Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Feb 5, 2013, 06:27 AM   #101
iLondoner
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: London (the big one, not London Ohio, Texas, Kentucky, etc)
Some aspects of skeuomorphism are not terribly evident—thank goodness—and it took me some time to realise the brown bit at the top of Calendar had paper tear offs underneath.

The one app where skeuomorphism really annoys me is the Game Centre which (maybe because I am a European) I find really creepy, so I never use it.

The only app I think should keep elements of skeuomorphism is the Calculator, otherwise long live a clean modern design.
__________________
13" MacBook Air 27" iMac 3TB Fusion 3TB Time Capsule Apple TV 3 iPhone 5 iPad Air
iLondoner is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2013, 07:26 AM   #102
clukas
macrumors 6502a
 
clukas's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoExpectations View Post
Agreed....but if they are looking to fill jobs now, it will be a long wait before we see any substantial updates.

3 months to Hire appropriate headcount
3 months for new hire(s) to settle in
6-12 months for development
3-6 months to test

Very true, but this sends out strong signals that apple has not yet abandoned its OS X software in favour of focusing on iOS. No question this will happen eventually, but at least we can expect 1 more major software update.
__________________
 iMac 27 (Late 2012)  13" MacBook Pro Retina (Late 2013)  iPhone 5  iPad 4 ATV
clukas is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2013, 10:22 AM   #103
applebro
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
hopefully they change it so that us engineers will actually have a use for Pages and Numbers
applebro is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2013, 10:58 AM   #104
globalhemp
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
iDVD

Apple states that the pricing of their products reflects not only the hardware, but software.

Apple choose to stop allowing iDVD to work on my iMac. No warning, no choice, no nothing. Just Apple's decision that nobody needs to use iDVD anymore.

I spoke with an Apple Store employee, and they stated that it was not a good app, that I should just go out and purchase Roxio.

I still have iDVD on my iMac, I just can't launch it due to an update that Apple made to dismantle its functionality. Now I'm being told that I need to purchase a replacement?!?!

Apple needs to bring back iDVD. If I want to send a video to family (e.g., grandma or mother), they don't have an Internet enabled tv. They don't even have an HDTV. However, they do have a DVD player.
__________________
Eric Pollitt
Global Hemp, Inc
Global Hemp
globalhemp is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2013, 03:00 PM   #105
linuxcooldude
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGRE View Post
Right, Apple should make an statement (by having all their own apps 64-bit) to all the software developers still working with 32-bit code. 64-bit is really faster, for some apps hardly noticeable but for other there is a big difference. 64-Bit Arperture is much faster than 32-bit iPhoto.
I don't know if 64 bit in of itself would be faster. But being 64 bit would have access to more then 4GB of RAM. The reasons why Aperture might be faster if it is written for multicore processors and graphic card acceleration.
__________________
Techshow:http://www.justin.tv/linuxcooldude
linuxcooldude is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2013, 06:57 PM   #106
iGrip
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Send a message via ICQ to iGrip Send a message via AIM to iGrip Send a message via MSN to iGrip Send a message via Yahoo to iGrip Send a message via Skype™ to iGrip
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post
That was Steve Jobs. And the mini is 7.9" and not 16:9 so one could argue its really nothing like the other 7" tablets on the market.
Doesn't matter. Anything under 10 inches cannot possibly express great tablet apps. Sorry, but that is true.
iGrip is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2013, 10:12 PM   #107
linuxcooldude
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by globalhemp View Post
Apple states that the pricing of their products reflects not only the hardware, but software.

Apple choose to stop allowing iDVD to work on my iMac. No warning, no choice, no nothing. Just Apple's decision that nobody needs to use iDVD anymore.

I spoke with an Apple Store employee, and they stated that it was not a good app, that I should just go out and purchase Roxio.

I still have iDVD on my iMac, I just can't launch it due to an update that Apple made to dismantle its functionality. Now I'm being told that I need to purchase a replacement?!?!

Apple needs to bring back iDVD. If I want to send a video to family (e.g., grandma or mother), they don't have an Internet enabled tv. They don't even have an HDTV. However, they do have a DVD player.
Not updating iDVD or not including it in future updates goes with the phasing out DVD's for downloadable media. Not just an Apple thing.

I have the most recent Mac OSX and iDVD works fine for me.
__________________
Techshow:http://www.justin.tv/linuxcooldude
linuxcooldude is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 6, 2013, 05:59 AM   #108
numlock
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard View Post
Numbers certainly needs an overhaul but five or six years ago when development started on this version I believe they achieved their goal which was a simple spread sheet app. Today things are far different, people do more with their Macs and thus a more professional Numbers is required.


Personally I hate OpenOffice but that is me. I'm really looking forward to a version of Numbers with a built in scripting language like Python. Numbers needs a lot of work when it comes to imports and exports. Frankly I'd like to see a version of Numbers that can easily turn a range of cells into HTML.
well my mention of openoffice/libreoffice was because if you dont have or want to use ms office its the closest thing available.

and if google sheets would have better support for different localization i could use google sheets for most of my needs.

numbers as you say started out fine but very little has been done with it. but pivot tables and freeze cells those are still not available right?

i dont use enough formulas to know if its lacking there.

there is a little application called tables that one could argue has surpassed numbers.
numlock is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 6, 2013, 10:02 AM   #109
gregwyattjr
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenryDJP View Post
I have to agree with you, Powerpoint definitely has features not found in Keynote such as "Lack of Intuitive UI", "Lack of beautiful templates", "Lack of graphics animation for presentations" and lack of ease of use.

Seriously, even the most fanboyish of MS Office users can't deny that Keynote is the best in class and Powerpoint is nowhere close. That being said, still doesn't mean that the entire iWork suite doesn't need an upgrade because it definitely does.
You hit the nail right on the head, brother.
__________________
I'm happy, hope you're happy too
gregwyattjr is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2013, 03:53 AM   #110
Solomani
macrumors 68000
 
Solomani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by iLondoner View Post
Some aspects of skeuomorphism are not terribly evident—thank goodness—and it took me some time to realise the brown bit at the top of Calendar had paper tear offs underneath.
Subtle skeumorphism is fine with me. As long as it's not an "in-your-face" glaring skeumorphic fashion statement, I don't mind it at all.
Solomani is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2013, 12:25 PM   #111
GermanyChris
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Here
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGRE View Post
At least 64-bit please.
because 64bit will help. I mean I need a office document to address more than 32GB of RAM..and iPhoto and Movie would be so much snappier if they could address more memory and anything but iMac's and Mac Pros..
GermanyChris is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2013, 02:11 PM   #112
Michael Goff
macrumors 68040
 
Michael Goff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanyChris View Post
because 64bit will help. I mean I need a office document to address more than 32GB of RAM..and iPhoto and Movie would be so much snappier if they could address more memory and anything but iMac's and Mac Pros..
You do realize that 64-bit applications are generally faster than 32-bit, right? >_>;
__________________
Surface Pro 3 i5/256gb
Windows 8.1
Michael Goff is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2013, 02:22 PM   #113
GermanyChris
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Here
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Goff View Post
You do realize that 64-bit applications are generally faster than 32-bit, right? >_>;
Actually there not..
GermanyChris is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2013, 02:38 PM   #114
Michael Goff
macrumors 68040
 
Michael Goff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanyChris View Post
Actually there not..
Let's look at things that have gotten faster when they took the leap to 64-bit:
Operating Systems
Browsers
Adobe Creative Studio.

Also, something that I forgot to correct, is that 32-bit applications can only address 2GB of RAM (Aside from the OS, which registers 4GB).
__________________
Surface Pro 3 i5/256gb
Windows 8.1
Michael Goff is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2013, 02:39 AM   #115
GermanyChris
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Here
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Goff View Post
Let's look at things that have gotten faster when they took the leap to 64-bit:
Operating Systems
Browsers
Adobe Creative Studio.

