or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by jasenj1

FWIW, I'm with cubist on this one. Apple should use the compiler that generates the fastest code possible for OS X. They can distribute GCC and XCode that generates decent speed code and is library compatible with the OS; that's not that hard. Metrowerks still sells CodeWarrior for the Mac and that uses their own compiler and interfaces with the OS libraries. Again, I like that the OS keeps getting faster, but I'm disappointed that Apple isn't using the fastest tool...
> Kudos to Micro Net for the mini Mate. Yes. Very nice looking unit. The 80 GB model appears overpriced, but all the others are right in there with external drives that don't offer USB and FireWire, and extra ports,. Only one minor gripe: no ports on the front. Interesting that they only claim 50 MB/s transfer rate on the FireWire connection. Shouldn't that be higher? - Jasen.
As a G3 owner, this is the sort of thing that both encourages and discourages me. On the one hand, OS X gets faster with each release and it's great to see Apple improving performance on an already snappy OS. On the other hand, why hasn't Apple used a better optimized compiler a long time ago? How much performance is being wasted in all Macs due to inefficient compilation? - Jasen.
Ugh. I think I'm pretty unhappy about this, too. Both companies have software that competes, has loyal followings, and does things differently enough to appeal to different people. Merging the two companies will undoubtedly result in the loss of some of that competion which helps products from both companies get better. OTOH, will some other company rise up and take Macromedia's place? There certainly must be sleeper software out there that can take advantage of...
Yeah. I think the new Pro apps (and iMovie HD) and Tiger make a great lineup on the software side. And every piece of Apple software (ok, the vast majority) must run on a piece of Apple hardware, so they make money twice. Sure, any of the apps may not be the FASTEST in the universe, but they are darn nice. I think Apple (and the rest of us who follow their products) are still stinging from IBM's "promise" to reach 3GHz and then missing. Unfortunately, the whole CPU...
April 29th is also the day the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy movie will hit the theaters. Coincindence? Maybe Apple will initially release version 10.4.2? Will there be a towel? Perhaps a new Infinite Improbability CPU? - Jasen. P.S. Oops. I see this has already been mentioned further up. Oh well, I still think it's funny.
I'll never understand stock analysts. Apple: We did REALLY well this past quarter, we sold a ton of stuff, increased our profit margins, put a bunch of cash in the giant horde we already have, increased sales in non-US markets. Life is good. Analysts: Apple can't possibly continue to do well. The stock price is overinflated because everyone expects them to do well, but they won't. (Oh, they'll continue to be profitable, but not AS profitable as everyone secretly...
Pfft. I bought my G3/350 with a DVD-ROM back in `99 expecting software to move to DVD delivery. Nice to see Apple finally taking the step. - Jasen. (P.S. Of course, my DVD drive died a couple years ago and I replaced it with a CD burner. D'oh! But I just ordered a Pioneer burner from NewEgg for $65, so I'm back up to date - till BluRay takes over. )
Actually, all of today's machines can run Core Image - some just run it on the CPU rather than the GPU. Yeah, yeah, but the whole point of Core Image is to offload processing to the GPU, isn't it? Not really. Core Image provides more than that, but offloading to the GPU is a nice feature for the CPU-cycle maximizers amongst us. But I agree, it'd be nice if Apple would update all their machines so the GPUs could run Core Image. I'm hoping the next iBook update does - and...
I agree. This made no sense to me. And why limit the chips to the mobile space? The Mini, laptops, and even iMac are all designed to run cool = low power. Why not throw one of these chips in a HT Mini, or add them to the motherboards of the laptops? Not reading the techincal details, it's unclear to me how these new chips relate to current graphics cards. Or do they offload processing from the CPU? Can anyone offer clarification? - Jasen.
New Posts  All Forums: