xStep
Apr 10, 11:35 PM
Everyone is pretty worried about this new overhaul because the guy who botched iMovie is the guy now in charge of FCP.
Uh, iMovie was botched?
Uh, iMovie was botched?
GregA
Apr 5, 06:06 PM
Would be grand if all this hype was for iMovie. :)
Apple needs to distinctly separate Final Cut Pro from consumer apps.
Personally as a Pro-sumer, I'd like to see iMovie align with the iPad version (use the timeline!) and sync to that. I'd like Final Cut Express as an option to do more advanced editing with my iMovie library - just choose which app I want. But these don't belong with NAB announcements :)
Apple needs to distinctly separate Final Cut Pro from consumer apps.
Personally as a Pro-sumer, I'd like to see iMovie align with the iPad version (use the timeline!) and sync to that. I'd like Final Cut Express as an option to do more advanced editing with my iMovie library - just choose which app I want. But these don't belong with NAB announcements :)
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
JFreak
Aug 8, 04:05 AM
Looks like this will be a significant upgrade. Tiger was not what it was promised to be, in my eyes at least, so now I'm thinking they have finally made it better than Panther.
Let's see...
Let's see...
Infrared
Apr 11, 07:56 AM
LOL, if you think final cut is from the 90's then Avid Media Composer is from the 50's. It's horrible GUI. I wouldn't learn it, if they paid me big bucks. Well I take that back, I would, but I would hate it. Avid Looks like a POS, the graphics designers at Avid have always been behind though. Look at Protools.
No kidding!
280734
Where's Picasso when you need him? :-)
Avid image was from here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYw4vvr7Aq4
No kidding!
280734
Where's Picasso when you need him? :-)
Avid image was from here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYw4vvr7Aq4
MrNomNoms
Apr 10, 04:08 AM
Hoping for some better multi-core support(although probably going to have to wait for Lion for the newer QuickTime engine) and a UI that isn't from the 90's. Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
In Lion they're providing AV Foundation which leads me to believe that QtKit will be a stripped down bare basic framework with AV Foundation going to be used for future heavy lifting projects. In Snow Leopard AV Foundation is provided but it is a private framework so the rumours a while ago that Lion version will be 'better' than the Snow Leopard sounds that it'll probably rely on AV Foundation in Snow Leopard but the Lion version, the one with the AV Foundation that is a public API, will probably have more features etc.
In Lion they're providing AV Foundation which leads me to believe that QtKit will be a stripped down bare basic framework with AV Foundation going to be used for future heavy lifting projects. In Snow Leopard AV Foundation is provided but it is a private framework so the rumours a while ago that Lion version will be 'better' than the Snow Leopard sounds that it'll probably rely on AV Foundation in Snow Leopard but the Lion version, the one with the AV Foundation that is a public API, will probably have more features etc.
~Shard~
Aug 25, 03:00 PM
Apple needs to address this situation appropriately. As their products gain higher profile, as their customer base increases and they gain market share, it's only logical to think that there will be a greater need for support. If nothing else, it's simple math - more Macs out there = more problems! Esepcially with how well the Intel Macs have been selling, I think Apple would be foolish to think that what was good enough a few years ago is still good enough today in terms of support.
Apple must also realize the importance of first impressions. Now more than ever new switchers are coming on board to the Intel platform, and if they have problems right off the bat and poor customer service and support, that's going to leave a sour taste in their mouth, and perhaps they may just get fed up and switch back.
Apple is so good at so many things - let's hope they ensure this is the case for their Support services as well.
Apple must also realize the importance of first impressions. Now more than ever new switchers are coming on board to the Intel platform, and if they have problems right off the bat and poor customer service and support, that's going to leave a sour taste in their mouth, and perhaps they may just get fed up and switch back.
Apple is so good at so many things - let's hope they ensure this is the case for their Support services as well.
ciTiger
Apr 11, 03:40 PM
Good! My iP4 will be the latest model longer! eheh:D
skunk
Mar 5, 04:12 AM
“teaching students from a young age that the homosexual lifestyle is perfectly natural … will [cause them to] develop into adults who are desensitized to the harmful, immoral reality of sexual deviance.”As if that was a bad thing.
jacg
Jul 27, 10:22 AM
Ah and where has the wireless mouse/kbd option gone in the store? Maybe they will be free with the upgraded iMacs.
According to the bluetooth mighty mouse info at apple.com, you still need a wired keyboard and mouse to install the thing. When you went for the wireless option before, did you get a wired keyboard too?
Also, are there any how-to guides for upgrading Yonah iMacs to Merom?
According to the bluetooth mighty mouse info at apple.com, you still need a wired keyboard and mouse to install the thing. When you went for the wireless option before, did you get a wired keyboard too?
Also, are there any how-to guides for upgrading Yonah iMacs to Merom?
DJMastaWes
Aug 26, 08:29 PM
Updated Wesbite Is Usually by 9 Eastern. Occasionally later. But usually then. :)
Eastern? That's 6:00AM Pacific? You think?
9:00AM Pacific sounds good.
Eastern? That's 6:00AM Pacific? You think?
9:00AM Pacific sounds good.
Stridder44
Aug 7, 04:14 PM
...You can also lock specific applications to specific Spaces, so you�ll always know where, say, Safari or Keynote is at all times.
Do you realize how awesome this would be at work???
Do you realize how awesome this would be at work???
vincenz
Apr 6, 10:22 AM
If the new airs are going to be anywhere near as powerful as the current MacBook pros, they're going to sell for sure.
DPazdanISU
Sep 19, 06:53 AM
Sorry but I've heard this so many times it gets pretty annoying. Dont assume to know what ppl want to use their Macbooks for. I want to use it for music production which can be very intensive on the processor, other people for graphics etc where a few seconds shaved off processing times when added up many times can make quite a difference to productivity.
Also, when the new chips come out it will instantly knock a chunk off the resell value - yes this is always the way with technology but buying when an update is coming soon seems silly.
i agree, I need a computer to encode video in iDVD because it takes forever on my PPC. That little difference in power is a big difference.
Also, when the new chips come out it will instantly knock a chunk off the resell value - yes this is always the way with technology but buying when an update is coming soon seems silly.
i agree, I need a computer to encode video in iDVD because it takes forever on my PPC. That little difference in power is a big difference.
AppleFreak89
Jun 8, 07:55 PM
I kind of take offense to the statement that the radioshack employees can ruin your credit. truth is it is impossible..there is no way to touch your credit when running an activation. the used phone incident sounded like a mistake, hardly the norm. I've never heard of that happening. Radioshack is connected to the carries and in fact have their own representative for each carrier. Also, Radioshack offers a 30-day policy same as everywhere. Oh and the cell-phones sold at Walmart, target and Sam's club are owned by Radioshack BTW.
iindigo
Mar 26, 07:35 AM
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Lion offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
sam10685
Jul 27, 10:14 PM
(I hate P4s)
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 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.
zoran
Oct 14, 02:50 PM
well its said that clovertown will be here early is that early/late november or early/late december, any new rumors regarding this subject?
Kan-O-Z
Mar 31, 02:57 PM
You could say the same thing about Apple though. The Apple fad will go away and the extremely closed ecosystem which seems to not be really developing much in terms of UI or having an actual roadmap could end iOS.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
I am an Apple fan and I do recognize pros and cons with both platforms. When you have control and integration of hardware and software, you have a much better experience, more stability, better overall hardware quality (both hardware and software), etc. The "open" systems don't control anything so anything goes, including installing any app you may find anywhere and customize things to your hearts content.
What I would like to say is that for 95% of people out there, the advantages of iOS are far more important than the advantages of Android. Honestly most people are very happy with all of the capabilities of the iPhone (and app store) all of which the iPhone performs beautifully. On top of that the Apple ecosystem is so easy and so integrated...Android can't compete. Think about renting a movie on your iPhone, streaming songs and videos to your TV, buying songs and books on the fly, etc...on top of which many ppl have extensive iTunes content and it integrates right in. Where do you start with Andriod with all this? And remember that people on this forum are the techies...and don't represent 95% of people out there.
Kan-O-Z
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
I am an Apple fan and I do recognize pros and cons with both platforms. When you have control and integration of hardware and software, you have a much better experience, more stability, better overall hardware quality (both hardware and software), etc. The "open" systems don't control anything so anything goes, including installing any app you may find anywhere and customize things to your hearts content.
What I would like to say is that for 95% of people out there, the advantages of iOS are far more important than the advantages of Android. Honestly most people are very happy with all of the capabilities of the iPhone (and app store) all of which the iPhone performs beautifully. On top of that the Apple ecosystem is so easy and so integrated...Android can't compete. Think about renting a movie on your iPhone, streaming songs and videos to your TV, buying songs and books on the fly, etc...on top of which many ppl have extensive iTunes content and it integrates right in. Where do you start with Andriod with all this? And remember that people on this forum are the techies...and don't represent 95% of people out there.
Kan-O-Z
Taustin Powers
Aug 12, 04:41 AM
Multi-quote madness!!! :eek:
agmaster
Apr 25, 03:35 PM
Wow, more people just trying to get money out of a successful company. Almost every phone tracks your location no matter what brand it is. I don't have an iPhone but there must be an option to turn off location tracking, but even if you did many great Apps out there wouldn't work if you did turn off location tracking.
doylecook
Mar 31, 06:44 PM
"But as Android's popularity has taken off and the number of manufacturers and devices utilizing it has exploded, Google has begun tightening its control over the operating system, perhaps recognizing that a purely open system might in fact not be best for consumers..."
Four legs good, two legs better.
Four legs good, two legs better.
0815
Apr 6, 02:34 PM
This can't be right. MR posters have assured me that the Xoom is better than the iPad. I mean, if you can't trust MR posters, whom can you trust?
Ballmer?
As someone who likes his Apple products, part of me laughs seeing numbers like this for the Xoom, but the other part thinks the same thing you post above--that Apple needs to have a successful competitor in the space to keep Apple's progress from stagnating. More competition will make them take bigger steps more quickly.
As long as SJ has some say he (and Apple) will follow his vision, not the competition (and this is a good thing) - the competition will follow Apple [Remember how Android Phone Prototypes looked like before the iPhone was out - just a copy of BlackBerry phones]
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first, although its idea of using a touch UI was not.
As Jobs explained, there was a simple UI demo done on a touch device originally designed to be a keyboard input prototype. That demo gave him the idea to go all touch on the iPhone. That's what he meant by "the tablet came first".
Since we know that during summer/fall the first iPhone UI concepts were done using iPods with wheels, his touch "eureka" moment probably came in late with the UI demo almost certainly done under OSX.
According to all known histories, the actual creation of iOS didn't begin until 2006. Prior to that, some at Apple were still proposing using Linux for the phone OS.
Maybe it should be put in these words: iOS was designed for the iPhone with a tablet in mind ....
I didn't know the "proposing Linux" part, very interesting - do you have any links on this so that I can read up on it?
Ballmer?
As someone who likes his Apple products, part of me laughs seeing numbers like this for the Xoom, but the other part thinks the same thing you post above--that Apple needs to have a successful competitor in the space to keep Apple's progress from stagnating. More competition will make them take bigger steps more quickly.
As long as SJ has some say he (and Apple) will follow his vision, not the competition (and this is a good thing) - the competition will follow Apple [Remember how Android Phone Prototypes looked like before the iPhone was out - just a copy of BlackBerry phones]
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first, although its idea of using a touch UI was not.
As Jobs explained, there was a simple UI demo done on a touch device originally designed to be a keyboard input prototype. That demo gave him the idea to go all touch on the iPhone. That's what he meant by "the tablet came first".
Since we know that during summer/fall the first iPhone UI concepts were done using iPods with wheels, his touch "eureka" moment probably came in late with the UI demo almost certainly done under OSX.
According to all known histories, the actual creation of iOS didn't begin until 2006. Prior to that, some at Apple were still proposing using Linux for the phone OS.
Maybe it should be put in these words: iOS was designed for the iPhone with a tablet in mind ....
I didn't know the "proposing Linux" part, very interesting - do you have any links on this so that I can read up on it?
mdntcallr
Sep 20, 04:10 PM
hey ill be happy as apple keeps the mac pro on the cutting edge, but anything to be able to bring the ram cost down would be awesome.
this buffered ram is expensive.
all the other ram out there is getting cheaper, but not this stuff they want in the mac pro.
this buffered ram is expensive.
all the other ram out there is getting cheaper, but not this stuff they want in the mac pro.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий