example, Apple Color used the best deal in town by far for coloring grading apps but last year Blackmagic purcahsed DaVinci (the gold standard in color correction) and dropped the price to $1000 for the software-only version. Perviously the lowest point of entry to get a DaVinci was over $200,000, AFAIK. Baselight, another high-end color grading system, just announced a Baselight plug-in for FCP that'll be available this fall for "less than $1000".
Lethal
Long story short, because the people that make up the groups want it and the other companies (Adobe, Avid, Canon, AJA, Blackmagic, etc.,) don't want to pass up a chance to talk to their demographic directly. Although still FCP-centric there are many other tools that editors are interested in learning about and the user groups accommodate that. Apple hasn't really been on the ball the last few years and companies like Adobe and Avid have been stepping up their game which, in my comings and goings, has kicked up the most interest in non-Apple software by FCP users I've seen since I first bought FCP 9 years ago.
Sure, there are die-hard fanboys but most editors realize these are just tools and want the best ones for the job and right now there is more competition in the prosumer price range than ever. For example, Apple Color used the best deal in town by far for coloring grading apps but last year Blackmagic purcahsed DaVinci (the gold standard in color correction) and dropped the price to $1000 for the software-only version. Perviously the lowest point of entry to get a DaVinci was over $200,000, AFAIK. Baselight, another high-end color grading system, just announced a Baselight plug-in for FCP that'll be available this fall for "less than $1000".
Lethal
amin
Aug 19, 09:42 AM
You make good points. I guess we'll learn more as more information becomes available.
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
bedifferent
Apr 10, 10:42 PM
I guess there's a lot of drama among the industry about Apple's refusal to release any kind of road map for FCP, not unlike their other products, and apparently a lot of people are starting to jump ship to Adobe's offerings. Everyone is pretty worried about this new overhaul because the guy who botched iMovie is the guy now in charge of FCP. I'm not into video editing, and I've never never used FCP or any product like it, but after hearing about all the drama and excitement surrounding this new overhaul I'm pretty stoked to see what happens.
My friend, who is a documentary film maker, was hired by Apple as a designer working with FCP engineers. In the past, we had differing views on FCP; I believed Apple was dropping it as well as other pro-sumer based products while she thought they wouldn't.
After recently speaking, and w/o breaking her NDA, she said she's disappointed. The project managers and engineers squabble a lot, and the designers (all almost film-makers and editors) aren't getting much input. According to her, Apple needs to fire the management and instate those focused on bringing the product to a new pro-sumer level. There appears to be a lot of mixed reviews, and that (as like Aperture) FCP is an attempt to bridge consumer and prosumer engines creating a big mess.
We'll see.
The guy who 'botched' iMovie is the same person that created Final Cut and continues to work on Final Cut. Randy Ubillos has been the head of Apple's video editing suites/applications for as long as I can remember.
�and according to those close to FCP development, therein lies the issue...
My friend, who is a documentary film maker, was hired by Apple as a designer working with FCP engineers. In the past, we had differing views on FCP; I believed Apple was dropping it as well as other pro-sumer based products while she thought they wouldn't.
After recently speaking, and w/o breaking her NDA, she said she's disappointed. The project managers and engineers squabble a lot, and the designers (all almost film-makers and editors) aren't getting much input. According to her, Apple needs to fire the management and instate those focused on bringing the product to a new pro-sumer level. There appears to be a lot of mixed reviews, and that (as like Aperture) FCP is an attempt to bridge consumer and prosumer engines creating a big mess.
We'll see.
The guy who 'botched' iMovie is the same person that created Final Cut and continues to work on Final Cut. Randy Ubillos has been the head of Apple's video editing suites/applications for as long as I can remember.
�and according to those close to FCP development, therein lies the issue...
NY Guitarist
Apr 5, 07:23 PM
I hope the next release of FCS integrates the different apps within the suite under a single UI.
The whole "Send to" export concept always seemed like an awkward workaround for using this package as a "suite".
