Wait a sec...are they FINALLY adding "Save and Shutdown" or "Hibernate" as Windows calls it, where it saves the RAM contents to the hard drive? That would be sweet, and make PowerBook and iBook users very very happy.
Hibernate SUCKS I have used it and it seems to screw things up, I seem to after wakeing a system up, get a bunch of memory errors.
When are we going to get a Finder that's even close to being as fast as Windows Explorer? I'd pay $129 for that, easily.
The other stuff is just icing. Apple, it's been almost 4 years, when are you going to give us a decent Finder? How about a decent UI for browsing network volumes? Let's get the fundamentals right, before we go setting up any whizbang stuff...
uhhh take a look at spotlight.... u wont even have to use the finder anymore.. and im sure it will be wayyyy faster than windows explorer
uhhh take a look at spotlight.... u wont even have to use the finder anymore.. and im sure it will be wayyyy faster than windows explorer
I was reading something a while back and if I recall it correctly, it said that Apple's new focus was to make it so easy to find things that the Finder wasn't even used very much anymore.
A document-centric approach if you will. Instead of digging through folders looking for apps and files just make a huge database of everything, and let the user search when they need to find a file. So unless Apple invents some radical new version of the finder, expect it to be less and less of a focus and new apps like Spotlight become the focus of Apple's system software.
I'm absolutely getting Tiger, and I think those who don't see the value don't get how significant the changes are.
Tiger is not about a bunch of stupid eye candy, although it has some.
Spotlight and coreaudio and corevideo will take your Mac experience to the next level.
Plus when the community of Dashboard developers flourishes and there are tons of add-ons--sort of like Konfabulator started to be then died off--resistance will be futile.
Tiger is the best OSX yet. I hate to say it, but if you don't see it, you're really missing the boat.
If you're not getting Tiger then ask yourself. "Why the hell am I into computing"
Tiger is the culmination of over 2 years of hard work by a programming team. Your productivity should go up. I get a kick out of someone who says.
Automator- "I'd never use that"
Spotlight- "I like my current organizational structure"
Dashboard- "That's a Konfabulator rip"
Quicktime "I use Videolan or XXXX"
There is always a negative justification for you to build a crutch. I presume that most of this stems from people that just don't want to part with more money. Computers can be a hard habit to feed at times.
will Tiger be fully dedicated to 64-bit processing? i'm kinda waiting until 64-bit processing becomes the new industry standard (at least with all Macs) before i upgrade to a new Mac OS
will Tiger be fully dedicated to 64-bit processing? i'm kinda waiting until 64-bit processing becomes the new industry standard (at least with all Macs) before i upgrade to a new Mac OS
Panther is 64-bit, so will be Tiger, but to more extent, full 64-bit support.
the Panther OS can take full advantage of the G5 chip? i thought in certain applications it bascially ran in "32-bit mode" or something
While Tiger will most certainly have more optimizations for the G5, whether your apps are 32-bit or 64-bit, the G5 doesn't care. There's no "32-bit" mode, it's all one-and-the-same "mode." The only thing you gain by going to 64-bit is being able to have more memory available to processes/apps. The only apps that need or would benefit from that are science stuff (that I will not pretend to understand) and video editing.
TextEdit, Safari, iTunes, and a vast majority of the apps that most people use will not run any faster if they were compiled in a "64-bit mode." Unless you've got one massive iTunes library...
There's a bunch of threads out there that would explain this phenomena more in-depth.
While Tiger will most certainly have more optimizations for the G5, whether your apps are 32-bit or 64-bit, the G5 doesn't care. There's no "32-bit" mode, it's all one-and-the-same "mode." The only thing you gain by going to 64-bit is being able to have more memory available to processes/apps. The only apps that need or would benefit from that are science stuff (that I will not pretend to understand) and video editing.
TextEdit, Safari, iTunes, and a vast majority of the apps that most people use will not run any faster if they were compiled in a "64-bit mode." Unless you've got one massive iTunes library...
There's a bunch of threads out there that would explain this phenomena more in-depth.
Video, such as recording it or converting it from MPEG-2 to MPEG-4 or DivX or H.264 when it becomes a realistic choice, place some pretty substantial loads on a system. If the apps were to be optimized for a 64 bit processor things could be speeded up appreciably. If one gets into HD video capture and editing I am not sure there is a thing as too much processing power.
Music has always been limited by the capacity of the CD media and the format recording it. Though no one has addressed the possibility of changing codecs or media (and players) for music it would be interesting to see just what improvements are possible.
Video, such as recording it or converting it from MPEG-2 to MPEG-4 or DivX or H.264 when it becomes a realistic choice, place some pretty substantial loads on a system. If the apps were to be optimized for a 64 bit processor things could be speeded up appreciably. If one gets into HD video capture and editing I am not sure there is a thing as too much processing power.
Music has always been limited by the capacity of the CD media and the format recording it. Though no one has addressed the possibility of changing codecs or media (and players) for music it would be interesting to see just what improvements are possible.
definitely, but I think the important thing to see is that CD audio is uncompresseed, video is compressed, H.264 is a compression albeit a better compression.
definitely, but I think the important thing to see is that CD audio is uncompresseed, video is compressed, H.264 is a compression albeit a better compression.
Most definitely, but with music there have been definite limits to what could be used as the input source. MP3s had a sufficient quality loss that they were not a useful codec for original CDs/albums. I do not know what testing has been done in the area of H.264 or even DivX 6 (which has recently been proposed as a standard for HD recordings using existing equipment, not Blu-Ray!) that the opportunity exists to see what can be done. It is not that the current generation of CDs are "bad", but they are not comparable to a good analog (vinyl) recording in a critical listening environment. IIRC there was a "super CD" a few years ago that offered technically superior recordings but never gained sufficient acceptance to become a commercial standard. It could be that we will remain with the uncompressed AIFF/WAV file standards simply for those reasons.
Most definitely, but with music there have been definite limits to what could be used as the input source. MP3s had a sufficient quality loss that they were not a useful codec for original CDs/albums. I do not know what testing has been done in the area of H.264 or even DivX 6 (which has recently been proposed as a standard for HD recordings using existing equipment, not Blu-Ray!) that the opportunity exists to see what can be done. It is not that the current generation of CDs are "bad", but they are not comparable to a good analog (vinyl) recording in a critical listening environment. IIRC there was a "super CD" a few years ago that offered technically superior recordings but never gained sufficient acceptance to become a commercial standard. It could be that we will remain with the uncompressed AIFF/WAV file standards simply for those reasons.
Cheers!
VHS was inferior and still one! Yeah CDs do not have the range found in Vinyl, I love vinyl. I do a show for a local radio station and i love to use vinyl.
I'll most likely be buying the first revision of PowerMac G5 that comes with Tiger... unless I can't resist and buy Tiger by itself..
I'll probably buy a PowerBook today (if they come out) and then get Tiger, i can't wait till Tiger for a new computer. Also probably better to wait for the first revision to Tiger - remember Panther and filevault!
I'll probably buy a PowerBook today (if they come out) and then get Tiger, i can't wait till Tiger for a new computer. Also probably better to wait for the first revision to Tiger - remember Panther and filevault!
Are you kidding me? This update is HUGE. CoreData is HUGE. 10.4 and Xcode 2 will be a boon for developing inhouse apps. I'm on it like white on rice, like ugly on an ape, like stink on shit, etc, etc.
Comments
Originally posted by Aquatic
Wait a sec...are they FINALLY adding "Save and Shutdown" or "Hibernate" as Windows calls it, where it saves the RAM contents to the hard drive? That would be sweet, and make PowerBook and iBook users very very happy.
Hibernate SUCKS I have used it and it seems to screw things up, I seem to after wakeing a system up, get a bunch of memory errors.
Originally posted by a_greer
Hibernate SUCKS I have used it and it seems to screw things up, I seem to after wakeing a system up, get a bunch of memory errors.
I have a windows box at home for CAD work and hibernate it, i never have any problems! I have problems with everything else though!!!
Originally posted by Gizzmonic
All the new features? Feh.
When are we going to get a Finder that's even close to being as fast as Windows Explorer? I'd pay $129 for that, easily.
The other stuff is just icing. Apple, it's been almost 4 years, when are you going to give us a decent Finder? How about a decent UI for browsing network volumes? Let's get the fundamentals right, before we go setting up any whizbang stuff...
uhhh take a look at spotlight.... u wont even have to use the finder anymore.. and im sure it will be wayyyy faster than windows explorer
Originally posted by Ferali
uhhh take a look at spotlight.... u wont even have to use the finder anymore.. and im sure it will be wayyyy faster than windows explorer
I was reading something a while back and if I recall it correctly, it said that Apple's new focus was to make it so easy to find things that the Finder wasn't even used very much anymore.
A document-centric approach if you will. Instead of digging through folders looking for apps and files just make a huge database of everything, and let the user search when they need to find a file. So unless Apple invents some radical new version of the finder, expect it to be less and less of a focus and new apps like Spotlight become the focus of Apple's system software.
Tiger is not about a bunch of stupid eye candy, although it has some.
Spotlight and coreaudio and corevideo will take your Mac experience to the next level.
Plus when the community of Dashboard developers flourishes and there are tons of add-ons--sort of like Konfabulator started to be then died off--resistance will be futile.
Tiger is the best OSX yet. I hate to say it, but if you don't see it, you're really missing the boat.
Tiger is the culmination of over 2 years of hard work by a programming team. Your productivity should go up. I get a kick out of someone who says.
Automator- "I'd never use that"
Spotlight- "I like my current organizational structure"
Dashboard- "That's a Konfabulator rip"
Quicktime "I use Videolan or XXXX"
There is always a negative justification for you to build a crutch. I presume that most of this stems from people that just don't want to part with more money. Computers can be a hard habit to feed at times.
Originally posted by Performa636CD
will Tiger be fully dedicated to 64-bit processing? i'm kinda waiting until 64-bit processing becomes the new industry standard (at least with all Macs) before i upgrade to a new Mac OS
Panther is 64-bit, so will be Tiger, but to more extent, full 64-bit support.
Originally posted by Performa636CD
the Panther OS can take full advantage of the G5 chip? i thought in certain applications it bascially ran in "32-bit mode" or something
While Tiger will most certainly have more optimizations for the G5, whether your apps are 32-bit or 64-bit, the G5 doesn't care. There's no "32-bit" mode, it's all one-and-the-same "mode." The only thing you gain by going to 64-bit is being able to have more memory available to processes/apps. The only apps that need or would benefit from that are science stuff (that I will not pretend to understand) and video editing.
TextEdit, Safari, iTunes, and a vast majority of the apps that most people use will not run any faster if they were compiled in a "64-bit mode." Unless you've got one massive iTunes library...
There's a bunch of threads out there that would explain this phenomena more in-depth.
Edit: Here's one.
Originally posted by SS3 GokouX
While Tiger will most certainly have more optimizations for the G5, whether your apps are 32-bit or 64-bit, the G5 doesn't care. There's no "32-bit" mode, it's all one-and-the-same "mode." The only thing you gain by going to 64-bit is being able to have more memory available to processes/apps. The only apps that need or would benefit from that are science stuff (that I will not pretend to understand) and video editing.
TextEdit, Safari, iTunes, and a vast majority of the apps that most people use will not run any faster if they were compiled in a "64-bit mode." Unless you've got one massive iTunes library...
There's a bunch of threads out there that would explain this phenomena more in-depth.
Edit: Here's one.
Video, such as recording it or converting it from MPEG-2 to MPEG-4 or DivX or H.264 when it becomes a realistic choice, place some pretty substantial loads on a system. If the apps were to be optimized for a 64 bit processor things could be speeded up appreciably. If one gets into HD video capture and editing I am not sure there is a thing as too much processing power.
Music has always been limited by the capacity of the CD media and the format recording it. Though no one has addressed the possibility of changing codecs or media (and players) for music it would be interesting to see just what improvements are possible.
Originally posted by RBR
Video, such as recording it or converting it from MPEG-2 to MPEG-4 or DivX or H.264 when it becomes a realistic choice, place some pretty substantial loads on a system. If the apps were to be optimized for a 64 bit processor things could be speeded up appreciably. If one gets into HD video capture and editing I am not sure there is a thing as too much processing power.
Music has always been limited by the capacity of the CD media and the format recording it. Though no one has addressed the possibility of changing codecs or media (and players) for music it would be interesting to see just what improvements are possible.
definitely, but I think the important thing to see is that CD audio is uncompresseed, video is compressed, H.264 is a compression albeit a better compression.
Originally posted by MacCrazy
definitely, but I think the important thing to see is that CD audio is uncompresseed, video is compressed, H.264 is a compression albeit a better compression.
Most definitely, but with music there have been definite limits to what could be used as the input source. MP3s had a sufficient quality loss that they were not a useful codec for original CDs/albums. I do not know what testing has been done in the area of H.264 or even DivX 6 (which has recently been proposed as a standard for HD recordings using existing equipment, not Blu-Ray!) that the opportunity exists to see what can be done. It is not that the current generation of CDs are "bad", but they are not comparable to a good analog (vinyl) recording in a critical listening environment. IIRC there was a "super CD" a few years ago that offered technically superior recordings but never gained sufficient acceptance to become a commercial standard. It could be that we will remain with the uncompressed AIFF/WAV file standards simply for those reasons.
Cheers!
Originally posted by RBR
Most definitely, but with music there have been definite limits to what could be used as the input source. MP3s had a sufficient quality loss that they were not a useful codec for original CDs/albums. I do not know what testing has been done in the area of H.264 or even DivX 6 (which has recently been proposed as a standard for HD recordings using existing equipment, not Blu-Ray!) that the opportunity exists to see what can be done. It is not that the current generation of CDs are "bad", but they are not comparable to a good analog (vinyl) recording in a critical listening environment. IIRC there was a "super CD" a few years ago that offered technically superior recordings but never gained sufficient acceptance to become a commercial standard. It could be that we will remain with the uncompressed AIFF/WAV file standards simply for those reasons.
Cheers!
VHS was inferior and still one! Yeah CDs do not have the range found in Vinyl, I love vinyl. I do a show for a local radio station and i love to use vinyl.
Originally posted by Squozen
I'll most likely be buying the first revision of PowerMac G5 that comes with Tiger... unless I can't resist and buy Tiger by itself..
I'll probably buy a PowerBook today (if they come out) and then get Tiger, i can't wait till Tiger for a new computer. Also probably better to wait for the first revision to Tiger - remember Panther and filevault!
Originally posted by MacCrazy
I'll probably buy a PowerBook today (if they come out) and then get Tiger, i can't wait till Tiger for a new computer. Also probably better to wait for the first revision to Tiger - remember Panther and filevault!
I still don't think anyone trusts filevault!