Correction, Mac OSX was attacked first. Theres a lot more cred to be had in haven an e-phallus contest with Apple's ad.
Could you repeat that in English please?
Just to be a bit nud tuff but isnt bitstream up to the drivers not the OS? There is Mac OSX BD decoding software but since there isn't an HDCP screen its a bit of a moot point. PavTube a ripper, so there is proof of your decoding. (Cant be effed searching google)
Actually, OS X does support HDCP on all nvidia 9400M/mDP-based Macs. It's not about HDCP, thats only one part of the chain. Apple would also need an AACS key and support for BD+, as well as a couple of other things that are now all lumped into one licensing fee.
So far, what I can read about Pavtube is that its only a blu-ray ripper in name, not in practice, and fails against all but a very small number of early blu-ray discs. Nobody uses it.
Across consoles. The PS3/360/Wii, has a lot more 'next gen' exclusives each than the PC does, If you want it that way.
Well first, the Wii isn't "next generation". It literally is the same hardware as the GameCube but running at twice the clock speed with more RAM. Plus the Wii is all Nintendo games, so it's pretty much a given that you won't see Mario on the PC. But the PC gaming market just shrugs and says "who cares?" and moves on.
Second, only a handful of titles on either the Xbox360 or PS3 don't make it to the PC and those would be the console exclusives, like MGS 4 and Forza.
Every other major release is on the PC as well, everything from having the best versions of Call of Duty to GRID to Lego Star Wars/Batman/Indiana Jones.
You mean like how Assasins creed got a massive upgrade? Or how DMC4 got a massive upgrade? Some get extra textures but a lot end up being crap.
Two games that were extremely overhyped and their actual sales numbers showed that they were all hype and nothing else.
Grand Theft Auto 4 got massive graphics updates, especially over the PS3's blurred 640p version.
Plus theres always the fact that modern mid-range PCs, even as far back as 2006 when the PS3 was released, can run the same games at higher detail settings, higher resolutions, while maintaining higher frame-rates.
Snow Leopard builds weren't legally available to the general public. So by your logic everybody should know .Net 4 because its been around long enough through developer builds.
Sigh.
Apple has a paid developer program. You pay money and you get access to builds of new OSes, among many other things. Basically, paid developers had access to early builds of Snow Leopard about as far back as when it was first announced. And OpenCL as a standard was finalized almost 11 months ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenCL
Synthetic benchmarks are preset. The result are known. All it is is doing preset calculations and recording a score. Simulations, a set of parameters are set but the result is unknown. So the calculations could lead the CPU anywhere.
Thats not necessarily true that synthetic benchmarks always have the same results. Go look at 3DMark and look how much the results can vary.
Folding@Home is basically an energy eating synthetic benchmark the same way 3DMark is.
Good way of avoiding the point there.
That would be you, not me.
Microsoft is just as bad as creating artificial need and you know it. A typical customer, "Why would I want DocX?" Want VBA on a Mac? Oh wait there is none. They took it out. Gee I wonder why.
Creating a new document format isn't the same as screwing millions of existing paid customers out of a feature that should have been included in software from the beginning that the hardware 100% supports, like 64-bit kernels and MMS in the original iPhone.
Fine I admit, I didn't know that. But the point of mDP was to make it smaller. Having Audio channels probably would of made it the same size. If you think it was purely for Apples gain, ATi is developing tech with mDP.
Good for ATI. Too bad they couldn't write drivers to save their own lives.
FYI, the first revision of mini-HDMI was approved with HDMI 1.3 back in early 2006. About the same size as mini DisplayPort and has full audio support. No reason Apple couldn't have used that instead of DisplayPort, considering HDMI 1.3 supports 2560x1600 over a single cable.
Oh thats right, Apple used mini DisplayPort so they could sell you royalty free ridiculously expensive adapters. We can't have Apple take a small hit to profit margins ($10,000 annual licensing fee, 4 cents per device) for HDMI and make everyone's life a lot easier! Nope. Gotta half-implement a standard and then charge everyone to use it! Brilliant!
You seriously think Im going to dig around in a forum like this? Any google searches say that the HP Envy looks like the MacBook Pro though.
And the MacBook Pro (which I was referring to) looks like the old HP DV5T and dv6000 line with Sony's keyboard instead of HP's keyboard.
So essentially, the HP Envy is a copy of a copy of an older HP design.
In the sense that Mac OSX 10.6 Kernel is like 10.1 Kernel?
The poster I was replying to lumped Windows9x and Windows 2000 together. The only thing those two OSes had in common were the "Windows" name and the UI. Two very different products aimed at very different groups of people.
Now I'm going to make a remark in the same trolly tone you're using.
Hur Hur, Yea multitasking, when you werent crashing!
In the 3 years I've been using a Mac, I've had OS X crash for no reason more times than I've ever had Windows crash in the nearly 2 decades I've been using Windows
And its certainly not my fault that OS X crashes. You know, OS X has crashed when I clicked on a link on legitimate sites like cnn.com in Safari, or when I empty the trash of pictures, or when I click "Burn" in a "Burn Folder".
Whos them? Rofl Rofl Rofl.
Uh.. what?
As a professional developer I can tell you that means **** when the technical details of a specification aren't finished. That is also the reason that you can count the number of OpenCL books with one hand. It hasn't been finalized until recent. Stable OpenCL drivers hasn't even been released since recent on a number of platforms, etc.
Sorry to break it to you, but OpenCL was finalized almost 11 months ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenCL Apple's paid developers have had access to Snow Leopard for a very long time.
You are aware that the PS3 (CELL) is getting more advanced (harder) units then those that are handled on the GPU ? You can't just compare the two, that is just intellectually wrong.
That doesn't change the fact that GPUs are significantly faster than the Cell.
It also doesn't change the fact that you can go look at F@H results and see that even those 3 year old Core 2 Duos that were released the same time as the PS3 outperform the Cell, and that real world benchmarks of PPC apps show the Cell being outperformed by single core iMac G5s.
Honestly, the Cell is a joke. It's a single core PPC chip that isn't even as fast as the old G5 clock per clock with a bunch of 32-bit co-processors tacked on for merit. I've read countless developers say that the Cell is great for things like Photoshop and Folding@Home, but when it comes to real world math, especially the kind required for physics and AI in gaming, it's the worst of the bunch. This, combined with the GeForce 7600 on steroids, is why the PS3 versions of games (aside from Oblivion) are always toned down and have less onscreen activity or much lower frame-rates. It's the reason Gran Turismo 5 still doesn't have accurate car physics and a piss poor damage model that doesn't cover all cars or affect handling.
Blu-Ray is still not in the vast majority of homes, approximately 12 million. Yes, I have it but then I tend to buy the latest and greatest toys (because I can).
Blu-ray is in more than twice as many homes now as DVD was when it was the same age.
Yes, a dual quad xeon is exactly what I use for 3d rendering and animation.
Again, the Xeon was meant for servers.
Whats wrong with dual Core i7?
I need rendering power- more cores and faster clock speed with HT. I'm more concerned about the time spent rendering than the GPU.
Again, whats wrong with dual Core i7? Two CPUs with 4 cores each along with hyper-threading, so you get 16 "logical" cores. Whats wrong with that? Plenty of motherboards out there support two Core i7 chips. You know that the Core i7 and current Xeon are basically the same, right? If you do some research, as I did before making that comment, you're going to find out that the only real benefit to getting a Core i7 Xeon over an actual Core i7 is that you can say you spent the extra money and you can use ECC RAM, which isn't always available to Core i7 depending on the motherboard.
It's lower-res than the 27" iMac, and not an IPS panel.
It's a good thing its not an IPS panel. Apple's panels tend to have a 16ms response time, which leads to some pretty terrible ghosting. Every Apple panel I've had the "pleasure" of using has had ghosting in everything from game playback to moving a window. Even the mouse turns from a pointer to a moving white 1/2" long blob on Apple's panels thanks to ghosting. The screen I'm using now has a 2ms response time and EVERYTHING, no matter what, stays nice and sharp. Oh it has the same 170/170 viewing angle as the 30" Cinema Display too.
Oh and I like how you ignored that Dell's display is a MATTE display too, not a mirror.
Again, not when you add in that 27 inch, lower res monitor from Dell. Then it's only a cost advantage of $100-$200.
Not at all. Because I build a system for $1,000 today, and then add that Dell display in, that $1,000 in PC hardware will literally mop the floor with that iMac. If the two systems were physically fighting, that $1,000 PC would be kicking the iMac while it's down and laughing at it.
Seriously, show me the parts, and I will make sure I find the time to build a dual quad core Xeon at 1/3 of the cost! I'd like to have a dual quad 2.93, which is $5400 from Apple (that's with my edu discount, still WAAAAY too much). If I can build that thing for $2000 myself, I will personally send you a thank you note. Via snail mail
www.google.com is your friend. I found everything I needed there, you go ahead and look yourself. Plenty of dual 1366 boards out there for dual Core i7, with triple channel DDR3 RAM. If you must have Xeon there are the same parts are Apple out there for much less.
Not sure why you feel it relevant to suddenly announce this but if it makes you happy
Because you incorrectly lumped it in with Win9x.
I as a new Windows user - I joined forums. I mentioned what you said about no virus issues since 95 - turning of the UAC and surfing without antivirus software. The most polite answer I got to your amazing suggestion was "If he's not joking, he is very misguided". Spreading FUD about Windows is your thing - I understand. Honestly I'm glad that I asked others for help with Windows.
Link to the forum?
Head over to AVS and Futuremark. You'll find about 3/4 of a million people who agree with me.
Repeating things don't change the fact that one small disclaimer on Apples web page is very different to the OS (Windows) reminding me every time I start up until I installed the software. So I presume that MS think viruses are a real threat otherwise their OS wouldn't keep asking for antivirus software.
So who do I think is correct - you or Microsoft...... mmmmmm I wonder.
And, like in countless other threads, you ignore the entire post and the facts.
Apple has multiple warnings on the site, PLUS THE OS ITSELF warns you when you download an application. Don't ignore that again.
Oh and those "demands" in Windows? Yeah, you can turn that off. You can't turn off OS X's warnings.
Oh another tangent to distract the argument
Says the one who selectively quotes and deliberately leaves out the facts that prove their entire argument wrong.
I've had heated debates without being timed out. You have to be quite rude apparently.
Polaris made it personal and we both got blamed.
I think it's particularly funny that mosx continues to cry about how the Apple LED displays are "edge lit" displays and are inferior to CFL lit displays.
What a joke. All LED lit televisions on the market, including the impressive LED Samsung use "edge lighting" technology.
Why? Because it works.
The lighting mechanism for a panel also has nothing to do with the panel technology itself.
Actually, you're completely wrong. There are two types of LED displays. The edge lit type that Apple uses for displays, and some HDTVs. Those would be "white" LEDs. Some Dell displays, the highest end of Samsung LED displays, and Sony's previous generation (not the current generation!) LED display all used "RGB LEDs". Thats where an actual LED panel is placed behind the screen, and it has red green and blue LEDs that can be controlled to reproduce various colors, increasing the color reproduction of the display dramatically.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backlight#LED_backlights Theres a nice little short read for you.
So let's put it this way: Apple's MacBook "Pro" (and iMac, and Cinema Display) use white edge-lit LEDs. The only difference between them and another standard CCFL LCD screen is the smaller area required for the lighting equipment. Dell uses an RGBLED in some of its Studio XPS notebooks. That means it has a whole panel of a bunch of tiny red, green, and blue LEDs that work together to give the screen 100% color reproduction.
Thats quite a difference when Apple's previous generation screens were only rated at 47% overall color reproduction (taken from specs found on this forum, search for them yourself0.
There is a possibility that in 5 years we will see a 4 or 8 layer BD technology that would allow for 4K (4X the resolution of 1080P) movies, although the market for such a technology would probably make it cost prohibitive.
4K resolution is 4096x3072, or 12,582,912 pixels. Blu-ray is 1920x1080, 2,073,600. "4k" is slightly more than 6x the resolution of blu-ray. "2K" already exists in digital projectors used in some high end movie theaters, and its just over 3.1MP.
Pioneer already developed a 16 layer blu-ray disc that holds 400GB and is compatible with current hardware after a firmware update. They plan to have a 1TB disc as soon as 2013.
If everyone in the world were law abiding citizens who never stole and illegally distributed content on the web companies would stop putting DRM on everything. Pretty sure that will never happen though. (and the rest of us suffer for it)
They absolutely would not stop. DRM is all about control and not at all about stopping piracy because DRM as it is does nothing to stop piracy.
Look at blu-ray for instance. BD+ was supposed to last for how many years without being defeated? AACS was also defeated early on, and so was HDCP. All DRM does is control legitimate buyers. It's a means for the content providers to tell legitimate customers what they can or cannot do with what they buy, and an attempt to force them to buy multiple copies of a single thing.
Look at movies. If one wants to "legitimately" get movies on their iPod, theres basically two ways. One way is to get the movie from iTunes, the other is from a "digital copy" included with a disc. The DRM forces the "legitimate" customer to have to pay for multiple copies, one way or another. If the DRM was not about control, they would allow you to make whatever type of copy you wanted from that original purchase. But its not. It's about forcing you, the paying customer, to pay as many times as they can think of ways to make you pay.
Thanks to a hopless Internet provider, I'm stuck using a Windoze 2000 computer for my Internet access, and believe me, Windoze is virus-ridden garbage.
Windows 2000 is about 10 years old and was never supported or updated in the way XP was. Nearly all modern software won't run on Windows 2000, and Windows 2000 won't run on modern hardware. It's an obsolete OS. You expect MS to keep supporting it with updates?