As sad as it was to see Apple kill off Shake, my hope is that it will be reborn inside FC as the node based compositor portion of the package. Motion inherited some of Shake's features, notably SmoothCam, so hopefully more of Shake will live on in FCP.
I'd really like to see FCS become of a single app where the "suite" of apps becomes more of a "mode" of operating. In other words if you choose to do editing the UI can switch to a mode that focuses on that, as with compositing, titles (LiveType) or audio editing (Soundtrack).. and so on.
The whole "Send to" export concept always seemed like an awkward workaround for using this package as a "suite".
As sad as it was to see Apple kill off Shake, my hope is that it will be reborn inside FC as the node based compositor portion of the package. Motion inherited some of Shake's features, notably SmoothCam, so hopefully more of Shake will live on in FCP.
I'd really like to see FCS become of a single app where the "suite" of apps becomes more of a "mode" of operating. In other words if you choose to do editing the UI can switch to a mode that focuses on that, as with compositing, titles (LiveType) or audio editing (Soundtrack).. and so on.
Awakener
Apr 13, 11:40 AM
You're going to be paying for a data plan anyway, so why not make some of that money back in a subsidy?
Yeah, I really don't get why you wouldn't buy with a subsidy. You're basically going to pay either AT&T or Verizon either way, so what's the difference whether you have a contract or not? EXCEPT, now there is talk iPhone 5 will be carrier independent! http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/02/11/why-a-tiny-iphone-could-be-a-big-deal/
HTC is outselling iPhone 4 atleast in some markets.
http://m.bgr.com/2011/03/31/htc-thunderbolt-outselling-iphone-4-at-verizon-wireless-stores-analyst-claims/
It today the news looks more likely iPhone 5 may be delayed:
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20110413PD212.html
Yeah, I really don't get why you wouldn't buy with a subsidy. You're basically going to pay either AT&T or Verizon either way, so what's the difference whether you have a contract or not? EXCEPT, now there is talk iPhone 5 will be carrier independent! http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/02/11/why-a-tiny-iphone-could-be-a-big-deal/
HTC is outselling iPhone 4 atleast in some markets.
http://m.bgr.com/2011/03/31/htc-thunderbolt-outselling-iphone-4-at-verizon-wireless-stores-analyst-claims/
It today the news looks more likely iPhone 5 may be delayed:
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20110413PD212.html
milo
Sep 13, 07:05 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet.
Not true, according to the article. They said it wasn't easy, but they were able to max out all 8 cores. You can see the Activity Monitor graph all filled up.
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
That's how it is now, at least with multiple apps. I bet it's possible to program for an unspecified number of multiple cores, and there may be apps doing it already.
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
Read the article again, they WERE able to max them out, just not easily. Based on that, OSX seems to be able to scale already. Developers just need to start writing apps that are more MP friendly.
Not true, according to the article. They said it wasn't easy, but they were able to max out all 8 cores. You can see the Activity Monitor graph all filled up.
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
That's how it is now, at least with multiple apps. I bet it's possible to program for an unspecified number of multiple cores, and there may be apps doing it already.
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
Read the article again, they WERE able to max them out, just not easily. Based on that, OSX seems to be able to scale already. Developers just need to start writing apps that are more MP friendly.
madhatter61
Mar 23, 10:36 AM
Widescreen is great for movie watching, and the spec-lover in me is all over that... but it�s not very flexible for portrait use. (Which is how you hold a tablet one-handed, and is how you see the most content on a web page or scrolling document.)
A 10.1� 1280x800 screen is actually almost exactly the same screen area as an iPad: the iPad is 45.2 sq. in., and the 10.1 is 45.8 sq. in.
Held in portrait mode, the 10.1 is .75� taller... but .5� narrower than an iPad. I don�t think I�d care for that. (But with 1280x800 you do gain 32 pixels of width, and 256 pixels of height. Still not great for portrait use.)
The 8.9 display, though�which seems to save a few bucks�is an interesting option for dropping the price floor on �real� tablets. (Not that I�d settle for Android�s failings. As pointed out: specs alone don�t make a good car, nor a good computer, nor a good tablet!)
Ha ha :D Good thinking!
Actually if you look at Xoom and Samsung 10.1 are both 16:10 ratio ... perfect for movies ... the iPAD is 4x3 old TV ratio ... creates the need for filler top/side bars... I think that is called letterboxing ... CRS?
The key advantage for iPAD is in Landscape there is more vertical space for the virtual keyboard ... duh?
Also key here is PPI and is the heart of the display issue. Apple wants the same density of PPI so software development has a common display requirement. Then all apps work across the board. That is why Apple has hundreds of thousands of apps that work.
A 10.1� 1280x800 screen is actually almost exactly the same screen area as an iPad: the iPad is 45.2 sq. in., and the 10.1 is 45.8 sq. in.
Held in portrait mode, the 10.1 is .75� taller... but .5� narrower than an iPad. I don�t think I�d care for that. (But with 1280x800 you do gain 32 pixels of width, and 256 pixels of height. Still not great for portrait use.)
The 8.9 display, though�which seems to save a few bucks�is an interesting option for dropping the price floor on �real� tablets. (Not that I�d settle for Android�s failings. As pointed out: specs alone don�t make a good car, nor a good computer, nor a good tablet!)
Ha ha :D Good thinking!
Actually if you look at Xoom and Samsung 10.1 are both 16:10 ratio ... perfect for movies ... the iPAD is 4x3 old TV ratio ... creates the need for filler top/side bars... I think that is called letterboxing ... CRS?
The key advantage for iPAD is in Landscape there is more vertical space for the virtual keyboard ... duh?
Also key here is PPI and is the heart of the display issue. Apple wants the same density of PPI so software development has a common display requirement. Then all apps work across the board. That is why Apple has hundreds of thousands of apps that work.
xxBURT0Nxx
Apr 7, 09:54 AM
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
I know about the whole nvidia/intel lawsuit, but to say that intel forced apple to use the IGP is not correct imo. Yes they may have said if you want to use integrated graphics, they must be our integrated graphics on sandy bridge, but obviously apple could still have chosen to use discrete graphics as they did in some of the macbook pros, however seeing them absent on the airs and the 13" mbp shows that apple didn't have enough space to include discrete on top of the new processors. I see what you are saying, but the op said intel made apple use their graphics in a machine that costs this much!?!? not true apple could have easily added amd graphics if they wanted to, however due to cost/design/whatever they use integrated graphics in their smaller laptops!
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
I know about the whole nvidia/intel lawsuit, but to say that intel forced apple to use the IGP is not correct imo. Yes they may have said if you want to use integrated graphics, they must be our integrated graphics on sandy bridge, but obviously apple could still have chosen to use discrete graphics as they did in some of the macbook pros, however seeing them absent on the airs and the 13" mbp shows that apple didn't have enough space to include discrete on top of the new processors. I see what you are saying, but the op said intel made apple use their graphics in a machine that costs this much!?!? not true apple could have easily added amd graphics if they wanted to, however due to cost/design/whatever they use integrated graphics in their smaller laptops!
zacman
Apr 19, 02:22 PM
So the interesting fact is:
Verizon iPhone release didn't help Apple to stop losing marketshare although everyone said the deal will quadruple iPhone sales. :rolleyes:
iPhone Q1/11: 19 million (+ 2.5 million)
Android Q1/11: 38 million (+8 million)
Ouch. No wonder they are now sueing HTC and Samsung. If you can't beat them in the market, beat them in court. Apple must have learned that from Nokia (like they learned the choppy animations when you start third party apps in iOS 4.3.2 from Symbian).
Verizon iPhone release didn't help Apple to stop losing marketshare although everyone said the deal will quadruple iPhone sales. :rolleyes:
iPhone Q1/11: 19 million (+ 2.5 million)
Android Q1/11: 38 million (+8 million)
Ouch. No wonder they are now sueing HTC and Samsung. If you can't beat them in the market, beat them in court. Apple must have learned that from Nokia (like they learned the choppy animations when you start third party apps in iOS 4.3.2 from Symbian).