nagromme
Aug 25, 03:27 PM
Call it what you want but these new MacBooks are crap. Yea there is people who are enjoying theirs without a hitch but look at all the reports of problems. Not once on this forum have we had a flood of problems with a single unit. Apple dropped the ball on this one. Poorly made unit
Actually EVERY single Apple product has had a "flood of problems" on this--and every other--Mac forum. Just as every product by every other company has had the same.
It's human nature (not to mention useful) to post when you have a problem. Not to say "by the way, my MacBook still runs fine this week" :D
ANY online forum will make the product in question seem more trouble-prone than reality. In fact, though, forums simply attract problems--and that's a very useful service they provide. Especially when solutions result, as often happens :)
Actually EVERY single Apple product has had a "flood of problems" on this--and every other--Mac forum. Just as every product by every other company has had the same.
It's human nature (not to mention useful) to post when you have a problem. Not to say "by the way, my MacBook still runs fine this week" :D
ANY online forum will make the product in question seem more trouble-prone than reality. In fact, though, forums simply attract problems--and that's a very useful service they provide. Especially when solutions result, as often happens :)
dialectician
Aug 7, 05:35 PM
Ok, so I take the point, made ad nauseam, that these features are not entirely new or innovative, since there are third party apps out there that do the same. And perhaps Apple is copying Vista, which doesn't really bother me either.
Bottom line: time machine will make a huge difference for most users in terms of preventing or remedying data loss!
Bottom line: time machine will make a huge difference for most users in terms of preventing or remedying data loss!
whatever
Nov 29, 12:42 PM
I'm certainly not on the record label's side on this, and I'm someone who almost never downloads anything online (not even free, MP3 of the week type tracks), but I think two important things we're glossing over are:
1 It is illegal to pirate music, regardless of whether or not a label gives their artists their fair share of profits.
2 Like it or not, most of the music on most people's portable music players is downloaded off of P2P. We "affluent" Mac users, who stay on the cutting edge of technology and come to places like MacRumors for heated exchanges about Apple news are not a typical cross section of music consumers.
I'd reckon most iPods are owned by the under 21 crowd, who've grown up with P2P as an ever-present option for music, and who swap songs with friends without thinking twice about it.
And as this generation gets older, things will only get worse for the labels, I figure.
On the other hand, at some point in time, this same generation will be in our courtrooms running the judicial system and in our capitol running our government, so it could be that some of these antiquated laws get modified for the digital age, but until then, refer back to Points 1 and 2 above and realize that despite how we may feel about the issue, it's illegal to download music freely and most people are doing it...
For starters, it's not illegal to download music freely. There are quite a few artists that allow free downloads of their music, so the first part of your statement "it's illegal to download music freely" is not correct. The second half of your statement ".... people are doing it....", assumes that everyone is guilty until they prove themselves innocent. Which is wrong.
I've been re-thinking my stance here. And if Apple decides to give a portion of their future iPod revenue to the music industry, then let them. I personally would never do it, but again, we're only talking a couple of dollars per iPod. Would Apple raise their prices on current models, most likely not. I would rather have Apple pay the iPod tax, instead of changing the iTunes Music Store's pricing model.
1 It is illegal to pirate music, regardless of whether or not a label gives their artists their fair share of profits.
2 Like it or not, most of the music on most people's portable music players is downloaded off of P2P. We "affluent" Mac users, who stay on the cutting edge of technology and come to places like MacRumors for heated exchanges about Apple news are not a typical cross section of music consumers.
I'd reckon most iPods are owned by the under 21 crowd, who've grown up with P2P as an ever-present option for music, and who swap songs with friends without thinking twice about it.
And as this generation gets older, things will only get worse for the labels, I figure.
On the other hand, at some point in time, this same generation will be in our courtrooms running the judicial system and in our capitol running our government, so it could be that some of these antiquated laws get modified for the digital age, but until then, refer back to Points 1 and 2 above and realize that despite how we may feel about the issue, it's illegal to download music freely and most people are doing it...
For starters, it's not illegal to download music freely. There are quite a few artists that allow free downloads of their music, so the first part of your statement "it's illegal to download music freely" is not correct. The second half of your statement ".... people are doing it....", assumes that everyone is guilty until they prove themselves innocent. Which is wrong.
I've been re-thinking my stance here. And if Apple decides to give a portion of their future iPod revenue to the music industry, then let them. I personally would never do it, but again, we're only talking a couple of dollars per iPod. Would Apple raise their prices on current models, most likely not. I would rather have Apple pay the iPod tax, instead of changing the iTunes Music Store's pricing model.
rezenclowd3
Dec 7, 02:53 PM
So another patch for today adding mechanical damage. Must have the newest firmware...
akac
Aug 7, 09:12 PM
Time Machine won't mean much when the HD fails. Back that azz up!
Actually - that's the exact scenario Apple talked about. HD goes down and with TIme Machine you can get all your stuff back. It backs up the system, files, apps - everything. That's almost verbatim from Apple's mouth.
Actually - that's the exact scenario Apple talked about. HD goes down and with TIme Machine you can get all your stuff back. It backs up the system, files, apps - everything. That's almost verbatim from Apple's mouth.
HyperZboy
Apr 8, 01:30 AM
You are an idiot to believe any of that. BB wants to save stock for their Sunday ads. That is the drive to bring customers in. They do this with any limited product. It's their nature. They need a certain number that matches their ad. They will tell you they are out of stock but they are waiting for Sunday.
Oh, so I'm an idiot to believe any of that and you're an idiot to believe OTHER chains don't do the same thing?
HAHA! Thank You! You made me laugh. :D
Oh, so I'm an idiot to believe any of that and you're an idiot to believe OTHER chains don't do the same thing?
HAHA! Thank You! You made me laugh. :D
generik
Aug 6, 03:10 AM
No Macbook Pros?? I hope there won't be any. My MBP gets to stay top of the line for few more weeks ;)
This kind of thinking is truly lame, just buy a Dell and go for penis enlargement surgury with the money you saved. No one will know the difference.
This kind of thinking is truly lame, just buy a Dell and go for penis enlargement surgury with the money you saved. No one will know the difference.
outlawarth
Apr 11, 01:23 PM
Analysts can just shove it. Complete BS all over the place. So.. according to them, we're going to have OSX Lion, iOS5, iPhone5, new iPods AND iPad 3... ALL IN THE FALL?! Complete bull. Oh, and throw in macbook pro updates for the later part of the fall, as usual. Just think about that for a second.
Now, let me remember, when was the last time they were wrong.. oh wait, that's right, iPad 2. Last I remember, it was, you won't see it till May/June at the earliest. WRONG. And after analysts vs. bloggers report, it seems bloggers are more right than analysts.
Anyways, after the 1st paragraph I wrote, I have no doubt in my mind that this is impossible. Last time Apple tried something like this, if I recall, it was Mobile Me, iPhone 3G + iOS2. It was a mess. Jobs himself said it was a mistake (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10006873-93.html) they'll never make again. So, when thinking about everything that is rumored by analysts to be coming out this fall, yeah, don't think so.:rolleyes:
Edit 2: ipad 2 entered production 1 month b4 apple announcing, so no freak'n 3 months as I've heard around rumor sites.
+1... Thank you.
Now, let me remember, when was the last time they were wrong.. oh wait, that's right, iPad 2. Last I remember, it was, you won't see it till May/June at the earliest. WRONG. And after analysts vs. bloggers report, it seems bloggers are more right than analysts.
Anyways, after the 1st paragraph I wrote, I have no doubt in my mind that this is impossible. Last time Apple tried something like this, if I recall, it was Mobile Me, iPhone 3G + iOS2. It was a mess. Jobs himself said it was a mistake (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10006873-93.html) they'll never make again. So, when thinking about everything that is rumored by analysts to be coming out this fall, yeah, don't think so.:rolleyes:
Edit 2: ipad 2 entered production 1 month b4 apple announcing, so no freak'n 3 months as I've heard around rumor sites.
+1... Thank you.
Sydde
Mar 20, 06:56 PM
But they have worked so hard, all these decades, to diminish the "one man, one vote" to something much less than that.
Well, you see, it is not about the one-man-one-vote thing. That works just fine. You just have to make sure you keep the wrong men from voting.
Well, you see, it is not about the one-man-one-vote thing. That works just fine. You just have to make sure you keep the wrong men from voting.
notjustjay
Apr 27, 10:28 AM
"Calculating a phone's location using just GPS satellite data can take up to several minutes."
Then how is car-navigation working?
The same thing - it can take up to a few minutes to establish a solid GPS lock. I own a Garmin GPSMAP 60csx (a hiking/geocaching GPS) which is getting a bit long in the tooth now (purchased in 2006) but at the time, the SiRFstar III chip that powers it was able to establish a location WAY faster than the previous GPS units I owned -- but even that meant a minute, maybe two. All of the Garmin and TomTom traffic GPS's I've used take a similar amount of time to acquire a signal lock.
Then how is car-navigation working?
The same thing - it can take up to a few minutes to establish a solid GPS lock. I own a Garmin GPSMAP 60csx (a hiking/geocaching GPS) which is getting a bit long in the tooth now (purchased in 2006) but at the time, the SiRFstar III chip that powers it was able to establish a location WAY faster than the previous GPS units I owned -- but even that meant a minute, maybe two. All of the Garmin and TomTom traffic GPS's I've used take a similar amount of time to acquire a signal lock.
milo
Jul 20, 04:34 PM
I think Logic can only use two cores/processors with a cludge to use the other two on a quad (by pretending it's a remote machine). Someone told me this though so I'm not 100% on that.
This is true. Logic will use up to about half the available processing power. Using the kludge (which is pretty simple but has some limitations) you can get close to all of it. Which allows for a ton more power than any of the dual G5s.
Still, apple needs to update Logic ASAP to use the full power without a hack. I can't believe it's taken them this long, they BETTER make the fix for all quad machines and not just intel boxes.
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
I don't buy that. Apple needs a workstation machine with the fastest available chips. PC's will use them in workstations, it would make no sense to cripple the top of the line desktop machine! Servers are distinguished from the pro line because they have a completely different form factor and feature set, no need to add artificial distincions.
Neither Apple or Dell operate in bubbles. They both realize that these chips belong in real servers and also requires an OS that can support such chips.
You don't think ANY pc makers will ship workstations with kentsfield? Why not? This is a chip that would be perfect for a workstation, you think nobody will take the opportunity to use it? The chips are fast as hell, what makes you think they only belong in servers? Are there features that can only be taken advantage of in a server and not in a workstation?
This is true. Logic will use up to about half the available processing power. Using the kludge (which is pretty simple but has some limitations) you can get close to all of it. Which allows for a ton more power than any of the dual G5s.
Still, apple needs to update Logic ASAP to use the full power without a hack. I can't believe it's taken them this long, they BETTER make the fix for all quad machines and not just intel boxes.
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
I don't buy that. Apple needs a workstation machine with the fastest available chips. PC's will use them in workstations, it would make no sense to cripple the top of the line desktop machine! Servers are distinguished from the pro line because they have a completely different form factor and feature set, no need to add artificial distincions.
Neither Apple or Dell operate in bubbles. They both realize that these chips belong in real servers and also requires an OS that can support such chips.
You don't think ANY pc makers will ship workstations with kentsfield? Why not? This is a chip that would be perfect for a workstation, you think nobody will take the opportunity to use it? The chips are fast as hell, what makes you think they only belong in servers? Are there features that can only be taken advantage of in a server and not in a workstation?
ninethirty
Aug 6, 03:15 PM
You have absolutely no chance of winning any legal battle based on what you've described here.
Also, while you're whining about who stole what from who, maybe change your 'save' icon on your site. It's nearly identical to Apples.
As Apple applied for the trademark, it will not be approved.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Also, while you're whining about who stole what from who, maybe change your 'save' icon on your site. It's nearly identical to Apples.
As Apple applied for the trademark, it will not be approved.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
mikethebigo
Apr 6, 10:23 AM
Does anyone know if the IGP in these processors is underclocked compared to the variants used in the MacBook Pros?
dante@sisna.com
Aug 18, 04:53 AM
Untill the cooling-solution starts to leak fluids, that is ;)?
Not likely to happen.
I have used liquid cooling setups in my PC's that were not nearly as well built as the AC Delco inpired Quad G5 without any problems for more than 5 years running.
Besides, my $99 a year apple care will more than cover this.
There are minimal to no reports of problems with the Quad G5 cooling system. I've run 3 of these for nearly 9 months with no problems.
DJO
Not likely to happen.
I have used liquid cooling setups in my PC's that were not nearly as well built as the AC Delco inpired Quad G5 without any problems for more than 5 years running.
Besides, my $99 a year apple care will more than cover this.
There are minimal to no reports of problems with the Quad G5 cooling system. I've run 3 of these for nearly 9 months with no problems.
DJO
ten-oak-druid
Apr 11, 01:09 PM
Iphone 5 on Sprint?
Machead III
Sep 19, 11:52 AM
lolol did you see Steve? He invented MacTop. new laptoP.
rofl. it is g5
rofl. it is g5
Multimedia
Jul 21, 12:20 PM
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
gauriemma
Jul 27, 01:25 PM
I never thought there'd come a day when I needed to know anything about what kind of chips Intel was coming out with.
Evangelion
Sep 13, 01:10 PM
The OS takes advantage of the extra 4 cores already therefore its ahead of the technology curve, correct? Gee, no innovation here...please move along folks. :rolleyes:
Uh, last time I checked, Windows can take advantage of multiple cores just fine. Do you think that multithreading is some Black Magic that only MacOS can do? Hell, standard Linux from kernel.org can use 512 cores as we speak!
Related to this: Maybe not 512-way SMP, but here (http://www.linux-mips.org/wiki/IP27_boot_messages) is what it looks like when Linux boots on 128-way SGI Origin supercomputer. Note, the kernel that is booting is 2.4.1, which was released in early 2001. Things have progressed A LOT since those day.
OS X works with quad core == "Ahead of technology curve"... puhleeze!
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support
Windows works just fine with dual-core. It really does. To Wndows, dual-core is more or less similar to typical SMP, and Windows has supported SMP since Windows NT!
I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores.
Any reason why it wouldn't work? And did you even read the Anandtech-article? They conducted their benchmarks in Windows XP! So it obviously DID work with four cores! And it DID show substantial improvement in performance in real-life apps! Sheesh! Dial tone that fanboysihness a bit, dude.
Uh, last time I checked, Windows can take advantage of multiple cores just fine. Do you think that multithreading is some Black Magic that only MacOS can do? Hell, standard Linux from kernel.org can use 512 cores as we speak!
Related to this: Maybe not 512-way SMP, but here (http://www.linux-mips.org/wiki/IP27_boot_messages) is what it looks like when Linux boots on 128-way SGI Origin supercomputer. Note, the kernel that is booting is 2.4.1, which was released in early 2001. Things have progressed A LOT since those day.
OS X works with quad core == "Ahead of technology curve"... puhleeze!
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support
Windows works just fine with dual-core. It really does. To Wndows, dual-core is more or less similar to typical SMP, and Windows has supported SMP since Windows NT!
I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores.
Any reason why it wouldn't work? And did you even read the Anandtech-article? They conducted their benchmarks in Windows XP! So it obviously DID work with four cores! And it DID show substantial improvement in performance in real-life apps! Sheesh! Dial tone that fanboysihness a bit, dude.
kcmac
Aug 7, 08:54 PM
I don't believe that we have to wait until Spring 2007.:mad:
Oh well. Wait or not, Apple will still be way ahead of Microsoft!
I loved the Vista bashing. Better yet, it came from a French guy!:D
The French have been particularly strong lately. First Landis, Now M$. What happened to the white towel? :D ....sorry couldn't resist.
Oh well. Wait or not, Apple will still be way ahead of Microsoft!
I loved the Vista bashing. Better yet, it came from a French guy!:D
The French have been particularly strong lately. First Landis, Now M$. What happened to the white towel? :D ....sorry couldn't resist.
balamw
Apr 6, 04:14 PM
That's why Apple lost around 30% marketshare in less than two months when the Galaxy tab was released? You know: That's the tablet that runs an outdated phone OS and not even a tablet OS...
Link? Wasn't there the whole story a month or two ago that the actual number of Galaxy Tabs delivered to customers was much less than had been reported. How can this cause a 30% reduction in market share when the HIGH number of Galaxy Tabs was < 10% the number of iPads?
B
Link? Wasn't there the whole story a month or two ago that the actual number of Galaxy Tabs delivered to customers was much less than had been reported. How can this cause a 30% reduction in market share when the HIGH number of Galaxy Tabs was < 10% the number of iPads?
B
blvdeast
Aug 7, 06:22 PM
hey, i got it.
lets say you have a folder on the dock, and you open it, it opens in the dok itself. and you can scroll left and right to pass through like iphoto speed. and you can have more then one dock and they would like stack on top/side of each other to have several "folder" open, and you do a shortcut and your dock goes normal. i know my idea sounds like a mess but i'm sure apple can polish it up
Cause you can only have so many folder icons in a folder window so i'm sure that it would be about the same.
As for the new features, I love them and can't wait to use it, but it is easy to see where Apple gets its inspiration from
Time Machine- Just an easy and fancy backup program
iChat Share Screen- Its like a VNC connection. I do it all the time between my linux desktop and ibook all the time. If you can have both screens at the same time and drag files in between to download would be awesome
Tabbed Chat Windows- Open source has been all over this for a while
Spaces- Virtual Desktops. Probably inspired by linux, and perfected
I mean its great updates and improvements, but I'm still waiting for innovation. Like expose. I want a feature to improve the use of my computer, not just awesome features
lets say you have a folder on the dock, and you open it, it opens in the dok itself. and you can scroll left and right to pass through like iphoto speed. and you can have more then one dock and they would like stack on top/side of each other to have several "folder" open, and you do a shortcut and your dock goes normal. i know my idea sounds like a mess but i'm sure apple can polish it up
Cause you can only have so many folder icons in a folder window so i'm sure that it would be about the same.
As for the new features, I love them and can't wait to use it, but it is easy to see where Apple gets its inspiration from
Time Machine- Just an easy and fancy backup program
iChat Share Screen- Its like a VNC connection. I do it all the time between my linux desktop and ibook all the time. If you can have both screens at the same time and drag files in between to download would be awesome
Tabbed Chat Windows- Open source has been all over this for a while
Spaces- Virtual Desktops. Probably inspired by linux, and perfected
I mean its great updates and improvements, but I'm still waiting for innovation. Like expose. I want a feature to improve the use of my computer, not just awesome features
anim8or
Apr 6, 10:13 AM
Asset management is easy if you are organized. If you're not, no amount of asset management software can help you!
I 100% agree.
Using AVID at work was a steep learning curve for me, coming from a FCP background.
If anything asset management TELLS you how to manage your work rather than letting you do it how you wish to do it.... Organisation is key.
I 100% agree.
Using AVID at work was a steep learning curve for me, coming from a FCP background.
If anything asset management TELLS you how to manage your work rather than letting you do it how you wish to do it.... Organisation is key.
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:
No comments:
Post a Comment