Kevin Monahan
Apr 5, 06:20 PM
At present we have to re-encode a lot of our footage (7D / Minicam etc), and you don't need to do that in Premiere, it just plays on the timeline - however editing in that is quite frankly an exercise in sheer frustration and strange bugs.
I don't find it frustrating, in fact, it runs circles around FCP and I worked at Apple on 2 versions of the software, wrote a book and founded the first FCPUG.
As for strange bugs, please let me know what they are. Our users aren't complaining about anything strange.
If you do find something, please report it: Submit bugs to http://www.adobe.com/go/wish . More on how to give feedback: http://bit.ly/93d6NF
Best,
Kevin
I don't find it frustrating, in fact, it runs circles around FCP and I worked at Apple on 2 versions of the software, wrote a book and founded the first FCPUG.
As for strange bugs, please let me know what they are. Our users aren't complaining about anything strange.
If you do find something, please report it: Submit bugs to http://www.adobe.com/go/wish . More on how to give feedback: http://bit.ly/93d6NF
Best,
Kevin
JS77
Mar 26, 08:23 AM
I'm really not looking forward to Lion at all. It just seems like a huge step backwards for those of us that use our computers as real computers and not toys. I have an ipad, an iphone and several macs, but they each have specific uses. I don't want my desktop machine to be anything like my ipad, one is for doing real work and doing my daily stuff on, the iOS gadgets are for fun games and browsing mostly.
I LOATH the whole idea of merging OSX and iOS, they shouldn't even be related. I hate how they are ruining expose, I really don't want my stuff groups by app, I want to see every window like it is now. I have no use for "full screen" apps, why would I waste all my screen real estate only showing one thing at a time? I hate the idea of getting programs through the app store on the Mac, I refuse to do that. I hate all the gesture crap going on, sure it's fine for laptop users, but it's of no use to me on my mac pro.
I think all this is just a dumbing down of what is an amazing OS. I don't use my mac with dual displays anything like I'd use an iPad, so why put that crap in there? I just don't like the direction they are taking OSX in general, and I doubt I will upgrade from snow leopard. To me this is very sad news, the day OSX and iOS merge is the day the mac dies.
110% with you buddy.
I LOATH the whole idea of merging OSX and iOS, they shouldn't even be related. I hate how they are ruining expose, I really don't want my stuff groups by app, I want to see every window like it is now. I have no use for "full screen" apps, why would I waste all my screen real estate only showing one thing at a time? I hate the idea of getting programs through the app store on the Mac, I refuse to do that. I hate all the gesture crap going on, sure it's fine for laptop users, but it's of no use to me on my mac pro.
I think all this is just a dumbing down of what is an amazing OS. I don't use my mac with dual displays anything like I'd use an iPad, so why put that crap in there? I just don't like the direction they are taking OSX in general, and I doubt I will upgrade from snow leopard. To me this is very sad news, the day OSX and iOS merge is the day the mac dies.
110% with you buddy.
^squirrel^
Jul 15, 02:21 PM
Good: Dual-Core 2GHz Intel Xeon, 512MB DDR 667, ATI Radeon X1600 Pro, 250GB Hard Drive,$1799
Better: Dual-Core 2.33GHz Intel Xeon, 1GB DDR2 667, ATI Radeon X1800 Pro, 320GB Hard Drive, $2499
Best: Two Dual-Core 2.66 Intel Xeon, 1GB DDR2 667, ATI Radeon X1800 Pro, 320GB Hard Drive, $3299
I wonder if i'll be able to upgrade to the X1900?
Better: Dual-Core 2.33GHz Intel Xeon, 1GB DDR2 667, ATI Radeon X1800 Pro, 320GB Hard Drive, $2499
Best: Two Dual-Core 2.66 Intel Xeon, 1GB DDR2 667, ATI Radeon X1800 Pro, 320GB Hard Drive, $3299
I wonder if i'll be able to upgrade to the X1900?
fivepoint
Mar 23, 02:20 PM
Again, Fivepoint, you forget that the President was selling the Iraq war with suspicious and weak information that the many questioned. It turns out they were right. Pre-war, the big issue was whether the war was justified based on the evidence being pushed by the President. The criticism President Bush faced thereafter had a lot to do with the fact that he lied to the American people in order to start a poorly planned war. They bungled every aspect of a war they lied to get us into. There were plenty of reasons to be critical.
"Lying" implies intent. Are you accusing them of lying, or getting it wrong?
Yes, there were many reasons to be critical.
Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations?
Out of curiousity, what do you expect? I expect conservative congressmen and women to support a conservative president, but to think for themselves, and do what they independently think is right. I don't respect blind support like what they did under GWB. Similarly, I expect liberal congressmen and women to support a liberal president, but to also think for themselves, and do what they independently think is right. Some are speaking out, and some are not blindly supporting President Obama. Can you acknowledge that the liberals are doing a better job with consistency than the GOP? If not, how do you explain GOP opposition to the Libya action?
Part of what you say is true, in that I should EXPECT people to be more critical of the other side. This is true. But I also think it's important (especially in this forum) to point out hypocrisy stemming from the left so that the Macrumors Echo Chamber doesn't keep you all in denial. What I personally expect is people to stand on principles, and not on parties. What I expect is that people live their lives in a honorable way and present a consistent philosophy. This is the same reason I rip on neo-con Republicans for talking about fiscal conservatism when history has shown us that their real world actions when in power are very different from their rhetoric... even if they still aren't as bad as the Democrats... it's not good enough. Both parties are bad at it, too many people simply tow the party line and don't think for themselves.
It sure is easy to peg me isn't it? Too bad if you go back over my posts you will find more than enough denouncing involvement in Iraq / Afghanistan.
It's much easier than actually addressing your real views... it's a defense mechanism which she uses to avoid serious debate.
If you are supporting non-intervention, than I disagree. I support the notion that the UN (using member-nations' pooled military or civilian assets) should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions.
Being a 'non-interventionist' does not mean that you NEVER support war, it means that you avoid it whenever possible. It means that you are far less prone to military intervention than someone who does not care about the values of non-interventionism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-interventionism
Nonintervention or non-interventionism is a foreign policy which holds that political rulers should avoid alliances with other nations, but still retain diplomacy, and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial self-defense.
"Lying" implies intent. Are you accusing them of lying, or getting it wrong?
Yes, there were many reasons to be critical.
Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations?
Out of curiousity, what do you expect? I expect conservative congressmen and women to support a conservative president, but to think for themselves, and do what they independently think is right. I don't respect blind support like what they did under GWB. Similarly, I expect liberal congressmen and women to support a liberal president, but to also think for themselves, and do what they independently think is right. Some are speaking out, and some are not blindly supporting President Obama. Can you acknowledge that the liberals are doing a better job with consistency than the GOP? If not, how do you explain GOP opposition to the Libya action?
Part of what you say is true, in that I should EXPECT people to be more critical of the other side. This is true. But I also think it's important (especially in this forum) to point out hypocrisy stemming from the left so that the Macrumors Echo Chamber doesn't keep you all in denial. What I personally expect is people to stand on principles, and not on parties. What I expect is that people live their lives in a honorable way and present a consistent philosophy. This is the same reason I rip on neo-con Republicans for talking about fiscal conservatism when history has shown us that their real world actions when in power are very different from their rhetoric... even if they still aren't as bad as the Democrats... it's not good enough. Both parties are bad at it, too many people simply tow the party line and don't think for themselves.
It sure is easy to peg me isn't it? Too bad if you go back over my posts you will find more than enough denouncing involvement in Iraq / Afghanistan.
It's much easier than actually addressing your real views... it's a defense mechanism which she uses to avoid serious debate.
If you are supporting non-intervention, than I disagree. I support the notion that the UN (using member-nations' pooled military or civilian assets) should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions.
Being a 'non-interventionist' does not mean that you NEVER support war, it means that you avoid it whenever possible. It means that you are far less prone to military intervention than someone who does not care about the values of non-interventionism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-interventionism
Nonintervention or non-interventionism is a foreign policy which holds that political rulers should avoid alliances with other nations, but still retain diplomacy, and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial self-defense.
Liebo11
Aug 7, 07:49 PM
does upgrading to leopard cost money for tiger users?
dustinsc
Mar 22, 12:52 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Well, minus the screen size too. Equal to isn't going to cut it against an Apple product. Just look at how the Zune fared.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Well, minus the screen size too. Equal to isn't going to cut it against an Apple product. Just look at how the Zune fared.
bedifferent
Apr 27, 08:50 AM
I don't get it. If the usual haters of "our overlord" hate Apple so much, why are they here and why do they use Apple products? There are dozens if not hundreds of alternatives, get a Droid and stop b****ing on an Apple based site about Apple. :rolleyes:
DoFoT9
Aug 18, 05:38 AM
A blue PS3 is a nice idea.
pretty darn cool! won't go very well with the black look that i am after though ;)
pretty darn cool! won't go very well with the black look that i am after though ;)
roland.g
Apr 6, 10:39 AM
I have something better than a MacBook Air. It's called an iPad 2.
That with my iMac and I have no need anymore for my 13" aluminum MacBook. While the Air is a nice looking and light machine, I still like having things like Firewire, an optical drive (without having to pay extra for it or plug it in), and above all, screen real estate.
My 24" iMac gives me that. While my iPad 2 gives my instant on, mobile, and light. When the iMacs get a refresh and ship with Lion, it will be time for a 27".
That with my iMac and I have no need anymore for my 13" aluminum MacBook. While the Air is a nice looking and light machine, I still like having things like Firewire, an optical drive (without having to pay extra for it or plug it in), and above all, screen real estate.
My 24" iMac gives me that. While my iPad 2 gives my instant on, mobile, and light. When the iMacs get a refresh and ship with Lion, it will be time for a 27".
maelstromr
Mar 31, 02:49 PM
Until you stop making money.
:D
:D
mdavis
Mar 26, 08:23 PM
What? this seems hard to believe... Already done on development? :confused:
it's not a particularly large release
it's not a particularly large release
noire anqa
Mar 26, 07:25 AM
Oracle's acquisition of Sun was just... bad. I have nothing good to say about that.
I loved ReiserFS (v3 anyway). I was using it in beta on Slackware about as early as I could.
And for my unnecessary griping about HFS+, I've never had a problem with it the whole time I've used Macs (so, about 6 years now). ZFS would be cool though.
I'm not sure about that .. my hfs+ partitions always seem to get corrupted more often than any linux box i've ever owned. I hate to say it, but probably even more than any windows box i've owned.
I loved ReiserFS (v3 anyway). I was using it in beta on Slackware about as early as I could.
And for my unnecessary griping about HFS+, I've never had a problem with it the whole time I've used Macs (so, about 6 years now). ZFS would be cool though.
I'm not sure about that .. my hfs+ partitions always seem to get corrupted more often than any linux box i've ever owned. I hate to say it, but probably even more than any windows box i've owned.
borisadmin
Jul 27, 10:52 PM
You are incorrect. The Core 2 family of processors are 64 bit processors.... they support 64 bit integer math, they support load/store using 64 bit virtual addresses (also at least 40 bit of physical), sport 64 bit wide register file, they support the larger register set enabled by EM64T, etc.
Could Shadowfax or Shawnce or someone else who knows describe a little more about the implications of the upgrade from Yonah to Merom? I'm trying to decide whether to get a Macbook or wait, I'm not that worried about the minor speed boost, but I am more concerned about longer term compatibility (say with mac OS or Windows). If there's going to be a point in a couple of years where the difference between Yonah and Merom is the difference between running the latest version of the OS or not, then I might wait. But if it's only speed and heat, I'll probably go for the Yonah (after WWDC) and live with not having the speed and lower heat that the upgrade brings.
Could Shadowfax or Shawnce or someone else who knows describe a little more about the implications of the upgrade from Yonah to Merom? I'm trying to decide whether to get a Macbook or wait, I'm not that worried about the minor speed boost, but I am more concerned about longer term compatibility (say with mac OS or Windows). If there's going to be a point in a couple of years where the difference between Yonah and Merom is the difference between running the latest version of the OS or not, then I might wait. But if it's only speed and heat, I'll probably go for the Yonah (after WWDC) and live with not having the speed and lower heat that the upgrade brings.
netdog
Aug 5, 04:55 PM
...in the mean time, it's best to be conservative and hope we might be surprised.
