jlandd
About
- Username
- jlandd
- Joined
- Visits
- 31
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 51
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 873
Reactions
-
Apple dissolves Mac automation management post, Sal Soghoian to leave company
It's a great tool but suffers from a strange interface. Typical Apple in that it has a lot of power but inexpensive 3rd party utilities let you go bing, bang, boom and you have your automation of ANYTHING the system or application can do, and if you went to Automator with just the help docs most people would poke around in it for an hour and maybe end up with something that worked. The only way I ever got Automator to work is if I carefully followed the directions on someone's blog for how to create something. I surely did benefit from those, and from downloading premade scripts from generous folks. Getting creative with it on my own had a terrible time to working result ratio.titantiger said:I loved the idea of Automator as well, but just could never get the hang of it.
Apple missed the boat by not having Automator available with an interface that could be used by someone who is the same person they've always targeted with their bundled apps, the iPhoto, iMovie, GarageBand users, aka normal people. The only people I've ever known who created a lot of useful Automations and Applescripts are people who are much more savvy than 90% of computer users and were using them for work related tasks, as firelock with his studio image work. Why did Apple never make it so that the average Joe could easily whip up a bunch of general productivity droplets for the ecosystem they created for home and non-work? It's so buried that most users never even knew it existed.
-
New MacBook Pro drops optical audio out through headphone jack
I applaud your optimism that an updated Mini will arrive in my lifetime!tokyojimu said:They better not drop it from the Mini!
-
Apple limits 2016 MacBook Pro models to 16GB of RAM to maximize battery life
Oh boy, here we go. "Buy something else or get a desktop solution. Human Narcissism is a disease, the worst on Earth. Don't bring it here. Hit the HP website."kamilton said:
Oh Boy Here We Go...dig48109 said:What a terrible decision. We buy high end Macbook Pros in our company. We buy lots of them and we max it out with 1TB SSD and a discrete graphics card. Many of our users are video editors for 360 video and our developers need more RAM for their needs. I need more RAM for running virtual machines. This is clearly a case of Apple not listening to their customers. Most of the time our laptops are plugged in. We can live with a USB type C connector as long as there are enough of them. To Phil Schiller. Give us Apple customers the choice in the Pro series between 1. More RAM sacrificing battery life 2. Choice of AMD/ATI graphics vs nVidia. Sorry but a lot of 3rd party tools still only support CUDA and not yet OpenCL. Typically many small developers who tools we use will write for nVidia only. This throws a monkey wrench in our pipeline development This is frustrating. We've been stuck at 16GB for too many years. There is no excuse for the top end Macbook Pro (w discrete graphics card) to be limited to 32GB. At another former company (500 artists) many of our users using Foundry's Nuke or Mari would be using 128GB or 64GB systems from a 1U system with a PCoIP graphics card. Computers were in Los Angeles and the artists were in Vancouver (BC govt subsidies lured the companies there). Apple time to listen to your customers. One shoe , or one max RAM size does not fit all. Sorry. Don't care what the limits are for the Macbook Air or Macbook (which by the way we never buy, has only one port and that too it has to be used for power, why couldn't he Macbook have two USB-C ports?)
"I represent 1/100th of the 1% that must have 64+ GB of RAM to exist and my opinion is so important that I can't imagine the other millions of MBP users existing in any other paradigm.
Buy something else or get a desktop solution. Human Narcissism is a disease, the worst on Earth. Don't bring it here. Hit the HP website.
News flash, the delay here is exactly like what we dealt with as the G5 roadmap ran dry. Intel has topped out. Apple waited and waited and finally just did the refresh they had to do. They ain't happy. We're going to see an Apple x86 chipset. They are done with intel holding up innovation.
You will get you 64GB standard with 128 option in the next 24 months.
Not to point out the obvious, but this isn't narcissism. Apple is putting out great laptops that top out at a certain bar performance-wise and DON'T currently offer a desktop alternative that is a good fit in plenty of scenarios. The price/what you get for a Mac Pro right now is unattractive. No one is complaining that Apple should have done XYZ for this MBP update, but that Apple should offer these things somewhere in their lines because these people want to keep using OS X and stay with Apple and dislike Windows. Will the Mac Pro be refreshed sooner rather than later? No doubt, probably 1st quarter. Will it be an attractive purchase for people who just need more than what the MBP (or any laptop) offers? Maybe not. That's the main issue. It might, but it might not. It might be announced in Jan and ship in Feb, but might not.
-
Two of four Thunderbolt 3 ports in new 13" MacBook Pro with Touch Bar have reduced speeds
Exactly. Not that it would be to Apple's benefit to correct this, but as a user I don't get any great benefit from the amount possible to put into the currently sized lineup, as the widths and weights of the MBPs from 7 or 8 years ago never even occurred to me to be a detriment. Space to vent so the parts didn't need to be lowest power above all else, space to vent so the fan didn't need to run as much, space to upgrade. And it's not like we're talking 2", more like .75 centimeters (just guessing).matrix077 said:sandor said:and you cannot get the (finally available) 2 TB SSD upgrade on the 13"
the purpose of a portable is to be portable. some professionals don't want to travel with a 15"
Apple needs a 13" *real* pro that can be a smaller, spec-maxed computer.
New 15" Pro is only marginally bigger and heavier than MBA. -
Apple limits 2016 MacBook Pro models to 16GB of RAM to maximize battery life
lorin schultz said:jkichline said:
The other thing to consider is it's possible the SSD which is three times faster than before, will offset any limitation in physical RAM.
Depends on the software, I think. Pro Tools, the definitive professional audio software, caches the timeline in RAM. I know less than zero about coding so take my observations with a grain of salt, but my impression is that Avid writes software in a way no one else does, and it's not always a good thing. I don't think disk swapping will work in Pro Tools, at least not the way you'd expect. 16GB of RAM could be a limitation for some projects, and I would have preferred a 32GB option, even if it meant sacrificing LOTS of battery time. I need to take my computer from place to place, but there's almost always a power outlet wherever I go.
Even aside from caching the timeline, all DAW software is reliant on RAM for buffering, which can be either a little or a whole lot, in order to keep away the glitching that happens when processes build too high for the CPU, and caching to disk isn't the answer. Much of audio work is reading and writing to disk but the rest is CPU and RAM dependent, and we're not at the point of diminishing returns, where more than X won't give us a higher return. While it's true that we've all done fine with 16GB in nearly all laptop recording situations, I have no doubt that before we know it it will be the same as 8 was a few years ago and 4 a while before that. It wasn't all that long ago when upgrading to 8GB in my MBP was quite a boost. I don't deal in the high resolution multitrack sessions with the track amounts and extremely high count plugin instances that heavy hitters do, but it's a fact that we have now gotten to the point where 16GB is not what it used to be. And the argument about battery life is a non-starter, because, aside from pushing MBPs as all you need to do your thing on, Apple can't say "If you need more RAM you want to choose from our currently available desktop series, which is same as it was in 2013". Apple, by design, has a few gaps in their hardware, and one is the desktop that simply takes care of what they don't put in their highest end laptop and no more, and where portability doesn't matter.
