mmmcheese
Jul 14, 03:37 PM
As usual though they come with 50% of the necessary RAM :rolleyes:, why Apple can't get this right I don't know.
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
1) This is all rumour and speculation...
2) At the price that OEMs charge for memory, less RAM is better. We can fill it with whatever we pick.
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
1) This is all rumour and speculation...
2) At the price that OEMs charge for memory, less RAM is better. We can fill it with whatever we pick.
AppleScruff1
Apr 10, 02:49 AM
Rockwell doesn't exist anymore, it's Broadwell now ;) After that it will be Sky Lake (16nm) and Skymont (11nm).
If these latest names hold true. :D
If these latest names hold true. :D
hulugu
Mar 18, 10:57 PM
What pacifist ever has a realistic chance of becoming the next "commander-in-chief"?
That's why 5P's contention is so ridiculous.
Candidates must paint themselves as "strong" and capable of leading our military, otherwise there'd be little chance they'd be elected as president.
Foreign adventurism is as American as apple pie, but post-World War II it's become a structural constant that no single president is going to change. Paul talks, but when it came down to actually withdrawing US troops from foreign bases, I seriously doubt that it would go as smoothly as fivepoint and Paul suggest.
It's a worthwhile consideration of Obama that he seems more hawk than dove these days, but I don't see another viable candidate from 2008 that would have done any better because these are difficult and complex problems.
That's why 5P's contention is so ridiculous.
Candidates must paint themselves as "strong" and capable of leading our military, otherwise there'd be little chance they'd be elected as president.
Foreign adventurism is as American as apple pie, but post-World War II it's become a structural constant that no single president is going to change. Paul talks, but when it came down to actually withdrawing US troops from foreign bases, I seriously doubt that it would go as smoothly as fivepoint and Paul suggest.
It's a worthwhile consideration of Obama that he seems more hawk than dove these days, but I don't see another viable candidate from 2008 that would have done any better because these are difficult and complex problems.
Doctor Q
Jul 14, 04:02 PM
top heavy is just idiotic.Case designers aren't perfect, but they aren't idiots either. Some PCs have power supplies on top, despite the top heaviness and the extra path for the power cable. What's the reason? There must be some tradeoff involved or they'd never build them that way.
netdog
Aug 11, 10:22 AM
What OS will the iPhone be running?
OS Xm
OS Xm
aegisdesign
Sep 13, 12:30 PM
The Mac Pro isn't for most people. It's for professionals and professional applications, which are usally multithreaded, and will take advantage of the capabilities.
If you have a complaint about all these cores and not being able to take advantage of them, then this is not the computer for you. You're probably not using the software that will take advantage of them, so let it go and stop whining about it. For the those of us that do, this is great news.
It was just a general point, not a whine, so don't get your panties in a bunch. And some of the applications that don't take advantage of multiple cores currently are Adobe Photoshop and Quicktime which both rarely use more than two cores and sometimes only one. Both pretty important to professionals.
If you have a complaint about all these cores and not being able to take advantage of them, then this is not the computer for you. You're probably not using the software that will take advantage of them, so let it go and stop whining about it. For the those of us that do, this is great news.
It was just a general point, not a whine, so don't get your panties in a bunch. And some of the applications that don't take advantage of multiple cores currently are Adobe Photoshop and Quicktime which both rarely use more than two cores and sometimes only one. Both pretty important to professionals.
iGary
Aug 5, 05:15 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.
iPod - No.
MacBook - No.
MacBook Pro - No.
MacPro - Yes.
Xserve - Yes.
Displays - Yes.
Leopard Preview - Yes.
iPhone - Ha ha ha ha ha ha.
adjuster
Mar 26, 06:06 PM
There is one feature I really need--the ability to run TimeMachine on an encrypted disk. Does the full disk encryption in Lion allow Time Machine to run in real time. With Snow Leopard, Time Machine will operate only after the system is shut down.
Kevin Monahan
Apr 6, 02:20 PM
Unless you have an extreme PC...Adobe makes no sense (unless you are using the Quadro nVidia cards in a Mac Pro). Sure, the Merc engine increases performance for a few transitions and filters....but rendering is still necessary in MOST cases!
Premiere Pro makes sense in a lot of cases for Mac users. It makes the most sense for After Effects artists, like yourself, as you can dynamic link directly to After Effects from the Premiere Pro timeline. As you pointed out, Macs work great with Premiere Pro and the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 card. More and more cards are being supported as time moves forward. Want a certain card to add Mercury Playback engine hardware acceleration? Make a request here: http://www.adobe.com/go/wish
Not sure what you mean by "unless you have an extreme PC, Adobe makes no sense?" Yes, you need more RAM and a decent NVIDIA card to make Premiere Pro really fly on a PC-it's a 64 bit application-but even modest PCs do just fine with Premiere Pro. If Apple puts out a 64 bit application, you can bet that you should be looking at upgrading your Mac with a lot more RAM, more cores on the GPU, etc., as well. Need more info on tuning your system with Premiere Pro? Watch this: http://tv.adobe.com/watch/learn-premiere-pro-cs5/optimize-a-computer-for-mercury-playback-engine/
You wrote that rendering is still necessary in most cases. Really? What kind of system are you on? I've never had to render, even on my '09 MacBook Pro with no NVIDIA card and the Mercury Playback Engine in software mode.
You say that CUDA accelerates only a "few" video filters and transitions? There are a lot more than that! Upgrade to Premiere Pro 5.0.3 and you'll see the following GPU accelerated effects:
- Alpha Adjust
- Basic 3D
- Black & White
- Brightness & Contrast
- Color Balance (RGB)
- Color Pass
- Color Replace
- Crop
- Drop Shadow
- Extract
- Fast Color Corrector
- Feather Edges
- Gamma Correction
- Garbage Matte (4, 8, 16)
- Gaussian Blur
- Horizontal Flip
- Levels
- Luma Corrector
- Luma Curve
- Noise
- Proc Amp
- RGB Curves
- RGB Color Corrector
- Sharpen
- Three-way Color Corrector
- Timecode
- Tint
- Track Matte
- Ultra Keyer
- Video Limiter
- Vertical Flip
Bull Shark: Bull Shark Attacks
the Bull Shark any day!
Bull+shark+attack+in+lake+
eyes - Bull sharks thrive
Latest Shark Attack News
Bullsharks
Bull-Nose-Shark; Shark Attacks
shark attack are extremely
white shark attacks whale,
Fla Shark Attack photos
Premiere Pro makes sense in a lot of cases for Mac users. It makes the most sense for After Effects artists, like yourself, as you can dynamic link directly to After Effects from the Premiere Pro timeline. As you pointed out, Macs work great with Premiere Pro and the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 card. More and more cards are being supported as time moves forward. Want a certain card to add Mercury Playback engine hardware acceleration? Make a request here: http://www.adobe.com/go/wish
Not sure what you mean by "unless you have an extreme PC, Adobe makes no sense?" Yes, you need more RAM and a decent NVIDIA card to make Premiere Pro really fly on a PC-it's a 64 bit application-but even modest PCs do just fine with Premiere Pro. If Apple puts out a 64 bit application, you can bet that you should be looking at upgrading your Mac with a lot more RAM, more cores on the GPU, etc., as well. Need more info on tuning your system with Premiere Pro? Watch this: http://tv.adobe.com/watch/learn-premiere-pro-cs5/optimize-a-computer-for-mercury-playback-engine/
You wrote that rendering is still necessary in most cases. Really? What kind of system are you on? I've never had to render, even on my '09 MacBook Pro with no NVIDIA card and the Mercury Playback Engine in software mode.
You say that CUDA accelerates only a "few" video filters and transitions? There are a lot more than that! Upgrade to Premiere Pro 5.0.3 and you'll see the following GPU accelerated effects:
- Alpha Adjust
- Basic 3D
- Black & White
- Brightness & Contrast
- Color Balance (RGB)
- Color Pass
- Color Replace
- Crop
- Drop Shadow
- Extract
- Fast Color Corrector
- Feather Edges
- Gamma Correction
- Garbage Matte (4, 8, 16)
- Gaussian Blur
- Horizontal Flip
- Levels
- Luma Corrector
- Luma Curve
- Noise
- Proc Amp
- RGB Curves
- RGB Color Corrector
- Sharpen
- Three-way Color Corrector
- Timecode
- Tint
- Track Matte
- Ultra Keyer
- Video Limiter
- Vertical Flip
Bill McEnaney
Apr 28, 02:57 PM
...so what you said about doubting and not believing is not true.
I was making a general point. Skunk is asking about a specific one. If I deny that I believe some proposition, that may because I haven't formed any opinion about whether it's true. If I haven't formed any opinion about whether that proposition is true, I neither believe that proposition, doubt it, nor believe that it's false. I've suspended judgment about it. You ask me whether I like lobster. I say "no" because I haven't tried it. Since I haven't tried it, I have no idea whether I'll like it. I'll tell you, "Let's wait and see whether I'll like it." Skunk told me that he didn't hate me. I'm glad he doesn't hate me, but I don't know whether he likes me. If he dislikes me, that's all right. But if he says that he doesn't hate me, that doesn't imply that he likes me.
No, folks, I haven't been talking in circles.
I was making a general point. Skunk is asking about a specific one. If I deny that I believe some proposition, that may because I haven't formed any opinion about whether it's true. If I haven't formed any opinion about whether that proposition is true, I neither believe that proposition, doubt it, nor believe that it's false. I've suspended judgment about it. You ask me whether I like lobster. I say "no" because I haven't tried it. Since I haven't tried it, I have no idea whether I'll like it. I'll tell you, "Let's wait and see whether I'll like it." Skunk told me that he didn't hate me. I'm glad he doesn't hate me, but I don't know whether he likes me. If he dislikes me, that's all right. But if he says that he doesn't hate me, that doesn't imply that he likes me.
No, folks, I haven't been talking in circles.
Island Dog
Aug 25, 08:24 PM
Right. Because the whole "if your battery's serial number falls within this range, this range, or this range" concept was so terribly difficult to grasp.
Yep. My serial falls into the range and the website still won't accept it. I guess I will have to sit on hold Monday morning.
Yep. My serial falls into the range and the website still won't accept it. I guess I will have to sit on hold Monday morning.
richard4339
Sep 18, 11:42 PM
I still think it's funny that everyone thinks these Macbook Pros are "long overdue" - when, exactly, did the FIRST Dell laptop with C2D ship? I thought it was supposed to be around tomorrow...but surely it couldn't have been before last Monday or so at the earliest.
So that's, what? A week behind in the worst case scenario? Oh God...
However - if they waited till November, then yeah, I'd agree that they were overdue...:)
Dell has staggered release dates. Today began shipping for the lower end Merom processors (2.0 and 2.16ghz)... the highest end 2.33ghz one was shipping October 1.
So that's, what? A week behind in the worst case scenario? Oh God...
However - if they waited till November, then yeah, I'd agree that they were overdue...:)
Dell has staggered release dates. Today began shipping for the lower end Merom processors (2.0 and 2.16ghz)... the highest end 2.33ghz one was shipping October 1.
sunfast
Aug 11, 10:09 AM
These iPhone rumours continue to persist. I admit to being a sceptic, but maybe I'm wrong! I just hope that if they do do it, they do it well.
AtHomeBoy_2000
Apr 10, 09:37 AM
I would think this revision will support 3D video editing, right?
Vegasman
Apr 27, 08:43 AM
I think is quite conceivable that keeping those logs forever, not encrypting them, maintaining them despite an opt out, and not removing the timestamps was done in the spirit of: "Let's keep the data, maybe they will be useful at some point, and why bother do encrypt them, that is just some extra lines of code to write."
And it is this spirit which is somehow worrying.
This is the most likely explanation for me (too).
And it is this spirit which is somehow worrying.
This is the most likely explanation for me (too).
aarond12
Sep 13, 06:50 PM
Didn't you get the memo, Hyperthreading was a joke.
Obviously, since Intel is no longer creating new processors with HT.
By the way, previous poster, HT does not double the number of cores. Just the number of virtual cores. A Pentium 4 system with HT will run slower than a dual Pentium 4 system (with HT disabled) at the same clock speed.
Dual-core means there are essentially two separate CPUs on a single die.
Oh, and to the IT person who didn't know Clovertown is 64-bit... congratulations. You've shown everyone that you have an exceedingly small penis in having to argue that a $3000 Mac is slower than a $30,000 Windows DataCenter Edition PC system.
-Aaron-
Obviously, since Intel is no longer creating new processors with HT.
By the way, previous poster, HT does not double the number of cores. Just the number of virtual cores. A Pentium 4 system with HT will run slower than a dual Pentium 4 system (with HT disabled) at the same clock speed.
Dual-core means there are essentially two separate CPUs on a single die.
Oh, and to the IT person who didn't know Clovertown is 64-bit... congratulations. You've shown everyone that you have an exceedingly small penis in having to argue that a $3000 Mac is slower than a $30,000 Windows DataCenter Edition PC system.
-Aaron-
HBOC
Apr 7, 10:24 PM
haha. Now they will have to upsell more BS to make up for this loss. I can see them advertising to connect your PS3 or XBOX 360 to your TV/monitor and hook up an ethernet cable for $149 again... :rolleyes:
ten-oak-druid
Apr 25, 02:18 PM
Because Apple is not tracking you. Apple does not get any of that data, they will never see or touch it. It is data that is stored locally on your phone out of reach from everyone except you. "Apple tracks you" would mean that the phone is sending the data 'home', but it doesn't. APPLE HAS NO IDEA WHERE THE F YOU ARE OR WERE (and they probably couldn't care less)
Prove it.