Sure, I have no problem with someone else taking that stance.
Sure, I have no problem with someone else taking that stance.
Stridder44
Aug 7, 05:24 PM
I'm sure I'm not going to hate it, it's probably gonna be fabulous, but it's not an innovation as Steve advertises it. In fact, not a single thing they showed about Leopard up to now is an innovation. Everything already exists somehow. I'm not complaining about the new features of the OS, but about how they present them. They're all (hopefully) improved versions of existing stuff!!
True, I guess we can only hope that the top secret stuff is top secret for a reason (or because it wasn't ready for the Keynote)
True, I guess we can only hope that the top secret stuff is top secret for a reason (or because it wasn't ready for the Keynote)
PBF
Apr 11, 11:11 PM
I think everyone making the (pretty much insane) comments that this spells the end of the iPhone's dominance should wait and see what iOS 5 looks like and how the iPhone 5 takes advantage of it.
Hmm, I wonder on what device they will preview iOS 5.
They can't really say something like "...and these awesome groundbreaking features will work even better on iPhone 5", can they? :rolleyes:
Hmm... :rolleyes:
Hmm, I wonder on what device they will preview iOS 5.
They can't really say something like "...and these awesome groundbreaking features will work even better on iPhone 5", can they? :rolleyes:
Hmm... :rolleyes:
kavika411
Mar 24, 01:13 PM
The vast majority of conservatives are WASP-ish
And the vast majority of WASPs are racists? Got it.
and almost all of the people who question Obama's religion/nationality are self-described conservatives.
And some people say the cucumber tastes better pickled. But the last time I checked, this thread, and my comment, dealt with Obama and military action. But feel free to teach me more about birthers, Charlie Sheen, and String Theory if we are going off topic.
Furthermore, conservatives as a group refuse to admit that this is the case. Got that?
Actually, I don't. I guess you can give me the the link - the one that says the vast number of conservatives are racist WASPS who who question Obama's religion and nationality and refuse to admit that this is the case. Thanks.
That's not what I said at all but feel free to parse things as you see fit.
Not what you said "at all"?
Perhaps you can tell us what you said "at all."
And the vast majority of WASPs are racists? Got it.
and almost all of the people who question Obama's religion/nationality are self-described conservatives.
And some people say the cucumber tastes better pickled. But the last time I checked, this thread, and my comment, dealt with Obama and military action. But feel free to teach me more about birthers, Charlie Sheen, and String Theory if we are going off topic.
Furthermore, conservatives as a group refuse to admit that this is the case. Got that?
Actually, I don't. I guess you can give me the the link - the one that says the vast number of conservatives are racist WASPS who who question Obama's religion and nationality and refuse to admit that this is the case. Thanks.
That's not what I said at all but feel free to parse things as you see fit.
Not what you said "at all"?
Perhaps you can tell us what you said "at all."
Cougarcat
Mar 25, 11:33 PM
I think all this is just a dumbing down of what is an amazing OS. I don't use my mac with dual displays anything like I'd use an iPad, so why put that crap in there? I just don't like the direction they are taking OSX in general, and I doubt I will upgrade from snow leopard. To me this is very sad news, the day OSX and iOS merge is the day the mac dies.
Relax. The sky is not falling. iOS and OS X rely on different user interaction. They will never be merged. Lion is not a "dumbing down." No features have been removed. You don't have to use fullscreen apps, or Launchpad, or the hidden scrollbars, or the gestures, or anything else that reminds you of iOS. Mission Control works better with Expose, IMO. The "All windows" view was way too cluttered. And normal expose for specific apps is still there.
Versions, Resume, the new Mail, MC and refinements to the interface are all awesome features that still makes Lion worth it even if you decide to avoid the more overt iOS influences.
I'm pretty susre you don't HAVE to use the new stuff. Old expose is still there for instance.
Partly true. All windows is gone, replaced by MC. The app Expose views work the same, though. Best of both worlds, IMO.
Relax. The sky is not falling. iOS and OS X rely on different user interaction. They will never be merged. Lion is not a "dumbing down." No features have been removed. You don't have to use fullscreen apps, or Launchpad, or the hidden scrollbars, or the gestures, or anything else that reminds you of iOS. Mission Control works better with Expose, IMO. The "All windows" view was way too cluttered. And normal expose for specific apps is still there.
Versions, Resume, the new Mail, MC and refinements to the interface are all awesome features that still makes Lion worth it even if you decide to avoid the more overt iOS influences.
I'm pretty susre you don't HAVE to use the new stuff. Old expose is still there for instance.
Partly true. All windows is gone, replaced by MC. The app Expose views work the same, though. Best of both worlds, IMO.
bibbz
Jun 11, 01:53 PM
I would Pre-Order ASAP. The longer you wait the less your chances get. Being their are 4 Retailers confirmed to launch I am sure Apple has a big Inventory on these but how much will each Company be receiving is the question. I can see Wal-Mart getting the least from anyone.
We are being told that inventory will be limited for non preorder customers. Basically, if you want one, you better preorder.
About opening before apple stores...
Thats what i thought too, but the only thing we were told is no later than 8am opening. Basically we can open anytime up to 8am.
We are being told that inventory will be limited for non preorder customers. Basically, if you want one, you better preorder.
About opening before apple stores...
Thats what i thought too, but the only thing we were told is no later than 8am opening. Basically we can open anytime up to 8am.
topgunn
Jul 20, 08:20 AM
THIS is why IBM was given the boot.
chatin
Aug 16, 11:58 PM
This poor cache design will kill off the G5's fast in rendering intensive workspaces.
The G5 has only 1MB of cache and it's per core not per cpu. If one core needs to cache 3.5MB of data it's possible on the Mac Pro becauce the CPU cache is fully unified.
I just ran Cinebench 9.5 on my Mac Pro and got 4 Cpu's Showing and a healthy 3.5 Ratio. (That means the CPU's are working together very well, thanks to the Intel Smart Cache.)
:) :p
The G5 has only 1MB of cache and it's per core not per cpu. If one core needs to cache 3.5MB of data it's possible on the Mac Pro becauce the CPU cache is fully unified.
I just ran Cinebench 9.5 on my Mac Pro and got 4 Cpu's Showing and a healthy 3.5 Ratio. (That means the CPU's are working together very well, thanks to the Intel Smart Cache.)
:) :p
bigandy
Aug 25, 03:10 PM
the vocal minority are always the ones who have problems :rolleyes:
zero2dash
Sep 14, 08:33 AM
Yes. Windows NT was running on machines with eight processors several years before OS X was even released.
Windows supported 64 bit platforms and dual core CPUs long before OS X did.
On the server side.
Nevertheless, ok. Windows did it first.
That's probably because you're not interested in reading anything that might portray Microsoft in a non-negative light.
Couldn't be farther from the truth. I have no problem with Microsoft or Windows, evident by the fact that I've ran their operating systems for the last 10 years. I have a problem with all the crap they're putting in Vista, but otherwise - Win2k and XP Pro have left me primarily trouble-free.
Windows supported 64 bit platforms and dual core CPUs long before OS X did.
On the server side.
Nevertheless, ok. Windows did it first.
That's probably because you're not interested in reading anything that might portray Microsoft in a non-negative light.
Couldn't be farther from the truth. I have no problem with Microsoft or Windows, evident by the fact that I've ran their operating systems for the last 10 years. I have a problem with all the crap they're putting in Vista, but otherwise - Win2k and XP Pro have left me primarily trouble-free.
madmax_2069
Dec 12, 04:57 PM
It's not a bad game but it could have been a lot better
Yeah for the amount of developing time and the money that went into GT5 yes it could have been way better then how it turned out. many things can be fixed with patches, but it should not have needed to on release. i can see a few bugs and such but not like when it first came out.
Yeah for the amount of developing time and the money that went into GT5 yes it could have been way better then how it turned out. many things can be fixed with patches, but it should not have needed to on release. i can see a few bugs and such but not like when it first came out.