SevenInchScrew
Nov 24, 01:20 PM
...I can't say how this compares to GT4 but so far it's been amazing
You have 800 cars exactly as they were in GT4, so you'll get a good idea. :p
My buddy picked this up today, so I'll be checking it out on Friday when we hang out. I'm not buying it without trying first. It will be interesting to see how well it plays. After waiting 6 years for another full Gran Turismo, I have big expectations. But hey, even if it doesn't play as well as I'm hoping, the photo mode looks excellent. I can spend a LOT of time in there.
You have 800 cars exactly as they were in GT4, so you'll get a good idea. :p
My buddy picked this up today, so I'll be checking it out on Friday when we hang out. I'm not buying it without trying first. It will be interesting to see how well it plays. After waiting 6 years for another full Gran Turismo, I have big expectations. But hey, even if it doesn't play as well as I'm hoping, the photo mode looks excellent. I can spend a LOT of time in there.
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.
DStaal
Jul 20, 09:33 AM
...Quad Duo?
...Quadra Duo?
...the "holy hell this is faster than you'll ever need" Mac? :D
If it can't model WW2 D-Day in full holographic 3D, with AI ground troops, AI generals, real physics and weather effects I garuntee you there will be people asking for more power.
(Now, doesn't that sound like a sweet game? :) )
...Quadra Duo?
...the "holy hell this is faster than you'll ever need" Mac? :D
If it can't model WW2 D-Day in full holographic 3D, with AI ground troops, AI generals, real physics and weather effects I garuntee you there will be people asking for more power.
(Now, doesn't that sound like a sweet game? :) )
robotx21
Sep 19, 12:57 PM
I don't know if that's proof or a reason enough to think they'll have more than a chip drop-in, but I'm certainly hoping that it does get announced, and that you're right. :)
Well, like I have said before, brenthaven is releasing new "macbook pro" carrying cases next week the same time around the photokina event, and they are about 1/4" thicker in terms of "minimum/maximum" laptop specifications. This gives me reason to believe the case will be approx. .1-.3 inches thicker than current models, possibly making room for a better graphics card and dvd drive? Don't know...
Well, like I have said before, brenthaven is releasing new "macbook pro" carrying cases next week the same time around the photokina event, and they are about 1/4" thicker in terms of "minimum/maximum" laptop specifications. This gives me reason to believe the case will be approx. .1-.3 inches thicker than current models, possibly making room for a better graphics card and dvd drive? Don't know...
Unspeaked
Nov 29, 11:10 AM
You posted a list of artist people will start to illegally copy if Universal starts to tax iPods....
Hey, what they do with the list is their business...
All I was doing was letting the thread know the breadth of Universal's stable!
;)
Hey, what they do with the list is their business...
All I was doing was letting the thread know the breadth of Universal's stable!
;)
LagunaSol
Apr 6, 04:08 PM
Is every app in the app store of the same caliber as those few apps you named?
Did I say that? No. (Strawman alert.) But there are a lot. Far more than you'll find for Honeycomb, despite mobilehavoc's contention to the contrary.
I'm sure you'll be the first to dance happy around when in the future finally some 5 year old Android apps/games will get ported to iOS like it is now with Windows/MacOS.
Ah, Android gaming. You seem to have things reversed in your head:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JICitdMtY5U
Did I say that? No. (Strawman alert.) But there are a lot. Far more than you'll find for Honeycomb, despite mobilehavoc's contention to the contrary.
I'm sure you'll be the first to dance happy around when in the future finally some 5 year old Android apps/games will get ported to iOS like it is now with Windows/MacOS.
Ah, Android gaming. You seem to have things reversed in your head:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JICitdMtY5U
princealfie
Nov 29, 09:16 AM
They aren't. The entire music business revenues are down 40% since 2001. Sales are down hugely. I can tell you from representing these artists that all the money is down too.
Are you spending as much on music as you did years ago?
Of course not. Most of the music sucks to be honest nowadays. I prefer the underground stuff from emusic, not big label stuff.
For example, Jay-Z's new album sucks compared to Reasonable Doubt.
The same with Nas nowadays compared to Illmatic.
The same with Mobb Deep.
etc. etc.
Get the picture? Artists who are hungry in the beginning put out a good album. Then they fall off the earth.
It's only the music industry that is losing quality. The only album this year that's from a major label that's any good this year is DJ Primo's production on Christina Aguilera's album and that's it period.
Sad, isn't it?
Are you spending as much on music as you did years ago?
Of course not. Most of the music sucks to be honest nowadays. I prefer the underground stuff from emusic, not big label stuff.
For example, Jay-Z's new album sucks compared to Reasonable Doubt.
The same with Nas nowadays compared to Illmatic.
The same with Mobb Deep.
etc. etc.
Get the picture? Artists who are hungry in the beginning put out a good album. Then they fall off the earth.
It's only the music industry that is losing quality. The only album this year that's from a major label that's any good this year is DJ Primo's production on Christina Aguilera's album and that's it period.
Sad, isn't it?
skunk
Feb 28, 06:04 PM
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things.No, it's called "living a human lifestyle".
I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.Why should your hang-ups be of any relevance to anybody else? Perhaps you need to deal with your own perceptions instead of relying on some dusty tome to tell you what to think. You know that Plato was a repressed homosexual, don't you? He spent hours at the gymnasium ogling naked young men, and perhaps like S/Paul, spent a lot of effort telling other people how to love to expiate his guilty feelings.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage.You are extraordinarily keen to prescribe what other people should do. What's it got to do with you?
If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away.You sound like a real catch, but hey, what you choose to do is up to you.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.So, you assert that a married non-Christian couple can do nothing but fornicate? What an appallingly demeaning attitude! Do you regard any couple you meet as probable fornicators by default? Do you question them about whether they use birth control, or whether they were married, and if so whether it was in a Catholic church with the proper sacraments? You clearly swallow Catholic dogma hook, line and sinker, so choosing righteous friends must be a real PITA.
I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.Why should your hang-ups be of any relevance to anybody else? Perhaps you need to deal with your own perceptions instead of relying on some dusty tome to tell you what to think. You know that Plato was a repressed homosexual, don't you? He spent hours at the gymnasium ogling naked young men, and perhaps like S/Paul, spent a lot of effort telling other people how to love to expiate his guilty feelings.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage.You are extraordinarily keen to prescribe what other people should do. What's it got to do with you?
If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away.You sound like a real catch, but hey, what you choose to do is up to you.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.So, you assert that a married non-Christian couple can do nothing but fornicate? What an appallingly demeaning attitude! Do you regard any couple you meet as probable fornicators by default? Do you question them about whether they use birth control, or whether they were married, and if so whether it was in a Catholic church with the proper sacraments? You clearly swallow Catholic dogma hook, line and sinker, so choosing righteous friends must be a real PITA.
odedia
Aug 27, 03:19 AM
I dont see much change really, the 1.66GHz merom chip will find its way into the mini (they'll scrap the solo model).
The 1.83 & 2.00GHz for iMacs (if they use merom) and MacBooks and the 2.16 and 2.33 for the 15 & 17 MBPs respectively. Its that simple.
the iMac will get a conroe. Nothing can be as dumb as putting a laptop chip in the desktop iMac. If the iMac could hold a G5 in it, it sure can hold a Conroe chip.
The 1.83 & 2.00GHz for iMacs (if they use merom) and MacBooks and the 2.16 and 2.33 for the 15 & 17 MBPs respectively. Its that simple.
the iMac will get a conroe. Nothing can be as dumb as putting a laptop chip in the desktop iMac. If the iMac could hold a G5 in it, it sure can hold a Conroe chip.
epitaphic
Aug 20, 08:07 AM
Not every professional is going to need more than 4 cores let alone be willing to pay for it. I think the more processors, the more specialized the computer is going to become.
This is precisely the transition we've been seeing for some time, becoming more and more apparent every 6 months. Computers are no longer general purpose machines. It's already happened to consumers: machines today are way more than what's needed for web and email. For prosumers, its just about right, for gamers, you can never have enough single core + GPU power.
I think its fair to say to that the Mac Pro is in a way too specialized already. If you look at it's server RAM for example, which group of professionals benefits from its strengths? How many professionals will actually be able to get close to using all four cores during their normal workflow?
The way i see it, there are about 8 mainstream lines of professionals:
- 3D Artists
- Coders
- Graphic Designers
- IT
- Multimedia Artists
- Musicians
- Photographers
- Video Editors
Who can fully utilize 4 cores right now? I'd say possibly 3D Artists, Musicians(quad G5 only), and IT.
Sure everyone else will probably get a 15% kick in performance in some apps but for the most part, 4 core Mac Pro is not going to make your apps run any faster (it does give the machine more headroom for ample multitasking though). Of course at the moment there is only a 4 core Mac Pro so it's a bit academic to discuss the fact that a 2 core Mac Pro would be just as productive and much more cost effective. However, as most of you probably already know, there are good chances of an 8 core Mac Pro in January.
Sidenote: This sort of update (new machine in August, new machine following January) is not new. It happened in 2002-2003 resulting in the top of the line machine introduced in August to drop 40% in price in January.
So the interesting thing to speculate now is, if most of us have a hard time utilizing a quad to its full potential, what would an 8 core do for you? I know its not cost effective for apple at the moment, but in the future I suspect we'll be seeing 4-8 lines of professional macs.
This is precisely the transition we've been seeing for some time, becoming more and more apparent every 6 months. Computers are no longer general purpose machines. It's already happened to consumers: machines today are way more than what's needed for web and email. For prosumers, its just about right, for gamers, you can never have enough single core + GPU power.
I think its fair to say to that the Mac Pro is in a way too specialized already. If you look at it's server RAM for example, which group of professionals benefits from its strengths? How many professionals will actually be able to get close to using all four cores during their normal workflow?
The way i see it, there are about 8 mainstream lines of professionals:
- 3D Artists
- Coders
- Graphic Designers
- IT
- Multimedia Artists
- Musicians
- Photographers
- Video Editors
Who can fully utilize 4 cores right now? I'd say possibly 3D Artists, Musicians(quad G5 only), and IT.
Sure everyone else will probably get a 15% kick in performance in some apps but for the most part, 4 core Mac Pro is not going to make your apps run any faster (it does give the machine more headroom for ample multitasking though). Of course at the moment there is only a 4 core Mac Pro so it's a bit academic to discuss the fact that a 2 core Mac Pro would be just as productive and much more cost effective. However, as most of you probably already know, there are good chances of an 8 core Mac Pro in January.
Sidenote: This sort of update (new machine in August, new machine following January) is not new. It happened in 2002-2003 resulting in the top of the line machine introduced in August to drop 40% in price in January.
So the interesting thing to speculate now is, if most of us have a hard time utilizing a quad to its full potential, what would an 8 core do for you? I know its not cost effective for apple at the moment, but in the future I suspect we'll be seeing 4-8 lines of professional macs.
jeanlain
Apr 12, 03:55 AM
"Insufficient content"
Is an error message that pops up at random. Very frustrating.
But Compressor don't. At least not if you send something from FC directly. You have to create a QuickTime file first, then open that in Compressor, then it will use all your cores.
BUT only if you have manage to set up Qmaster correctly first. It took me 5 days online to figure this out and make it work properly. I still come to post houses where they haven't figured this out.
It shouldn't have to be this complicated
The insufficient content shouldn't pop up at random, or there is a bug. It pops up when there is insufficient content for a transition. Some transitions like crossfade are centered at the end/starting point of a clip. So it expands past/before this point, hence the need of additional content in the file.
I didn't know about that multicore issue with Compressor when launched directly from the timeline. I suspect an issue with your setup. Compressor does make good use of my 4 cores on mpeg2 and I never set up Qmaster.
Is an error message that pops up at random. Very frustrating.
But Compressor don't. At least not if you send something from FC directly. You have to create a QuickTime file first, then open that in Compressor, then it will use all your cores.
BUT only if you have manage to set up Qmaster correctly first. It took me 5 days online to figure this out and make it work properly. I still come to post houses where they haven't figured this out.
It shouldn't have to be this complicated
The insufficient content shouldn't pop up at random, or there is a bug. It pops up when there is insufficient content for a transition. Some transitions like crossfade are centered at the end/starting point of a clip. So it expands past/before this point, hence the need of additional content in the file.
I didn't know about that multicore issue with Compressor when launched directly from the timeline. I suspect an issue with your setup. Compressor does make good use of my 4 cores on mpeg2 and I never set up Qmaster.
greenstork
Jul 31, 12:17 PM
I've built a gaming PC around the Core 2 Duo E6700. I'd like to be able to install OS X on it, because the only reason why I'd ever use Windows is for the latest games. Here are the spec's, think this would run OS X nicely? ;-)
Intel 975XBX Motherboard
Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 (should overclock to around 3.2 to 3.5 GHz with my Zalman CNPS9500 AT air cooler)
ATI Crossfire x1900 (crossfire master card)
Sapphire ATI x1900xt (in crossfire)
1GB Crucial Ballistix DDR2 800 Memory
2 x 320GB Seagate Perpendicular Recording SATA2 HD's in RAID 1
Antec Trupower II 550 watt power supply
Antec P180 case in black
... keep in mind I am a diehard Mac fan, but I've always wanted to build a gaming rig since I'm a hardcore gamer. After all, I'm writing this entry on my MacBook Pro. Mmmmm.
You should have waited for a Mac Pro. By hacking OS X to run on your custom built machine, you're constantly going to have to deal with a buggy Mac OS. There's no doubt that with every OS update, Apple will try to disable your hacked copy, if not fry your OS X installation. Make sure you partition...
I'm a gamer too and I'm just sitting on my hands waiting for a Mac Pro. Sure, it may be more expensive than a custom-built Intel machine, but it will run OS X like a charm, and that's ultimately the most important factor in my computer purchase. But access to Windows games and Mac OS X, that's a dream come true for this mac fanatic. I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that virtualization makes big enough strides that I never have to leave OS X to play Windows-based games.
Intel 975XBX Motherboard
Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 (should overclock to around 3.2 to 3.5 GHz with my Zalman CNPS9500 AT air cooler)
ATI Crossfire x1900 (crossfire master card)
Sapphire ATI x1900xt (in crossfire)
1GB Crucial Ballistix DDR2 800 Memory
2 x 320GB Seagate Perpendicular Recording SATA2 HD's in RAID 1
Antec Trupower II 550 watt power supply
Antec P180 case in black
... keep in mind I am a diehard Mac fan, but I've always wanted to build a gaming rig since I'm a hardcore gamer. After all, I'm writing this entry on my MacBook Pro. Mmmmm.
You should have waited for a Mac Pro. By hacking OS X to run on your custom built machine, you're constantly going to have to deal with a buggy Mac OS. There's no doubt that with every OS update, Apple will try to disable your hacked copy, if not fry your OS X installation. Make sure you partition...
I'm a gamer too and I'm just sitting on my hands waiting for a Mac Pro. Sure, it may be more expensive than a custom-built Intel machine, but it will run OS X like a charm, and that's ultimately the most important factor in my computer purchase. But access to Windows games and Mac OS X, that's a dream come true for this mac fanatic. I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that virtualization makes big enough strides that I never have to leave OS X to play Windows-based games.
BWhaler
Jul 14, 03:33 PM
I've never thought much of the relevance of its placement myself - why do you say that? Care to elaborate on why it is "REALLY stupid"?
1. Notice the power plug hole at the top? Now imagine a cord running out of it. Yup, there is a reason why Apple has put it at the bottom.
2. Top heavy.
1. Notice the power plug hole at the top? Now imagine a cord running out of it. Yup, there is a reason why Apple has put it at the bottom.
2. Top heavy.
Vegasman
Apr 25, 04:45 PM
Why should Location Services stop your phone from logging cell tower information, the same information your cell company logs?
Now if it's in Airplane Mode, then I'd wonder...
I don't think the "smart people" are all that smart if that's their issue!
People don't tend to lose their "cell tower information" stored on their carrier's servers too often.
They do however lose their phone in bars (ask Apple), in airports and other places.
And then there is the issue of the iTunes backup....
Imagine for a second you were going through a nasty divorce, and the crazy spouse got the Mac Book Pro as part of some early asset devying up. And just now you are finding out she has the backup of YOUR locations. Those same locations her sneaky lawyer can use to create this wild ass scenario that makes you look bad for reasons A, B and C.
Personal stuff needs to stay private and secure. It's incredible what malicious people can do with it it.
Now if it's in Airplane Mode, then I'd wonder...
I don't think the "smart people" are all that smart if that's their issue!
People don't tend to lose their "cell tower information" stored on their carrier's servers too often.
They do however lose their phone in bars (ask Apple), in airports and other places.
And then there is the issue of the iTunes backup....
Imagine for a second you were going through a nasty divorce, and the crazy spouse got the Mac Book Pro as part of some early asset devying up. And just now you are finding out she has the backup of YOUR locations. Those same locations her sneaky lawyer can use to create this wild ass scenario that makes you look bad for reasons A, B and C.
Personal stuff needs to stay private and secure. It's incredible what malicious people can do with it it.
TheAnswer
Jul 14, 09:00 PM
I'm going to guess that the power supply on top will be like the MDD models, and therefore add rooms for more hard drives and optical drives.
Either that, or the guy that made up these specs figured that mimicing the MDD structure would add street cred to the rumor of the two optical drives.
Either way, between the case redesign rumor and the Conroe vs. Woodcrest rumor, looks like WWDC will really boost the credibility of one rumors site and smash the other's credibility to pieces (unless they're both wrong).
Either that, or the guy that made up these specs figured that mimicing the MDD structure would add street cred to the rumor of the two optical drives.
Either way, between the case redesign rumor and the Conroe vs. Woodcrest rumor, looks like WWDC will really boost the credibility of one rumors site and smash the other's credibility to pieces (unless they're both wrong).
AppliedVisual
Oct 15, 12:59 PM
Why would Apple show their Clovertown workstations after HP and not simultaneusly with HP?
Because that's usually how it works. :confused:
HP is Intel's main launch partner for the quad-core Xeon and I think they have secured the first of the major shipments.
Because that's usually how it works. :confused:
HP is Intel's main launch partner for the quad-core Xeon and I think they have secured the first of the major shipments.
xsnightclub
Aug 6, 04:34 PM
Mike - I'm sure Apple had their IP counsel do a IP search prior to deciding on any names and filing for registration. That is the first and most basic step and is not going going to escape the experienced folks at whatever large firm Apple is using for IP these days. A TM approval from the USPTO doesn't take long at all, 10 to 18 months. Are you operating under the impression that Apple's registration hasn't already been approved? Did you protest the trademark during the time provided for the filing of protests during the trademark registration process? If you've registered mac-pro in the past, did you follow all the guidelines (e.g. providing notice that you were using the term within 6 months of your approval to the USPTO or request a six month extension with USPTO, etc.) have you renewed the registration? If you did file, had it approved, provided the notices of use to the the USPTO, and protested and lost on Apple's application, a bid for a TRO will be interesting as - assuming that last list of events - there are no rights being infringed. Of course, I'm not an IP att'y and there's a long list of assumptions here, and I'm sure if you did have an issue, a post on the MR forum wouldn't be your means of pursuing it.
I think the only assumption that matters with this matter, is that the poster actually is who he says he is. Which is highly doubtful.
This information is all easily found under corporate registration searches and USPTO filings.
This all seems like a child trying to copy the Tiger Direct fiasco.
Anyway, Bring on the new Mac Pros!
I think the only assumption that matters with this matter, is that the poster actually is who he says he is. Which is highly doubtful.
This information is all easily found under corporate registration searches and USPTO filings.
This all seems like a child trying to copy the Tiger Direct fiasco.
Anyway, Bring on the new Mac Pros!
MattInOz
Apr 6, 06:48 PM
I still don't think this means new MacBook Airs in June. Can anyone really see Apple releasing new hardware before Lion is released?
Yes I can...
In fact I expect it.
Then the full range of machines can run either SL or Lion. You don't normally see machines restricted to running the new OS until after update 2 or 3. Otherwise they'd be cutting off pro sales for people who rely on some 3rd party software that doesn't cope with Lion till those or the software itself updates.
Yes I can...
In fact I expect it.
Then the full range of machines can run either SL or Lion. You don't normally see machines restricted to running the new OS until after update 2 or 3. Otherwise they'd be cutting off pro sales for people who rely on some 3rd party software that doesn't cope with Lion till those or the software itself updates.
deconai
Aug 11, 03:37 PM
Well now you ignorant yankie ;) Firstly the mobile phone penetration in Europe is about 99% or maybe slighly more. You should really travel a bit to get some perspective.
And secondly, GSM has user base of over 1 billion while CDMA as you said has some 60m users. Which one you think would be more interesting market to cover for a new mobile phone manufacturer? And there is really no question of "we'll see which one wins" because GSM won a long long time ago, hands down.
Are you saying 99% of Europeans use cell phones or that 99% of Europe is cell-ready? If the former, then there must be a ton of kids yapping it up on the wireless. ;)
And secondly, GSM has user base of over 1 billion while CDMA as you said has some 60m users. Which one you think would be more interesting market to cover for a new mobile phone manufacturer? And there is really no question of "we'll see which one wins" because GSM won a long long time ago, hands down.
Are you saying 99% of Europeans use cell phones or that 99% of Europe is cell-ready? If the former, then there must be a ton of kids yapping it up on the wireless. ;)
juicedropsdeuce
Apr 6, 11:46 AM
Really what sort of clients ?
Some people do more than use Final Cut for making YouTube videos. FYI. :rolleyes:
Some people do more than use Final Cut for making YouTube videos. FYI. :rolleyes:
KnightWRX
Mar 26, 07:58 AM
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
faroZ06
Apr 27, 08:46 AM
Did you read ANY of the news articles.
With location services turned off, this data was still be collected. And Apple says this was a "bug"
So you're wrong.
Ok then show me where it says that turning location services off will not stop the tracking. I've scanned the articles and did not find anything that said that. If it does still track when you turn it off, I'd like to know.
With location services turned off, this data was still be collected. And Apple says this was a "bug"
So you're wrong.
Ok then show me where it says that turning location services off will not stop the tracking. I've scanned the articles and did not find anything that said that. If it does still track when you turn it off, I'd like to know.
jonnysods
Apr 6, 08:02 AM
Yikes! Better offload my copy of the current version of FCS before it drops too low.
Any takers? :D
Any takers? :D
skippy-fluff
Aug 25, 05:06 PM
The battery recall validator also rejected my battery, which is clearly in the range advertised on the web site. When I called the support lines yesterday, they didn't even try to take the call. Today I got through, and I got told by "Rachel" that there were a small number of batteries in the ranges that were manufactured by someone other than Sony. She couldn't tell me who, and when I asked for further information, she escalated the call.
The next guy, whose name I didn't catch, basically said the same thing. When I explained that I would like something from Apple indicating that the public listing on the recall didn't apply to me, he said that sometime in the future (unstated) this will get updated on the website. Since my primary reason for wanting it is to avoid potential airline troubles, that wasn't too great answer. His next suggestion, to print the validation failure, was funny, but not very practical. I fly about once a week, and I've already seen the dell guys being asked not to work on the plane. I don't want to be in that club, so I was pretty insistent that they write something down.
I asked them to send me something (even by fax) that simply said that my battery was not subject to recall, despite the fact it fell into the consumer product safety commission recalled range and Apple announced range (still up, with no amendment, by at https://support.apple.com/ibook_powerbook/batteryexchange/index.html). He could not.
I next got sent to Kelly, in customer service, whose attitude was about the least customer-service related of any of them. She tried to read out the web site to me, and got very frustrated when I pointed out that it did not say what she wanted it to say. It does not say that there are batteries in the ranges that are fine. It says at least twice that if you have a battery in the range you should send for a replacement and not use it. I pointed out to her that the trouble ticket I'd opened covered the ground nicely, and that all I wanted was a statement of the result: "Apple's support staff has worked with this customer and has established that the battery Serial No. XXXX is not subject to the recall on Sony-produced batteries". Or whatever language they like.
She agreed that this was truth, but said she could not provide any documentation. She also declined to escalate further.
Given that the validator has said no to people who should have gotten yes, relying on it as the last word is a bad idea. Get a real person on the phone. But even then, be prepared for frustration if you would like
anything but an oral assurance that the battery you have is good.
The next guy, whose name I didn't catch, basically said the same thing. When I explained that I would like something from Apple indicating that the public listing on the recall didn't apply to me, he said that sometime in the future (unstated) this will get updated on the website. Since my primary reason for wanting it is to avoid potential airline troubles, that wasn't too great answer. His next suggestion, to print the validation failure, was funny, but not very practical. I fly about once a week, and I've already seen the dell guys being asked not to work on the plane. I don't want to be in that club, so I was pretty insistent that they write something down.
I asked them to send me something (even by fax) that simply said that my battery was not subject to recall, despite the fact it fell into the consumer product safety commission recalled range and Apple announced range (still up, with no amendment, by at https://support.apple.com/ibook_powerbook/batteryexchange/index.html). He could not.
I next got sent to Kelly, in customer service, whose attitude was about the least customer-service related of any of them. She tried to read out the web site to me, and got very frustrated when I pointed out that it did not say what she wanted it to say. It does not say that there are batteries in the ranges that are fine. It says at least twice that if you have a battery in the range you should send for a replacement and not use it. I pointed out to her that the trouble ticket I'd opened covered the ground nicely, and that all I wanted was a statement of the result: "Apple's support staff has worked with this customer and has established that the battery Serial No. XXXX is not subject to the recall on Sony-produced batteries". Or whatever language they like.
She agreed that this was truth, but said she could not provide any documentation. She also declined to escalate further.
Given that the validator has said no to people who should have gotten yes, relying on it as the last word is a bad idea. Get a real person on the phone. But even then, be prepared for frustration if you would like
anything but an oral assurance that the battery you have is good.
No comments:
Post a Comment