NJPitcher
Aug 27, 01:44 AM
Also Soon:
MacBook Pro 17"
Easy Access HD Bay
2.33 GHz Merom
1 GB DDR2 RAM + 1 or 2 GB Third Party Stick
Black Anodized Aluminum
$2799 + 30" Dell on 20% off Sale $1520 = My ultimate Core 2 Duo Starter Kit for only $4319 + $346 CA sales tax = $4665 . :p
How do you get black aluminum? Or is this just a wish? Cause that'd be pretty ill.
And what is the easy access HD bay?
MacBook Pro 17"
Easy Access HD Bay
2.33 GHz Merom
1 GB DDR2 RAM + 1 or 2 GB Third Party Stick
Black Anodized Aluminum
$2799 + 30" Dell on 20% off Sale $1520 = My ultimate Core 2 Duo Starter Kit for only $4319 + $346 CA sales tax = $4665 . :p
How do you get black aluminum? Or is this just a wish? Cause that'd be pretty ill.
And what is the easy access HD bay?
8CoreWhore
Mar 22, 02:55 PM
Why do they call their tablet a "book". Just stupid.
absynth
Apr 11, 01:34 PM
who cares about iphone 5, where's my white iphone4 dammit! :mad:
ltcol266845
Aug 26, 04:53 PM
Well, the on advantage of not being able to afford a lappy until next years it that I might a MacBook based on the Santa Rosa platform.
It seems though that Santa Rosa might end up getting delayed... there have been many issues with getting 802.11n finalized, which is an important component to the new platform
It seems though that Santa Rosa might end up getting delayed... there have been many issues with getting 802.11n finalized, which is an important component to the new platform
MattSepeta
Apr 27, 02:45 PM
Sure there are. Been designing since before you were born. This file does not have layers. It has objects within one group. A document created in 1961 will have been scanned, possible inadvertently split into sections as it's not even a linked group or even a compound path. MattSepata is correct to some extent, but I doubt it's been OCRed. Just a crappily-made PDF... which hasn't even been security-locked.
To help 5P understand: Government can not do anything right, not even scan a document and make a lousy secured PDF :p:p
To help 5P understand: Government can not do anything right, not even scan a document and make a lousy secured PDF :p:p
chrmjenkins
Mar 22, 06:09 PM
A government in power is responding against a rebellion.
If a rebellion sprang up in the United States, our government would respond with force as well.
"Slaughtering his own people" sounds a little propogandish to me. Are you saying that Qaddafi is taking people who have no connection to the rebellion at all and slaughtering them?
How can any government meet armed internal rebellion without qualifying as "slaughtering their own people"?
As others have pointed out, killing a peaceful protester (or non-involved innocent civilian for that matter) is never justified.
If a rebellion sprang up in the United States, our government would respond with force as well.
"Slaughtering his own people" sounds a little propogandish to me. Are you saying that Qaddafi is taking people who have no connection to the rebellion at all and slaughtering them?
How can any government meet armed internal rebellion without qualifying as "slaughtering their own people"?
As others have pointed out, killing a peaceful protester (or non-involved innocent civilian for that matter) is never justified.
nilk
Apr 6, 04:14 PM
I run a Windows VM with 1 GB of dedicated memory and a Linux VM with 1.5 GB of dedicated memory. All while Xcode is open and doing something in every OS.
Seriously, software development is about the less ressource hungry task you can do on modern computers. Browsers use more system ressources nowadays than code editors/compilers/debuggers.
Totally depends on what tools you are using. Sure, when I'm at home working on a light webapp running nothing but Emacs, Chrome, Postgres, and using, for example, Python as my server-side language, 4GB of RAM is more than enough, hell I could get by with 2GB no problem.
But at work I have open: Eclipse, one or more instance of Tomcat or Jetty, Oracle SQL Developer (Java app), Windows VM with Visual Studio and other tools, and maybe a Linux VM running Oracle. I always have the Windows VM running. When I had 4GB, things would drag, and I couldn't run the Linux VM without my system becoming unusable. Now that I have 8GB things run great; I can afford to give my Windows VM over 2GB, and I don't notice the difference between running and not running my Linux VM. Sometimes I have as many as 3 VMs running using over 3GB RAM in total and things are still smooth unless there's a lot of hard drive access going on.
But it's encourage to know that you're successfully using a MBA w/ 4GB even with VMs eating up half your RAM. Maybe the SSD makes a huge difference.
Seriously, software development is about the less ressource hungry task you can do on modern computers. Browsers use more system ressources nowadays than code editors/compilers/debuggers.
Totally depends on what tools you are using. Sure, when I'm at home working on a light webapp running nothing but Emacs, Chrome, Postgres, and using, for example, Python as my server-side language, 4GB of RAM is more than enough, hell I could get by with 2GB no problem.
But at work I have open: Eclipse, one or more instance of Tomcat or Jetty, Oracle SQL Developer (Java app), Windows VM with Visual Studio and other tools, and maybe a Linux VM running Oracle. I always have the Windows VM running. When I had 4GB, things would drag, and I couldn't run the Linux VM without my system becoming unusable. Now that I have 8GB things run great; I can afford to give my Windows VM over 2GB, and I don't notice the difference between running and not running my Linux VM. Sometimes I have as many as 3 VMs running using over 3GB RAM in total and things are still smooth unless there's a lot of hard drive access going on.
But it's encourage to know that you're successfully using a MBA w/ 4GB even with VMs eating up half your RAM. Maybe the SSD makes a huge difference.
gorgeousninja
Apr 20, 05:54 AM
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
You're really pushing this aren't you? So what exactly is your point that has a significant relevance to the main topic? ...None, that's what.
Just because 30 years ago Apple took an idea initially developed by Xerox, but then improved upon it and subsequently released to the mass market a product that most people acknowledge as being the first home computer, has absolutely no bearing on the fact that Samsung have blatantly copied Apple's design.
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
You're really pushing this aren't you? So what exactly is your point that has a significant relevance to the main topic? ...None, that's what.
Just because 30 years ago Apple took an idea initially developed by Xerox, but then improved upon it and subsequently released to the mass market a product that most people acknowledge as being the first home computer, has absolutely no bearing on the fact that Samsung have blatantly copied Apple's design.
totoum
Apr 12, 12:31 PM
I use ProRes for almost everything, so this doesn't bother me.
So wait,on the projects you're working on,is everyone using recorders to record direct to prores or do you enjoy having to waste time converting everything you get?
Never had problems with this.
Then I'm guessing you do your cross fades manualy?
edit:and I do get your point,it works,but other competitors over the last couple years have brought improvements that I'd like to also see in FCP
So wait,on the projects you're working on,is everyone using recorders to record direct to prores or do you enjoy having to waste time converting everything you get?
Never had problems with this.
Then I'm guessing you do your cross fades manualy?
edit:and I do get your point,it works,but other competitors over the last couple years have brought improvements that I'd like to also see in FCP
THX1139
Sep 20, 02:39 AM
Ah, a mature, intelligent, well reasoned reply.
What did you expect? Didn't you look at his avatar? Cool, Homer is a member of Macrumors. :D
What did you expect? Didn't you look at his avatar? Cool, Homer is a member of Macrumors. :D
DMann
Aug 7, 03:23 PM
The new HW is fine, but Leopard is exciting! I'll look forward to this as I have all the big cats.
In nine months or less......... we'll have those
Top Secret features in our machines - too bad
for Redmond they won't be revealed until then.
Core graphics and Quartz Extreme will be amazing.
Love Time Machine, Spaces, etc.
In nine months or less......... we'll have those
Top Secret features in our machines - too bad
for Redmond they won't be revealed until then.
Core graphics and Quartz Extreme will be amazing.
Love Time Machine, Spaces, etc.
bibbz
Jun 11, 09:09 PM
Okay, the guy I talked to seem pretty good. He just said he can't guarantee that they are even going to get the phones on the 24th. Thats what worried me. He said he couldn't promise me that they will have the phones on the 24th.
The way our DC knows to send us phones on launches is by how many we pre order.
For example for the evo launch my store pre ordered 10, so we were guaranteed to get 10. We also got some extra based on how many pre orders we took, so we got 15 total. The 5 extra were gone within the 1st hour. About 1/2 the pre orders were gone by 10, then the rest of the pre orders came in randomly throughout the day.
As a company we had 10k we could pre order. Once all the stores reached that limit, pre orders stopped. Then we had a different allocation of phones that were sent to stores based on how many preorders they did. I would imagine apple will have us in waaaay better position than just 10k for 4500ish stores.
One thing to be concerned about though if you are on the west coast is if we have say 25k to pre order from, the other 3 time zones have a 3 hour jump on those. All the pre orders could be gone by the time the west coast stores open. Pre order early, and pre order often!!
The way our DC knows to send us phones on launches is by how many we pre order.
For example for the evo launch my store pre ordered 10, so we were guaranteed to get 10. We also got some extra based on how many pre orders we took, so we got 15 total. The 5 extra were gone within the 1st hour. About 1/2 the pre orders were gone by 10, then the rest of the pre orders came in randomly throughout the day.
As a company we had 10k we could pre order. Once all the stores reached that limit, pre orders stopped. Then we had a different allocation of phones that were sent to stores based on how many preorders they did. I would imagine apple will have us in waaaay better position than just 10k for 4500ish stores.
One thing to be concerned about though if you are on the west coast is if we have say 25k to pre order from, the other 3 time zones have a 3 hour jump on those. All the pre orders could be gone by the time the west coast stores open. Pre order early, and pre order often!!
donlphi
Nov 29, 12:31 AM
I also wanted to add... go onto UNIVERSAL MUSIC GROUP (http://new.umusic.com/flash.aspx) and see how many groups you would be missing if ITUNES didn't offer Universal.
If you need "98 DEGREES" on your iPOD, then you better start freaking out...
Otherwise, don't sweat it. Universal has nothing to threaten Apple with. No worries here.
If you need "98 DEGREES" on your iPOD, then you better start freaking out...
Otherwise, don't sweat it. Universal has nothing to threaten Apple with. No worries here.
gekko513
Jul 15, 12:27 PM
Also, 1GB of RAM, who are they kidding? More like Mac Amateur
Many prefer to buy their own RAM because it's usually cheaper. There would be more people crying if Apple bundled 2GB of expensive RAM. They could offer a RAM downgrade of course, but then why not just give the price of the downgraded version, which leaves us at square one again.
Many prefer to buy their own RAM because it's usually cheaper. There would be more people crying if Apple bundled 2GB of expensive RAM. They could offer a RAM downgrade of course, but then why not just give the price of the downgraded version, which leaves us at square one again.
janstett
Oct 23, 11:44 AM
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
sirgant
Nov 29, 02:44 AM
What on earth are these people at music studio's thinking!!! Did they get royalties for every stereo sold? NO, so neither should they get anything for iPod or any hardware sales. Only for the products THEY supply, should they get money, being the music and movies/ video's, in other words the content.
This is typical behaviour of music studio's and I sincerely hope that Apple will not budge, nor should any other company. Of course MS is eager to pay as they need their Zune to succeed, and Universal is riding along for a slice of the pie, but who will loose out in the end is the consumer, as these royalties are eventually going to get calculated such that we will pay them......
We should all start protesting all record companies to clean up their act, in the mean time, the general consumer should to, copying of music is stealing, the prices on iTunes are fair and reasonable, so lets be nice and buy them properly, and the record companies can then make sure there is more for us to buy (some real refreshing new music would be nice, instead of all this "X factor, American idol, etc etc manufactured stuff....) , and not just fill their pockets as they are trying to do all the time
It's not music studios, but record companies, they are not the same entities.
A couple of things to clarify. I am actually a producer, who has a pre-existing deal with MCA/Universal Music Publishers.
1. Doug Morris, Chairman of Universal is a greedy bastard, who I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw him.
2. Artists, Songwriters & Producers are already getting screwed by major labels, not accounting properly, holding millions of dollars, using creative accounting practices etc.
3. The percentage breakdown with ITMS and labels is basically 65/35 as it is rounded off to the 100 in favor of the labels.
4. The real culprit here is Microsoft, who is whoring out Zunes in order to get a foothold on the marketplace. Consumers can speak with their pocketbooks, don't buy the crappy Zune players, but support your artists & songwriters who make a living off of sales, by purchasing music.
Thanks
This is typical behaviour of music studio's and I sincerely hope that Apple will not budge, nor should any other company. Of course MS is eager to pay as they need their Zune to succeed, and Universal is riding along for a slice of the pie, but who will loose out in the end is the consumer, as these royalties are eventually going to get calculated such that we will pay them......
We should all start protesting all record companies to clean up their act, in the mean time, the general consumer should to, copying of music is stealing, the prices on iTunes are fair and reasonable, so lets be nice and buy them properly, and the record companies can then make sure there is more for us to buy (some real refreshing new music would be nice, instead of all this "X factor, American idol, etc etc manufactured stuff....) , and not just fill their pockets as they are trying to do all the time
It's not music studios, but record companies, they are not the same entities.
A couple of things to clarify. I am actually a producer, who has a pre-existing deal with MCA/Universal Music Publishers.
1. Doug Morris, Chairman of Universal is a greedy bastard, who I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw him.
2. Artists, Songwriters & Producers are already getting screwed by major labels, not accounting properly, holding millions of dollars, using creative accounting practices etc.
3. The percentage breakdown with ITMS and labels is basically 65/35 as it is rounded off to the 100 in favor of the labels.
4. The real culprit here is Microsoft, who is whoring out Zunes in order to get a foothold on the marketplace. Consumers can speak with their pocketbooks, don't buy the crappy Zune players, but support your artists & songwriters who make a living off of sales, by purchasing music.
Thanks
pika2000
Mar 26, 01:01 AM
Sandy Bridge iMac + Lion. ;)
infidel69
Mar 31, 02:37 PM
Lol, the fragmentation that "doesnt exist".
I knew it would bite them in the ass someday.
How is it biting them in the ass? Android is the fastest growing OS with a larger share than IOS. I think it's been a very succesfull strategy.
I knew it would bite them in the ass someday.
How is it biting them in the ass? Android is the fastest growing OS with a larger share than IOS. I think it's been a very succesfull strategy.
Some_Big_Spoon
Aug 27, 12:56 PM
I'd like to see a couple pounds shaved off the iMac. I know it sounds goofy, but I'd like a machine thatI could transport easily either to work, or just room to room. It's very light now (considering how much is in there), but - 2 to 5 lbs. would be great.
Also, and I know peeps don't dig them, but the glossy screen would be nice. The glare's not cool, but the rich colors and brightness are tops.
Also, and I know peeps don't dig them, but the glossy screen would be nice. The glare's not cool, but the rich colors and brightness are tops.
ClimbingTheLog
Jul 20, 12:56 PM
Anyone else think this is getting out of hand? Two cores, great improvement. Four cores, ehh it's faster but Joe can't tell. Eight cores, now thats just stupid.
Let me guess it will only come with 512mb of Ram :p (ok it will be at least a GB).
Have you ever owned a machine that hasn't been CPU bound? I know I haven't.
you need to do your math better, extra core = 1.5x - 1.8x speed increase. but still the same power usage as a normal core!
Where do you get these magical free electrons to drive the second core? That's some fancy silicon that uses 0W.
eight cores + Tiger = Octopussy?!?
Even Apple isn't that cool. Alas, I fear "Mac Pro 8x3.2"
How fast do you want mail to go? The main reasons you need good processors is not for browsing, e-mail, text, and such and such. I highly doubt someone who does all these things on a five year old computer will be much slower than someone on a 16 GB RAM top of the line Powermac
Have you ever done a search on a large volume of mail with AppleMail? That can eat my CPU for hours on a large IMAP mailstore on a 1.5 year old Mac. How about using Firefox with a number of useful extensions? CPU pegged for minutes when loading up the day's news stories from my RSS reader, and that's with a 2-year old Mac.
Bring the speed.
Let me guess it will only come with 512mb of Ram :p (ok it will be at least a GB).
Have you ever owned a machine that hasn't been CPU bound? I know I haven't.
you need to do your math better, extra core = 1.5x - 1.8x speed increase. but still the same power usage as a normal core!
Where do you get these magical free electrons to drive the second core? That's some fancy silicon that uses 0W.
eight cores + Tiger = Octopussy?!?
Even Apple isn't that cool. Alas, I fear "Mac Pro 8x3.2"
How fast do you want mail to go? The main reasons you need good processors is not for browsing, e-mail, text, and such and such. I highly doubt someone who does all these things on a five year old computer will be much slower than someone on a 16 GB RAM top of the line Powermac
Have you ever done a search on a large volume of mail with AppleMail? That can eat my CPU for hours on a large IMAP mailstore on a 1.5 year old Mac. How about using Firefox with a number of useful extensions? CPU pegged for minutes when loading up the day's news stories from my RSS reader, and that's with a 2-year old Mac.
Bring the speed.
SeaFox
Aug 5, 06:04 PM
I can't believe it's only two days away, how time flies.
I'll be expecting the new Mac Pro to show up (order now, shipping in 6-8 weeks) and new displays (to match the Mac Pro's new enclosure, and becuase they haven't been updated in waaaay too long).
I don't think anything iPod-related will happen, but I'd really like them to update the Shuffle if they're going to.
I'll be expecting the new Mac Pro to show up (order now, shipping in 6-8 weeks) and new displays (to match the Mac Pro's new enclosure, and becuase they haven't been updated in waaaay too long).
I don't think anything iPod-related will happen, but I'd really like them to update the Shuffle if they're going to.
littleman23408
Dec 7, 08:10 AM
I settled for 2nd on that test. Gold isnt worth the aggravation.
I found a youtube vid of a guy showing him get gold. I am getting oh so close to mimicing him and getting 1st. I almost decided to stay up all night last night if I had to, but then I chose otherwise. Maybe I will try a couple more times later tonight.
I found a youtube vid of a guy showing him get gold. I am getting oh so close to mimicing him and getting 1st. I almost decided to stay up all night last night if I had to, but then I chose otherwise. Maybe I will try a couple more times later tonight.
kdarling
Apr 27, 10:20 AM
Ever been to NTTC Corry?
Oops, you deleted your PS.
No sir, trained at DLI Monterey and Goodfellow AFB. Damn, how come the Navy always has the bases at the nicest spots? :)
Oops, you deleted your PS.
No sir, trained at DLI Monterey and Goodfellow AFB. Damn, how come the Navy always has the bases at the nicest spots? :)
Nuck81
Dec 9, 11:24 AM
My biggest complaint about the game is that it's atmosphere and presentation are just absolutely sterile.
With the exception of car models the graphics don't approach what we see in other console racers. NFSL Shift makes it look like a PS2 game when it comes to detail, but GT5 makes a huge comeback and almost breaks dead even since it runs at 60fps. I went back and played Shift the other day and it was so choppy I almost couldn't play it.
The sound is also disappointing. Except for the car engines (to the guy that said they all sound the same, stop putting the same muffler and tranny on every car, it covers up their distinct sound) everything else is canned a tinny. When I go off track I hardly get any indication on sound. Go off track on Shift and you can hear pebbles, gravel, and dirt grinding under your car and banging around on the sides. Shift snarls, roars, rumbles and get's you excited to be out there and racing with other cars. GT5 is like driving miss daisy. The AI follows a single line, there is no off road sound, hardly any rumble on the gamepad, and it doesn't do a lot to put you in the game.
But GT5 makes up for a lot just by how the cars feel when they drive. Every single car is different and you can tell instantly. It drives so well I had to go get a Driving Force GT just to enjoy the drive as much as I can. Also I'll use it for Shift 2, and other racing games I have.
If you want a racing game, there are better ones than GT5. I'd recommend Shift over GT5 to someone who just wants a racing game. But if you want to drive cars, and come as close as you can without actually driving one on a console, there is not a better ride on any system (other than PC) than GT5.
With the exception of car models the graphics don't approach what we see in other console racers. NFSL Shift makes it look like a PS2 game when it comes to detail, but GT5 makes a huge comeback and almost breaks dead even since it runs at 60fps. I went back and played Shift the other day and it was so choppy I almost couldn't play it.
The sound is also disappointing. Except for the car engines (to the guy that said they all sound the same, stop putting the same muffler and tranny on every car, it covers up their distinct sound) everything else is canned a tinny. When I go off track I hardly get any indication on sound. Go off track on Shift and you can hear pebbles, gravel, and dirt grinding under your car and banging around on the sides. Shift snarls, roars, rumbles and get's you excited to be out there and racing with other cars. GT5 is like driving miss daisy. The AI follows a single line, there is no off road sound, hardly any rumble on the gamepad, and it doesn't do a lot to put you in the game.
But GT5 makes up for a lot just by how the cars feel when they drive. Every single car is different and you can tell instantly. It drives so well I had to go get a Driving Force GT just to enjoy the drive as much as I can. Also I'll use it for Shift 2, and other racing games I have.
If you want a racing game, there are better ones than GT5. I'd recommend Shift over GT5 to someone who just wants a racing game. But if you want to drive cars, and come as close as you can without actually driving one on a console, there is not a better ride on any system (other than PC) than GT5.
No comments:
Post a Comment