Prove it.
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 06:11 AM
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
MrCrowbar
Aug 27, 04:26 PM
I have a few friends who own PC laptops with glossy screens and all of them have keyboards imprinted on their screens! I cannot say from experience if this happens with the MacBooks but i'd rather not risk it....
I've seen tons of laptops with the keyboard marks on the screen among powerbooks and the expensive Sony things. And those were all matte screens. My glossy Macbook screen is still as it was when I bought it (2 or 3 days after they were announced). The keyboard is a bit lower than on most laptops, so the re's quite some space between the keys and the screen whan it's closed. Unless you have a thick layer of chocklate/peanut butter/anal lube etc.. on your Keyboard, your screen is fine.
As opposed to Multimedia, I don't use foam barriers at all. Those things actually touch your screen, so if you have any dirt on the foam barrier, it's likely to scratch the screen if it moves. I like to bang my laptop lid like a car door and the Macbookhas this nice smooth sound when closeing (gotta love the magnetic latch). :-)
I've seen tons of laptops with the keyboard marks on the screen among powerbooks and the expensive Sony things. And those were all matte screens. My glossy Macbook screen is still as it was when I bought it (2 or 3 days after they were announced). The keyboard is a bit lower than on most laptops, so the re's quite some space between the keys and the screen whan it's closed. Unless you have a thick layer of chocklate/peanut butter/anal lube etc.. on your Keyboard, your screen is fine.
As opposed to Multimedia, I don't use foam barriers at all. Those things actually touch your screen, so if you have any dirt on the foam barrier, it's likely to scratch the screen if it moves. I like to bang my laptop lid like a car door and the Macbookhas this nice smooth sound when closeing (gotta love the magnetic latch). :-)
layte
Mar 31, 04:23 PM
Well at least you are an honest troll. Can't say that about everyone who starts attacking groups of people over their OS choice. *shrug*
:confused:
Where have I posted anything that could be construed as trolling? Or are we doing the 'I don't agree with you therefore it is trolling' thing?
:confused:
Where have I posted anything that could be construed as trolling? Or are we doing the 'I don't agree with you therefore it is trolling' thing?
hob
Apr 5, 07:21 PM
Really? And yet, it seems to be good enough for the top directors in the industry.... some of the recent Academy nominated films were all edited on Final Cut, including the Cohen Brothers' "True Grit", and "Winter's Bone". Also, David Fincher and Francis Ford Coppola used FCP on their last films... these are all people that have access and can afford cutting their films on AVID and yet, they recently choose Final Cut Pro... so why do people even question it? :rolleyes:
Because those big name directors can afford a whole team of assistants to manage their assets? ;)
Because those big name directors can afford a whole team of assistants to manage their assets? ;)
appleguy123
Feb 28, 06:32 PM
Where did I say he could not have an opinion? All I said was that his opinion should have no bearing on my life.
Agreed, but when you air your opinions in public, others have the right to challenge them.
I acknowledge that I misspoke. Opinions like this should be checked. Carry on.
Agreed, but when you air your opinions in public, others have the right to challenge them.
I acknowledge that I misspoke. Opinions like this should be checked. Carry on.
samcraig
Apr 27, 10:10 AM
Yes, the Apple fans were more correct than the anti-Apple folks. What we heard over the last week is that your personal data was being sent to Apple (it wasn't), that Apple is evil (it isn't), that Steve Jobs is lying (he isn't).
Strip away the hyperbole and you have a bug that is going to be fixed, data that is anonymized and not trackable to you unless you physically possess someone's Mac, and a story that made news last year and should never have gotten so big this time around. So yes, the Apple fans were more correct while the hype machine was wrong (as usual).
Maybe that's what you heard.
I heard that the database couldn't be user purged (easily)
The the database kept data from Day one
and that Location services being turned off didn't change the recording of the data.
Apple fans were "more correct". Wow. Ok - if you say so.... and if it helps you sleep at night
Strip away the hyperbole and you have a bug that is going to be fixed, data that is anonymized and not trackable to you unless you physically possess someone's Mac, and a story that made news last year and should never have gotten so big this time around. So yes, the Apple fans were more correct while the hype machine was wrong (as usual).
Maybe that's what you heard.
I heard that the database couldn't be user purged (easily)
The the database kept data from Day one
and that Location services being turned off didn't change the recording of the data.
Apple fans were "more correct". Wow. Ok - if you say so.... and if it helps you sleep at night
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario