ChaosAngel
Apr 2, 11:44 AM
Hi all,
I'm currently testing Mac OS X Lion (as a Mac Dev), but I’m interested to hear peoples thoughts on how they think it will compare to Windows 8. For those who haven't seen, a lot of Windows 8 information has already been leaked.
In my opinion Windows 8 is already looking very good and although I’m loving Mac OS X Lion, I can't help but think that the advantage OS X used to have over Windows is quickly being eaten away.
Personally, I really hope Apple have some big new features in Lion that they haven't yet revealed (maybe waiting for WWDC?).
Thoughts? :apple:
I'm currently testing Mac OS X Lion (as a Mac Dev), but I’m interested to hear peoples thoughts on how they think it will compare to Windows 8. For those who haven't seen, a lot of Windows 8 information has already been leaked.
In my opinion Windows 8 is already looking very good and although I’m loving Mac OS X Lion, I can't help but think that the advantage OS X used to have over Windows is quickly being eaten away.
Personally, I really hope Apple have some big new features in Lion that they haven't yet revealed (maybe waiting for WWDC?).
Thoughts? :apple:
aeaglex07
Apr 29, 03:52 PM
I noticed most of the criticism stems from the changes in iCal and Address Book which are both disgusting. Sadly they havent changed yet
wvuwhat
Dec 4, 07:40 PM
Famas
-Red Dot Site
Crossbow
Semtex, Willey pete, Claymore
Hardline pro, Hardcore pro, Marathon pro
RC, Care package, Chopper Gunner
I've got my ideal set-up for my style of play.
...AND I HATE HAVANA
-Red Dot Site
Crossbow
Semtex, Willey pete, Claymore
Hardline pro, Hardcore pro, Marathon pro
RC, Care package, Chopper Gunner
I've got my ideal set-up for my style of play.
...AND I HATE HAVANA
twoodcc
Aug 11, 09:59 PM
fair call, added power, costs, fuss etcetc. not worth it i guess
i think it might be worth it on some systems, but not this one. this one has had a rough life
i think it might be worth it on some systems, but not this one. this one has had a rough life
obeygiant
Apr 25, 05:18 PM
Is anyone mad as the two *******s who actually beat this person up? I am. They should be charged with aggravated assault.
0010101
Oct 29, 11:57 AM
No, you have it backwards. Software companies don't release products because the hardware is out there. They release because they've added new features and want user to upgrade and new consumers to come. Consumers buy the hardware because the software is available for it. A computer without software is just a really expensive paper weight. It's Adobe's lack of a native Creative Suite than keeps professionals from picking up MacPros - and Apple said just that during their last financial results call.
You think graphic designers aren't interested in getting an Intel Mac and the performance gains that come with it? They get higher performance running Photoshop on the G5's they have now than running it on the Intel Macs under Rosetta. So why spend the money to degrade your production apps?
Adobe has nothing to gain from not releasing a native Creative Suite. I mean, it's not like Apple is going to hold a press conference tomorrow and announce they are going back to IBM chips. This is the future and if Adobe doesn't ship a new Creative Suite they will be no different than the companies that never ported their apps to PPC native versions and stayed with 68k - giving up.
The graphics professionals I know don't scurry out to buy a new Mac everytime apple lifts it's cheek and plops one out.
Software companies make their money by writing their software to the largest audience, and the Intel Mac is currently a very small portion of an already small segment of the general 'computer user' population.
If your argument is that if Adobe were to write a universal version of their software that graphics professionals would run out instantly to buy new hardware, that's just not reality.. not when they're still paying off the G5's they just bought a year or two ago.
The vast majority of people I know who use an Apple computer for a living in the visual arts sector have not made the switch to an Intel Mac, and don't plan to anytime soon, regardless of what Adobe does.
In fact, talk around the campfire seems to revolve around wether Intel Mac native apps will run any better or faster than the new crop of Winblows apps.. with some 'jumping ship' to join the thousands of others who have moved to the Windows platform in recent years.
You think graphic designers aren't interested in getting an Intel Mac and the performance gains that come with it? They get higher performance running Photoshop on the G5's they have now than running it on the Intel Macs under Rosetta. So why spend the money to degrade your production apps?
Adobe has nothing to gain from not releasing a native Creative Suite. I mean, it's not like Apple is going to hold a press conference tomorrow and announce they are going back to IBM chips. This is the future and if Adobe doesn't ship a new Creative Suite they will be no different than the companies that never ported their apps to PPC native versions and stayed with 68k - giving up.
The graphics professionals I know don't scurry out to buy a new Mac everytime apple lifts it's cheek and plops one out.
Software companies make their money by writing their software to the largest audience, and the Intel Mac is currently a very small portion of an already small segment of the general 'computer user' population.
If your argument is that if Adobe were to write a universal version of their software that graphics professionals would run out instantly to buy new hardware, that's just not reality.. not when they're still paying off the G5's they just bought a year or two ago.
The vast majority of people I know who use an Apple computer for a living in the visual arts sector have not made the switch to an Intel Mac, and don't plan to anytime soon, regardless of what Adobe does.
In fact, talk around the campfire seems to revolve around wether Intel Mac native apps will run any better or faster than the new crop of Winblows apps.. with some 'jumping ship' to join the thousands of others who have moved to the Windows platform in recent years.
iMeowbot
Oct 28, 04:59 PM
Didn't the Open Darwin project get shut down a few months back already?
Yes, that project closed down, but OpenDarwin, and the associated Web site, and the decision to give up, were all independent of Apple.
I don't like the concept of Apple loosing its open kernel due to someone reading between the lines on what is legal and what is right. Thats sad.
This is really the same thing that was being done by the earlier project. The claim from Apple all this time has been that Darwin (but not the higher level OS X stuff) is open source; this is supposed to be happening.
Yes, that project closed down, but OpenDarwin, and the associated Web site, and the decision to give up, were all independent of Apple.
I don't like the concept of Apple loosing its open kernel due to someone reading between the lines on what is legal and what is right. Thats sad.
This is really the same thing that was being done by the earlier project. The claim from Apple all this time has been that Darwin (but not the higher level OS X stuff) is open source; this is supposed to be happening.
belovedmonster
Jan 5, 06:15 PM
If it was live you wouldnt get all the split screen editing etc. It would be quite a linear and boring presentation.
Editing the feed can give emphasis to certain aspects and also cut out anything that goes wrong.
Havent you ever seen live TV? Doing Picture in Picture effects (split screen) is nothing that cant be done with a simple press of a button at the mixing desk and doesn't represent any problem for live broadcasts what so ever. In fact, actually editing those effects in afterwards would require way more work than just doing it live on the fly. No one in their right mind would do it after the event if they didn't have to.
Editing the feed can give emphasis to certain aspects and also cut out anything that goes wrong.
Havent you ever seen live TV? Doing Picture in Picture effects (split screen) is nothing that cant be done with a simple press of a button at the mixing desk and doesn't represent any problem for live broadcasts what so ever. In fact, actually editing those effects in afterwards would require way more work than just doing it live on the fly. No one in their right mind would do it after the event if they didn't have to.
kuwisdelu
Apr 12, 05:43 PM
Neither iLife nor Office are part of the OS, so why are we comparing them anyway?
GadgetAddict
Apr 29, 01:55 PM
What stage will this be stable enough to use as your main OS? :apple:
When it is publicly released.
When it is publicly released.
Ender17
May 3, 11:10 PM
Pity I can't buy the product.
Why are Apple spending so much money on advertising when they can't even keep up with demand? Makes no sense.I found a store online selling them
http://store.apple.com/us
Why are Apple spending so much money on advertising when they can't even keep up with demand? Makes no sense.I found a store online selling them
http://store.apple.com/us
mattcube64
Apr 9, 10:28 PM
My first foray into either series! :)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5189/5604518861_bfd913b136_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5189/5604518861_bfd913b136_b.jpg
mackensteff
Jan 5, 07:41 PM
I didn't see any replies to my idea about posting a counter to tick of the DD:HH:MM:SS until climax, I mean Keynote.;) Usually I take that as a bad sign, but you know how you all get when you have blue b..., you can't think straight. So is this idea worth pursuing, kinda like the widgets available, but might be nice to have directly tied to the link with no spoilers.
Check the front page right above this story for the count down. I think the blue b... things are starting to affect your vision, but I thought it was the opposite, you go blind if you... I guess we now know the truth
Check the front page right above this story for the count down. I think the blue b... things are starting to affect your vision, but I thought it was the opposite, you go blind if you... I guess we now know the truth
cherrypop
Oct 11, 09:00 AM
Makes total sense to me: Microsoft's Zune introduction naturally raised the bar for MP3 players. Some of the press Zune is getting for its larger display, clean design and usability is adding to the pressure for Apple to ship an answer to the Zune.
Apple is ready to announce their rumored video/wireless iPod
Apple is ready to announce their rumored video/wireless iPod
iOrlando
Apr 15, 12:46 PM
looks like alot of a/lum/nigh.
dalvin200
Sep 12, 07:03 AM
five hours to go.. grrr..
zzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzz
psingh01
Mar 24, 04:35 PM
I remember getting this free (along with a white 'X' t-shirt) at a local Mac store. Don't know where my disc is, but I still wear the shirt :D
simsaladimbamba
Apr 2, 11:48 AM
Is Windows 8 then Windows 7.0, like Windows Seven is actually Windows 6.1?
Burgess07
Apr 29, 06:46 PM
I don't like this. Apple, give us an option to choose the iOS slider buttons!
Or I will throw all my apple products out the window. :o:mad::apple:
Like this? :p
283521
Or I will throw all my apple products out the window. :o:mad::apple:
Like this? :p
283521
Bistroengine
Apr 5, 04:38 PM
Maybe I'm being harsh, maybe what the world really needs is a 3 hour Zoomba infomercial app. Or an app extolling the benefits of the snuggie. And the excuse 'hey dude, I work in advertising' is not a good reason to criticise people who see this app for what it is, a pile of s***. If you work in advertising, the best thing you could do is make a note of the fact that everyone who DOESN'T work in advertising thinks this is a pile of s*** and modify your advertising strategy accordingly.
It's like people at burger king reacting to the fact that everyone hates burger king by saying 'these burgers are useful to me, because I work at burger king'
But clearly, anyone who claims they may find the iAd Gallery App useful is instantly labeled a 'Moron', tarred, feathered and burned at the stake. Apparently you seem to have extensive knowledge of what everyone else thinks. Have you taken a survey of EVERYONE who DOESN'T work in advertising to confirm your assessment that the iAd App is a 'Pile of ****'? Add to that, your Burger King analogy is invalid because you can't possibly claim that EVERYONE hates Burger King. The only claim you could possibly make from any of this is that the majority of MacRumors forum members commenting on this post are grossly mis-informed and incredibly immature.
It's like people at burger king reacting to the fact that everyone hates burger king by saying 'these burgers are useful to me, because I work at burger king'
But clearly, anyone who claims they may find the iAd Gallery App useful is instantly labeled a 'Moron', tarred, feathered and burned at the stake. Apparently you seem to have extensive knowledge of what everyone else thinks. Have you taken a survey of EVERYONE who DOESN'T work in advertising to confirm your assessment that the iAd App is a 'Pile of ****'? Add to that, your Burger King analogy is invalid because you can't possibly claim that EVERYONE hates Burger King. The only claim you could possibly make from any of this is that the majority of MacRumors forum members commenting on this post are grossly mis-informed and incredibly immature.
notromeel
Apr 25, 02:52 PM
I don't see it. Holding my iPhone at nearly the same angle and about the same distance they look identical.
You're holding it wrong.
You're holding it wrong.
SilentPanda
Apr 21, 11:50 AM
If I want to revert to apathy from a previously engaged stance, I can't. I have to actively disapprove or actively approve.
That is true. Just make sure you never want to revert to apathy and you'll be fine.
It's also a system that currently serve no purpose whatsoever on these forums. People are worrying about it way too much.
That is true. Just make sure you never want to revert to apathy and you'll be fine.
It's also a system that currently serve no purpose whatsoever on these forums. People are worrying about it way too much.
Warbrain
Dec 13, 10:53 AM
Haha, nope.
This is the company that released an EDGE phone as it's first model. No way they're jumping to LTE this early in the game.
This is the company that released an EDGE phone as it's first model. No way they're jumping to LTE this early in the game.
JayMysterio
Dec 6, 07:59 PM
the kill streak rewards are so low because its practically impossible to get more then 11 kills in one game with the ****** spawns. (unless you get lucky) 25 was feasible in Modern Warfare because it was a much better game and strategic players who knew how to play could get 25 kills cause they were fighting dip *****. in Black Ops everyone (dip ***** and good players alike) seems to be forced into the same run and gun strategy.
This goes back to Treyarch's seeming desire to reduce the trenched in camping snipers. The real reason that 25 was feasible was because of stacking killstreaks. If you've seen the vids of people getting nukes in record time, it was all based on opening grenade spam salvo, hoping that gets enough for a killstreak, working to a copter, which lead to a nuke. Not necessarily anything based on skill.
Treyarch has wisely spaced the spawns far enough so opening grenade spams don't work ( unless it's Nuketown and the opposing team runs as a pack into a rolling holy frag grenade ), so if one does lucky with the opening it only leads to an RC XD or perhaps a SAM turret ( hardline pro changing of it is becoming tired, but they claim a fix is coming ), but no cheap additions to a more lethal killstreak.
The spawning issue which is infuriating at times, but does have a point. It completely destroys camping. Treyarch seemed to make a decision to nerf the whole snipe/camp thing, making sniping more difficult, and camping a risky & questionable proposition. Running & gunning is the way Black Ops seems to go, if you want to camp, stack killstreaks, modern warfare is the way to go. The amount of times I have seen someone going XX kills & 0 deaths I can count on one hand, while in MW2 I had done it quite a few times.
I think Black Ops has become a nice alternative, and not just a continuation of modern warfare. It gives players choices.
This goes back to Treyarch's seeming desire to reduce the trenched in camping snipers. The real reason that 25 was feasible was because of stacking killstreaks. If you've seen the vids of people getting nukes in record time, it was all based on opening grenade spam salvo, hoping that gets enough for a killstreak, working to a copter, which lead to a nuke. Not necessarily anything based on skill.
Treyarch has wisely spaced the spawns far enough so opening grenade spams don't work ( unless it's Nuketown and the opposing team runs as a pack into a rolling holy frag grenade ), so if one does lucky with the opening it only leads to an RC XD or perhaps a SAM turret ( hardline pro changing of it is becoming tired, but they claim a fix is coming ), but no cheap additions to a more lethal killstreak.
The spawning issue which is infuriating at times, but does have a point. It completely destroys camping. Treyarch seemed to make a decision to nerf the whole snipe/camp thing, making sniping more difficult, and camping a risky & questionable proposition. Running & gunning is the way Black Ops seems to go, if you want to camp, stack killstreaks, modern warfare is the way to go. The amount of times I have seen someone going XX kills & 0 deaths I can count on one hand, while in MW2 I had done it quite a few times.
I think Black Ops has become a nice alternative, and not just a continuation of modern warfare. It gives players choices.