Sharky II
Sep 25, 10:39 AM
Can't believe aperture doesn't support more RAW types yet.
Until it supports more/all of the raw types, it will never be a real 'pro' application imho
Until it supports more/all of the raw types, it will never be a real 'pro' application imho
MrCrowbar
Oct 16, 11:21 PM
I would love something along the lines of a nano that made phone calls. I could even do without the numeric pad.
I'm with you. I already catched myself looking up a number in my nano's address book ("contacts") and looking for the "call" item. I'd love to have the main menu going "Music \n Phone \n Phone \n Extras etc." But the nano might actually be a little small for a phone. Try holding one at your ear for a minute. How about an add-on that you plug in on the bottom via the dock connector? Makes the thing a little longer and you can just upgrade your iPod. Kinda like the iTrip, but in the exact same design as the iPod itself.
I'm with you. I already catched myself looking up a number in my nano's address book ("contacts") and looking for the "call" item. I'd love to have the main menu going "Music \n Phone \n Phone \n Extras etc." But the nano might actually be a little small for a phone. Try holding one at your ear for a minute. How about an add-on that you plug in on the bottom via the dock connector? Makes the thing a little longer and you can just upgrade your iPod. Kinda like the iTrip, but in the exact same design as the iPod itself.
Michaelgtrusa
Mar 23, 01:07 PM
I see no issues with that.
SeaFox
Oct 27, 04:44 PM
- No spam management
- No full data set for the Address Book (still can't note bdays, etc.)
- No iCal integration with a fully editable calendar
Yup, I mirror those complaints. There is spam filtering, but I personally have no way to change the settings, I'd like to make them a little more restrictive. One thing I notice about the Address Book is the way it ranks phone numbers for display. This was a problem in the old Webmail as well.
The new Address Book search in the mailbox window is cool, but when it displays the phone number, it only shows one of the phone numbers for the contact, and it doesn't let you choose which one. It ranks the numbers as 1. Mobile, 2. Home, and 3. Work. So if I want the work number to display for a contact, the only option is to not list a mobile or home number for them! Even worse, it doesn't tell you which one it's using, either. All them would need to do is add a faint (m), (h), or (w) notation like they do other places in Webmail.
I'd also like to see screen real estate used a little better. The bar with "Feedback" "Prefrences" and the language is a waste, moving those to buttons on the main toolbar would be better, and I don't need the top with the Apple site tabs, or the links to the other .Mac areas, either. I tried to remove them with Firefox but I got a blank area at the bottom of the window the same size then, so I didn't gain any usuable space, also this removed the only Logout button on the page.
I do really like the new webmail overall in the end. Much less clicking needed to get things done. But it does need some polishing.
And the lack of a web-editable calendar function is just dumb. I sometimes think of just paying the $20 a year fee for Yahoo Mail Plus to get rid of the ads and transfer everything over ot that. Their calandar is a real must have for me. And I would get more reliable email service, but I want IMAP access.
Edit: The bar separating the message list from the preview pane can be moved up and down, but the position is not remembered and resets after you log out or go to the address book.
There's a "Get Mail" button. I hope I don't have to push that to check for new messages anymore. I would expect an webmail system using "the latest technologies" to have an AJAX interface and retrieve new messages periodically on it's own without having to reload the entire page.
- No full data set for the Address Book (still can't note bdays, etc.)
- No iCal integration with a fully editable calendar
Yup, I mirror those complaints. There is spam filtering, but I personally have no way to change the settings, I'd like to make them a little more restrictive. One thing I notice about the Address Book is the way it ranks phone numbers for display. This was a problem in the old Webmail as well.
The new Address Book search in the mailbox window is cool, but when it displays the phone number, it only shows one of the phone numbers for the contact, and it doesn't let you choose which one. It ranks the numbers as 1. Mobile, 2. Home, and 3. Work. So if I want the work number to display for a contact, the only option is to not list a mobile or home number for them! Even worse, it doesn't tell you which one it's using, either. All them would need to do is add a faint (m), (h), or (w) notation like they do other places in Webmail.
I'd also like to see screen real estate used a little better. The bar with "Feedback" "Prefrences" and the language is a waste, moving those to buttons on the main toolbar would be better, and I don't need the top with the Apple site tabs, or the links to the other .Mac areas, either. I tried to remove them with Firefox but I got a blank area at the bottom of the window the same size then, so I didn't gain any usuable space, also this removed the only Logout button on the page.
I do really like the new webmail overall in the end. Much less clicking needed to get things done. But it does need some polishing.
And the lack of a web-editable calendar function is just dumb. I sometimes think of just paying the $20 a year fee for Yahoo Mail Plus to get rid of the ads and transfer everything over ot that. Their calandar is a real must have for me. And I would get more reliable email service, but I want IMAP access.
Edit: The bar separating the message list from the preview pane can be moved up and down, but the position is not remembered and resets after you log out or go to the address book.
There's a "Get Mail" button. I hope I don't have to push that to check for new messages anymore. I would expect an webmail system using "the latest technologies" to have an AJAX interface and retrieve new messages periodically on it's own without having to reload the entire page.
Kilamite
Oct 6, 11:17 AM
I'm not saying its a necessity I'm just saying Apple's curve of sales is going up while Nokia and other manufactures are losing sales with the model suggested in the article.
I'm not saying Apple couldn't pull it of, maybe they can I'm just saying I'm skeptical of this report. That's all :)
You are pulling figures out of thin-air. Where is your proof that the reason Nokia and other manufactures aren't doing well is because they have more than one type of phone?
I'm not saying Apple couldn't pull it of, maybe they can I'm just saying I'm skeptical of this report. That's all :)
You are pulling figures out of thin-air. Where is your proof that the reason Nokia and other manufactures aren't doing well is because they have more than one type of phone?
lmalave
Nov 2, 10:13 PM
In respect to the dedicated graphics card, I totally agree with you here. I keep saying it, but a dedicated gaming machine made in the Apple style would absolutely vault them 5% in share overnight. Maybe more.
Hmm...interesting idea. Maybe Apple could offer a $100 upgrade to a decent video card in the MacBook and Mac mini. And brand those as the "gaming" versions of those machines. I think this would be worth it for Apple. Even though it would cannibalize some MBP sales, I think the increase in MacBook sales would be much larger than the slight drop in MBP sales...
EDIT: And hey, what about if in order to highlight the multithreaded Open GL capabilities in OS X, the "gaming versions" came with World of Warcraft preinstalled and optimized for multithreading? It would be a boon for Apple since WoW is so popular, and it would be good marketing for Blizzard, since WoW makes most of its money from subscriptions anyway...
Hmm...interesting idea. Maybe Apple could offer a $100 upgrade to a decent video card in the MacBook and Mac mini. And brand those as the "gaming" versions of those machines. I think this would be worth it for Apple. Even though it would cannibalize some MBP sales, I think the increase in MacBook sales would be much larger than the slight drop in MBP sales...
EDIT: And hey, what about if in order to highlight the multithreaded Open GL capabilities in OS X, the "gaming versions" came with World of Warcraft preinstalled and optimized for multithreading? It would be a boon for Apple since WoW is so popular, and it would be good marketing for Blizzard, since WoW makes most of its money from subscriptions anyway...
Fraaaa
Apr 21, 03:08 PM
1. Apple is an American company. Their products get released in the US first. The US market is and should remain their primary concern. If the US is going to LTE, that's where Apple needs to go.
2. Apple innovates. It's what they do. Innovate a way to offer LTE with acceptable battery life.
3. Processor speed for phones is overrated, especially when apps are written to account for legacy hardware in the wild. No one is going to write an A-5 only App as long as the iPad 1, iPhone 4 & 3GS level tech remains so widely held.
1. I believe Apple wants the best for their US and Non-US customers, you guys should stop differentiate yourselves from the rest of the world, you are not any special than us. No offence.
2. From the last financial report Q&A:
Q: How do you think of the maturity of LTE? And Apple's sense of urgency to get products out?
A: I was asked this question when we launched the iPhone with Verizon. The first generation of LTE chipsets forced a lot of design compromises. Some of those we are just not willing to make. We are extremely happy with the iPhone 4 and the iPhone 3GS. And hitting 18.6 million units was something much larger than we thought we could do this quarter. And to 3 more large carriers.
Innovating worth nothing if done wrong. I didn't say Apple will never adopt it. I said it might not be the best time at the moment. This statement from Apple seems in line with what I said.
3. This is the exact same thing that I said earlier:
when people will realize that computer usability lies in the software and not the hardware?
You say processor speed is overrated, that the actual iPhone are good enough, yet you disagree on LTE/4G to not be implemented this year? Isn't 3G good enough?
You say in two years time bla bla I'd wish I had 4G on my current iPhone, and why wouldn't I wish for a better processor? Make up your mind.
LTE coverage is already decent in the US thanks to verizon's aggressive rollout. They already cover 110 million Americans (over a third). They'll be in 145 markets by year's end, covering well over half of the US. Full coverage by 2013.
http://news.vzw.com/LTE/Overview.html
Immaterial. Package size is not directly proportional to die size as any sort of general rule. You also presume the iPhone 4's PCB is so dense it couldn't handle a larger package (if needed). All speculation on your part.
The battery is the same rating (25 whr) and the device gets the same (if not better in some tests) battery life than the iPad 1. Debunked.
Unsubstantiated claims followed by baseless speculation.
Of course mine are speculation, I brought the argument up because I'd like to hear someone else's opinion.
Rumors are saying the next iPhone iteration could be having the same package of the current iPhone. I'm bringing two facts up, the A5 die is bigger then the A4 as both are 45nm. And at the iPad2 keynote they said how could they manage to get the same hours of battery life with a much powerful processor, the answer was that their engineer had a workaround - later to be found an additional pack of battery.
Considered this I think that Apple will redesign the internals of the new iteration if they are going to use the same package.
About the network, this: Full coverage by 2013.
Second of all: Verizon. What about AT&T?
Third and I repeat this, you guys should not be considered special compared to the rest of the world.
The fact that Apple used GSM technology for the first iPhone was infact that they could rollout their product to other countries as CDMA is not adopted as much as GSM worldwide. The same applies to LTE/4G. There is no reason of adding hardware that can be adopted by a quarter of the customers if not less that that. It's a waste of money in design and implementation, let alone that even Apple is not willing to make the leap with compromise that are not willing to make by adopting this fairly new technology.
2. Apple innovates. It's what they do. Innovate a way to offer LTE with acceptable battery life.
3. Processor speed for phones is overrated, especially when apps are written to account for legacy hardware in the wild. No one is going to write an A-5 only App as long as the iPad 1, iPhone 4 & 3GS level tech remains so widely held.
1. I believe Apple wants the best for their US and Non-US customers, you guys should stop differentiate yourselves from the rest of the world, you are not any special than us. No offence.
2. From the last financial report Q&A:
Q: How do you think of the maturity of LTE? And Apple's sense of urgency to get products out?
A: I was asked this question when we launched the iPhone with Verizon. The first generation of LTE chipsets forced a lot of design compromises. Some of those we are just not willing to make. We are extremely happy with the iPhone 4 and the iPhone 3GS. And hitting 18.6 million units was something much larger than we thought we could do this quarter. And to 3 more large carriers.
Innovating worth nothing if done wrong. I didn't say Apple will never adopt it. I said it might not be the best time at the moment. This statement from Apple seems in line with what I said.
3. This is the exact same thing that I said earlier:
when people will realize that computer usability lies in the software and not the hardware?
You say processor speed is overrated, that the actual iPhone are good enough, yet you disagree on LTE/4G to not be implemented this year? Isn't 3G good enough?
You say in two years time bla bla I'd wish I had 4G on my current iPhone, and why wouldn't I wish for a better processor? Make up your mind.
LTE coverage is already decent in the US thanks to verizon's aggressive rollout. They already cover 110 million Americans (over a third). They'll be in 145 markets by year's end, covering well over half of the US. Full coverage by 2013.
http://news.vzw.com/LTE/Overview.html
Immaterial. Package size is not directly proportional to die size as any sort of general rule. You also presume the iPhone 4's PCB is so dense it couldn't handle a larger package (if needed). All speculation on your part.
The battery is the same rating (25 whr) and the device gets the same (if not better in some tests) battery life than the iPad 1. Debunked.
Unsubstantiated claims followed by baseless speculation.
Of course mine are speculation, I brought the argument up because I'd like to hear someone else's opinion.
Rumors are saying the next iPhone iteration could be having the same package of the current iPhone. I'm bringing two facts up, the A5 die is bigger then the A4 as both are 45nm. And at the iPad2 keynote they said how could they manage to get the same hours of battery life with a much powerful processor, the answer was that their engineer had a workaround - later to be found an additional pack of battery.
Considered this I think that Apple will redesign the internals of the new iteration if they are going to use the same package.
About the network, this: Full coverage by 2013.
Second of all: Verizon. What about AT&T?
Third and I repeat this, you guys should not be considered special compared to the rest of the world.
The fact that Apple used GSM technology for the first iPhone was infact that they could rollout their product to other countries as CDMA is not adopted as much as GSM worldwide. The same applies to LTE/4G. There is no reason of adding hardware that can be adopted by a quarter of the customers if not less that that. It's a waste of money in design and implementation, let alone that even Apple is not willing to make the leap with compromise that are not willing to make by adopting this fairly new technology.
AP_piano295
May 3, 09:00 AM
The effect of terrorists to the West is enormously magnified by our reaction to them. How many Western deaths have been caused through terrorism in the last 15 years. 5000? Probably less than 200 in the last 5 years.
How many soldiers have been killed in subsequent wars? Over 7000 (http://icasualties.org/).
How many civilians have been killed in these wars? 100s of thousands.
And how much are we spending on this? What is the 'opportunity cost' of that lost cash - which could have been spent on health care/research/education?
I think we need to learn to ignore the 'short game' of small terrorist outrages and instead concentrate on the 'long game', which the West is undoubtably winning.
Terrorists represent a tiny proportion of radicals, that bubble to the surface of large populations of unhappy, poor and repressed people. Those underlying populations are changing though... all across North Africa and the Arab world people are mobilising to gain democracy, spurred on by the slow liberalising Western influence of open communication technologies and culture. This 'long game' political change is MUCH more significant than OBL's death.
Take away the unhappy cultures that breed terrorists won't completely remove risk - but it will make terrorism more the action of criminals, and less of a 'clash of cultures'. Smart Western political leadership would sell terrorist outrages as 'random acts of criminal radicals' not 'we must go to war with the axis of evil'.
All Obama has to do is decide whether he can afford to stop propping up the US military industrial complex.
It is a bit like spending a trillion dollars trying to invent an anti lighting hat (rather unsuccessfully). While totally ignoring cancer research :confused:.
How many soldiers have been killed in subsequent wars? Over 7000 (http://icasualties.org/).
How many civilians have been killed in these wars? 100s of thousands.
And how much are we spending on this? What is the 'opportunity cost' of that lost cash - which could have been spent on health care/research/education?
I think we need to learn to ignore the 'short game' of small terrorist outrages and instead concentrate on the 'long game', which the West is undoubtably winning.
Terrorists represent a tiny proportion of radicals, that bubble to the surface of large populations of unhappy, poor and repressed people. Those underlying populations are changing though... all across North Africa and the Arab world people are mobilising to gain democracy, spurred on by the slow liberalising Western influence of open communication technologies and culture. This 'long game' political change is MUCH more significant than OBL's death.
Take away the unhappy cultures that breed terrorists won't completely remove risk - but it will make terrorism more the action of criminals, and less of a 'clash of cultures'. Smart Western political leadership would sell terrorist outrages as 'random acts of criminal radicals' not 'we must go to war with the axis of evil'.
All Obama has to do is decide whether he can afford to stop propping up the US military industrial complex.
It is a bit like spending a trillion dollars trying to invent an anti lighting hat (rather unsuccessfully). While totally ignoring cancer research :confused:.
twoodcc
Nov 21, 05:28 PM
sounds like a good idea to me. better battery life is always good ;)
mrcammy
Nov 11, 03:01 PM
Just wondering how Japan perceives Apple as a company - if anyone knows. I know they don't like Microsoft (as in Xbox). I can't imagine they sell many Apple computers over there. Ipods a different story?
toddybody
May 2, 02:31 PM
What is your point? If you have something to say, then say it, don't post useless links.
It's called sarcasm - some get it and some don't.
%IMG_DESC_12%
%IMG_DESC_13%
%IMG_DESC_14%
%IMG_DESC_15%
%IMG_DESC_16%
%IMG_DESC_17%
%IMG_DESC_18%
%IMG_DESC_19%
Reacent Post
It's called sarcasm - some get it and some don't.
sk58781111
Oct 7, 10:47 AM
3.5" was great in 2007 but not anymore. Apple needs to make a 4.2" iPhone ;)
UberMac
Sep 19, 03:35 PM
Hopefully this will address the issues some users have seen with the Mac Pro apparently not being able to boot beyond a black screen when using the XP disc to boot from. Although I would think that is more an issue of GFX than firmware on the Mac Pro...maybe they're the same thing!
Also, why two different downloads? Surely they could be incorporated into the same file...
Uber
Also, why two different downloads? Surely they could be incorporated into the same file...
Uber
mrkramer
Apr 23, 12:50 AM
Then how do you feel about our current president?
He's better than the McCain would have been in most things, but on a whole he gives in to the Republicans way too much. He passed their healthcare plan instead of one that would actually work, kept Guantanamo open, and as far as "National Security" goes he's about the same as Bush. So basically, he was the best of the two choices, but still not very good.
He's better than the McCain would have been in most things, but on a whole he gives in to the Republicans way too much. He passed their healthcare plan instead of one that would actually work, kept Guantanamo open, and as far as "National Security" goes he's about the same as Bush. So basically, he was the best of the two choices, but still not very good.
fragiledreams
Sep 15, 05:26 PM
Originally posted by King Cobra
At Pascack Hills, I have been on computers running NT4 and Windoze 2000, and both have *rarely* crashed on me. However, it's not common for me to see OS X crash on me. Even when I had 10.1 on my iMac 233 for a short time, it did not crash one time.
My point is that as stable as the Windoze OS is, as you point out, OS X, simply put, is even more stable. Although there are some issues with hardware, usually, that's with upgraded hardware, the OS performs very well under the power of the G4.
I have also heard about XP not crashing as much as the previous OSs. So I'll say it as it is: The Windoze OS is improving, but incremently closer to perfect. If an error pops up, at least explain what should be done about.
Ok.. you're right too.... I just don't like the fact that in some threads mac people use the "crapy OS" as a point in order for example to overcome the speed differences. If you like say that you prefer better the GUI in OSX, I don't have any problem with that. But saying that it is crap, bugy or unstable is untrue to say the least.
At Pascack Hills, I have been on computers running NT4 and Windoze 2000, and both have *rarely* crashed on me. However, it's not common for me to see OS X crash on me. Even when I had 10.1 on my iMac 233 for a short time, it did not crash one time.
My point is that as stable as the Windoze OS is, as you point out, OS X, simply put, is even more stable. Although there are some issues with hardware, usually, that's with upgraded hardware, the OS performs very well under the power of the G4.
I have also heard about XP not crashing as much as the previous OSs. So I'll say it as it is: The Windoze OS is improving, but incremently closer to perfect. If an error pops up, at least explain what should be done about.
Ok.. you're right too.... I just don't like the fact that in some threads mac people use the "crapy OS" as a point in order for example to overcome the speed differences. If you like say that you prefer better the GUI in OSX, I don't have any problem with that. But saying that it is crap, bugy or unstable is untrue to say the least.
aprofetto8
Apr 5, 09:45 AM
Fake. Not enough unicorn dust to be real.
CylonGlitch
Apr 5, 09:42 AM
The iPhone 4 was and still is the best
For some. My iPhone4 has been a pain in the ass when it comes to phone calls. I have a nearly 90% drop rate on phone calls. Those that do go through, no one can understand me. I think I need to exchange my phone.
For some. My iPhone4 has been a pain in the ass when it comes to phone calls. I have a nearly 90% drop rate on phone calls. Those that do go through, no one can understand me. I think I need to exchange my phone.
BenRoethig
Oct 30, 11:34 AM
http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/10/30/soundbooth/index.php
Macworld posted an article on the subject today. You can read it with the link above. I'm going to post a couple comments from the article by Adobe's John Nack.
Nack offers a different point of view. From his perspective, if Apple hadn�t switched to Intel processors, Soundbooth might very likely be a Windows application only. Apple�s migration to the Intel chip architecture �makes Mac development more attractive,� said Nack.
�Here�s the reality: Apple�s migration to Intel chips means that it�s easier to develop for both Mac and Windows, because instead of splitting development resources optimizing for two different chip architectures, you can focus on just one,� he wrote.
This is why the PowerPC machines need to go as quickly as everyone can buy an Intel machine. Making a intel only Mac Application is cheaper and less time consuming for the developer and is able to take advantage of any code optimization for the x86 platform. That makes it more likey that we'll get better software products and applications we normally wouldn't get. To be frank, developers had absolutely no reason to optimize PPC applications. The platform is too small to warrant it.
The follow snippet is something the platform as a whole should take note of. It should be pretty self explanatory.
Nack � a professed �die-hard� Mac user � also refers to �that vocal little group of zealots and forum trolls� he sees as particularly damaging to Mac users� reputations as a whole.
�You�re hurting the Mac platform. You�re hurting the Mac community. You need to crush a little aluminum foil against those antennae of yours, because you�re hurting everyone concerned. You�re making it harder (and less appealing) for people of goodwill to make the effort to support the Mac,� he said.
Macworld posted an article on the subject today. You can read it with the link above. I'm going to post a couple comments from the article by Adobe's John Nack.
Nack offers a different point of view. From his perspective, if Apple hadn�t switched to Intel processors, Soundbooth might very likely be a Windows application only. Apple�s migration to the Intel chip architecture �makes Mac development more attractive,� said Nack.
�Here�s the reality: Apple�s migration to Intel chips means that it�s easier to develop for both Mac and Windows, because instead of splitting development resources optimizing for two different chip architectures, you can focus on just one,� he wrote.
This is why the PowerPC machines need to go as quickly as everyone can buy an Intel machine. Making a intel only Mac Application is cheaper and less time consuming for the developer and is able to take advantage of any code optimization for the x86 platform. That makes it more likey that we'll get better software products and applications we normally wouldn't get. To be frank, developers had absolutely no reason to optimize PPC applications. The platform is too small to warrant it.
The follow snippet is something the platform as a whole should take note of. It should be pretty self explanatory.
Nack � a professed �die-hard� Mac user � also refers to �that vocal little group of zealots and forum trolls� he sees as particularly damaging to Mac users� reputations as a whole.
�You�re hurting the Mac platform. You�re hurting the Mac community. You need to crush a little aluminum foil against those antennae of yours, because you�re hurting everyone concerned. You�re making it harder (and less appealing) for people of goodwill to make the effort to support the Mac,� he said.
JGowan
Apr 5, 12:28 PM
I don't know if I qualify as a "fan boy" or not... I love technology, Apple just happens to have been the leader for a long time. Anyway, I'm not a fan of CR's criteria regardless of what they recommend. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.I hear ya. People would definitely say Fanboy James is talking Apple again, but looking around my world, I see Sanyo, Sony, Vizio, MS XBox, Pioneer, Toshiba and other logos. I like tech. I have more Apple stuff, but Apple simply makes more stuff that I like in certain ways than others do.
Those shouting Fanboy, take notice!
Those shouting Fanboy, take notice!
JAT
Apr 12, 03:11 PM
Ugh, outlook syncing to Exchange 2010 is still slow. Emails hit my iPhone instantly, as well as Outlook 2010. As for the Outlook it takes up to 30 seconds. Maybe they need to improve EWS???
Very slow on Office too. My 1G iPod Touch was faster.
They made Mac OS office very similar to the windows counterpart in the 2011 version. Granted its not 100% the same but the gap between office 2011 on mac and office 2011 on windows is very tiny now.
They made 2011 similar to not 2010.
Very slow on Office too. My 1G iPod Touch was faster.
They made Mac OS office very similar to the windows counterpart in the 2011 version. Granted its not 100% the same but the gap between office 2011 on mac and office 2011 on windows is very tiny now.
They made 2011 similar to not 2010.
basesloaded190
Jan 6, 03:25 PM
This is probably a very easy question, but how do I get to that screen?
Facebook under settings
Facebook under settings
chrmjenkins
Apr 4, 11:19 AM
I agree that you're taxing the wrong thing. If you tax mileage rather than gas, you're not encouraging higher fuel economy the same way a gas tax would. The ones who burn more fuel should brunt the burden. It's a lot easier to get a more fuel efficient vehicle than it is to make your necessary commute shorter.
robbieduncan
Sep 27, 09:18 AM
I expect that 10.4.8 will be required for Aperture 1.5 (as OS updates are normally required to add RAW support for new cameras). A post on another forum (arstechnicas iirc) by someone who was at Photokina and had talked to someone from Apple said that Aperture 1.5 was scheduled to be available for download at the end of the show (October 1st)...
DeSnousa
May 14, 07:13 PM
i mean what is $800 Australian in American dollars?
the reason i bring up the next GPU client is b/c i've heard it will be better with ATI cards than the current client. now i'm not sure if the ATI cards will pass nvidia or not though (i doubt it, but i'm just not sure).
right now intel is better than amd for folding, but that doesn't mean you can't fold with it.
with intel, if you go with let's say an i3 or i5 processor, you can always upgrade later. but keep in mind that i3, i5, and i7 860 use a different socket than the i7 920/930 and up.
Ahh stuff it I will spend roughly 900-1100 US dollars, so if you had that kind of money what would you get, don't need a screen, nor Windows 7. I appreciate your thought and help.
the reason i bring up the next GPU client is b/c i've heard it will be better with ATI cards than the current client. now i'm not sure if the ATI cards will pass nvidia or not though (i doubt it, but i'm just not sure).
right now intel is better than amd for folding, but that doesn't mean you can't fold with it.
with intel, if you go with let's say an i3 or i5 processor, you can always upgrade later. but keep in mind that i3, i5, and i7 860 use a different socket than the i7 920/930 and up.
Ahh stuff it I will spend roughly 900-1100 US dollars, so if you had that kind of money what would you get, don't need a screen, nor Windows 7. I appreciate your thought and help.
0 comments:
Post a Comment