Also, something that I forgot to correct, is that 32-bit applications can only address 2GB of RAM (Aside from the OS, which registers 4GB).
OS's haven't gotten faster as they've gone 64bit..the isn't a significant difference in speed between Snow Leopard and Mountain Lion. Just like there was no diffenence between xp 64 and 32 going forward.

Browsers have gotten faster in 64bit that'd be news to me..

The creative suite is a memory hog and and not applicable what where talking about here. Yes PS is faster if you give it more RAM.

In OSX 32bit applications can address 4GB of memory the 2GB limitations is artificial and limited to Windows.
GermanyChris is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2013, 02:55 AM   #116
Renzatic
macrumors 604
 
Renzatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Who puts the washers in the woods?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanyChris View Post
...the 2GB limitations is artificial and limited to Windows.
There isn't a 2GB limit on applications in 32 bit Windows. They can access the full 4GB limit anything can, minus what's taken up by the OS and other programs, of course.
Renzatic is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2013, 03:03 AM   #117
GermanyChris
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Here
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
There isn't a 2GB limit on applications in 32 bit Windows. They can access the full 4GB limit anything can, minus what's taken up by the OS and other programs, of course.
no, thats the point.

Windows, where the operating system takes 2GB leaving only 2GB available for the running application. Mac OS X, like Linux, has always allowed applications the full 4GB available on the Intel architecture

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/0...opard-64-bits/

Just a quick google
GermanyChris is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2013, 03:07 AM   #118
Renzatic
macrumors 604
 
Renzatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Who puts the washers in the woods?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanyChris View Post
no, thats the point.

Windows, where the operating system takes 2GB leaving only 2GB available for the running application. Mac OS X, like Linux, has always allowed applications the full 4GB available on the Intel architecture

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/0...opard-64-bits/

Just a quick google
Roughly Drafted. Gawd. That site's almost as bad as Obama Pacman for pure Apple praising internet dumbness.

Windows doesn't take up a static 2GB of ram and absolutely refuses to allow any other programs to access it. Windows is incredibly efficient with memory usage these days. If a application needs more memory, Windows will start moving OS specific data out, and allow said application to access it.

For example, I've rendered out a complex scene on a 4GB 64 bit machine before. It needed as much ram as it could get. By the time it was done, Windows was eating up 4% of my memory, and slowly started swapping OS data back into the ram as it needed it. 32-bit Windows does this exact same thing.
Renzatic is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2013, 03:13 AM   #119
GermanyChris
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Here
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
Roughly Drafted. Gawd. That site's almost as bad as Obama Pacman for pure Apple praising internet dumbness.

Windows doesn't take up a static 2GB of ram and absolutely refuses to allow any other programs to access it. Windows is incredibly efficient with memory usage these days. If a application needs more memory, Windows will start moving OS specific data out, and allow said application to access it.

For example, I've rendered out a complex scene on a 4GB 64 bit machine before. It needed as much ram as it could get. By the time it was done, Windows was eating up 4% of my memory, and slowly started swapping OS data back into the ram as it needed it. 32-bit Windows does this exact same thing.
OK google PAE..
GermanyChris is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2013, 03:16 AM   #120
Renzatic
macrumors 604
 
Renzatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Who puts the washers in the woods?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanyChris View Post
OK google PAE..
What about it? That's a processor feature to allow 32-bit computers to use more than 4GB memory. It's not a requirement, nor is it addressing a weakness specific to Windows.

edit: Okay, it has to be enabled within the OS as well. But I still don't see how it proves your point. For one, Windows will only address 4GB regardless, and two, it's a common feature across all OSes.
Renzatic is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2013, 03:32 AM   #121
GermanyChris
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Here
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
What about it? That's a processor feature to allow 32-bit computers to use more than 4GB memory. It's not a requirement, nor is it addressing a weakness specific to Windows.

edit: Okay, it has to be enabled within the OS as well. But I still don't see how it proves your point. For one, Windows will only address 4GB regardless, and two, it's a common feature across all OSes.
It allows 32bit programs to address more than 2GB of RAM.

PAE has been standard in OSX and Linux for quite a long time it's only standard now in Windows 8 and only selectively used/enabled before.

PAE has system wide benefits for memory allocation 16GB of RAM for the G5 32GB for early Mac Pros even though the OS and more importantly the Kernel (program) is 32bit.
GermanyChris is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2013, 03:39 AM   #122
Renzatic
macrumors 604
 
Renzatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Who puts the washers in the woods?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanyChris View Post
It allows 32bit programs to address more than 2GB of RAM.
I've been reading up on this, and it looks like you're at least half right. Windows by default only allows 32-bit programs to access 2GB memory...

...unless otherwise specified by the programmer. They can set it so that their application can access 3GB, with 1GB dedicated to the kernel.

Though this isn't a Windows specific problem. Linux only allows 2GB by default. Some higher end server OSes (of which Unix is one) can access 3GB by default. With Windows, it seems to be determined by the programmer, and how the PAE is being used by the OS.

As for it being standard in Windows only with 8, that's not correct. It's now a requirement as of 8. It's been standard in Windows since Win2k, though mostly used only in their server class OSes.
Renzatic is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2013, 03:48 AM   #123
GermanyChris
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Here
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
I've been reading up on this, and it looks like you're at least half right. Windows by default only allows 32-bit programs to access 2GB memory...

...unless otherwise specified by the programmer. They can set it so that their application can access 3GB, with 1GB dedicated to the kernel.

Though this isn't a Windows specific problem. Linux only allows 2GB by default. Some higher end server OSes (of which Unix is one) can access 3GB by default. With Windows, it seems to be determined by the programmer, and how the PAE is being used by the OS.
You have to look to find a Linux OS that doesn't have PAE enabled..

The 3GB thing only holds true if your stacking a 32 bit program on a 32bit Kernel. If you take the same 32 bit program and stack it on a 64 bit Kernel it;ll address all 4GB minus a few KB

**edit** let continue this debate later I need to take apart the big Mac
GermanyChris is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2013, 03:52 AM   #124
Renzatic
macrumors 604
 
Renzatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Who puts the washers in the woods?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanyChris View Post
You have to look to find a Linux OS that doesn't have PAE enabled..

The 3GB thing only holds true if your stacking a 32 bit program on a 32bit Kernel. If you take the same 32 bit program and stack it on a 64 bit Kernel it;ll address all 4GB minus a few KB
Yeah, but the thing is, anyone who desperately needed more than 2GB ram for their programs back during the 32-bit days likely wasn't using consumer grade Windows OSes. They were on XP Professional at the very least, which did have PAE support.

Really, we're getting into a topic I don't know that much about. Though from what I've read, Windows didn't necessarily have a deficit in comparison to other OSes in this regard.
Renzatic is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2013, 05:05 AM   #125
GermanyChris
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Here
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
Yeah, but the thing is, anyone who desperately needed more than 2GB ram for their programs back during the 32-bit days likely wasn't using consumer grade Windows OSes. They were on XP Professional at the very least, which did have PAE support.

Really, we're getting into a topic I don't know that much about. Though from what I've read, Windows didn't necessarily have a deficit in comparison to other OSes in this regard.
It was never my intent to criticize Windows it was just a statement that was an artificial limitation. The gentlemen I quoted was thinking in a Windows paradigm and that it wasn't applicable to all.

In the end state no one really cares as long as everything works the way it should. It will most iLife and iWork will most probably be updated to 64bit more than anything to finish off the transition that started in Tiger.
GermanyChris is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
iPad: iLife/iWork Prawnstar69 iPad 6 Oct 25, 2013 11:24 PM
Try this for getting iWork and iLife... SRLMJ23 OS X Mavericks (10.9) 0 Oct 24, 2013 02:34 AM
Samsung Fails to Win Presidential Veto of Potential U.S. Import Ban in Apple Patent Case MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 74 Oct 12, 2013 03:13 AM
AirPort Express Stock Shortages Hint at Potential 802.11ac Update MacRumors Mac Blog Discussion 41 Sep 25, 2013 09:49 AM
iLife and iWork Support dvoros Mac Applications and Mac App Store 1 Mar 26, 2013 09:40 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:00 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC