dethmaShine
Apr 19, 03:05 PM
Well you can see that with the Mac. About 3% worldwide marketshare but Apple makes tons of money with it.
And eveybody crys tears here when some 5 year old Windows games finally get ported to MacOS. You want that to happen with the iPhone and iOS compared to Android? Fine. But I'm sure 99% of iPhone buyers don't want that scenario.
Not trying to defend poor gaming on the macintosh, but android is the one getting year old titles now.
Just to make it more clear, marketshare is one small factor considered for game development. There's much more than that. For e.g. people paying for actual games, ease of code for a single graphic card [a big hassle for windows gaming].
Just read through?
And eveybody crys tears here when some 5 year old Windows games finally get ported to MacOS. You want that to happen with the iPhone and iOS compared to Android? Fine. But I'm sure 99% of iPhone buyers don't want that scenario.
Not trying to defend poor gaming on the macintosh, but android is the one getting year old titles now.
Just to make it more clear, marketshare is one small factor considered for game development. There's much more than that. For e.g. people paying for actual games, ease of code for a single graphic card [a big hassle for windows gaming].
Just read through?
notabadname
Mar 22, 04:06 PM
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
1st point: It's factually inaccurate to make your first statement, as evidenced by your last statement. Kind of funny, don't you think?
In your second statement, you are comparing all Android software-running phones to a single model/product line, the iPhone. The iPhone (each generation) has out sold any single phone model (generation) over it's life than that of any offered by any other hardware manufacturer.
Your comparison is like saying Toyota has sold more cars than Ford has sold F-150s. That may be true, but the F-150 is still the number one selling truck in the US, even though it does not outsell the sum total of all other trucks by all other manufacturers.
You should compare a single phone model, say Motorola Droid or HTC Incredible. You are simply talking software. Apple is primarily a hardware company that happens to make the software for its hardware. (yes, I know about FCP and other software) They do not license the iOS software to other manufacturers, so comparison to Google's OS and number of DIFFERENT phones it runs on is really irrelevant to whether any hardware manufacturer has had a more successful phone than the iPhone.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
1st point: It's factually inaccurate to make your first statement, as evidenced by your last statement. Kind of funny, don't you think?
In your second statement, you are comparing all Android software-running phones to a single model/product line, the iPhone. The iPhone (each generation) has out sold any single phone model (generation) over it's life than that of any offered by any other hardware manufacturer.
Your comparison is like saying Toyota has sold more cars than Ford has sold F-150s. That may be true, but the F-150 is still the number one selling truck in the US, even though it does not outsell the sum total of all other trucks by all other manufacturers.
You should compare a single phone model, say Motorola Droid or HTC Incredible. You are simply talking software. Apple is primarily a hardware company that happens to make the software for its hardware. (yes, I know about FCP and other software) They do not license the iOS software to other manufacturers, so comparison to Google's OS and number of DIFFERENT phones it runs on is really irrelevant to whether any hardware manufacturer has had a more successful phone than the iPhone.
*LTD*
Mar 31, 07:34 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
So stop whoring out your lame beta OS, Google, and finally have some respect for your product.
Steve Jobs was right all along. All this open baloney falls apart pretty quick when you spread your crap around to anyone and everyone who can slam together a box.
Next on the list: tighter Android Marketplace controls and a fresh round of app rejections.
Then we'll here everyone say "of course, it had to happen, no big deal." Yeah, we ****ing told you like two years ago when it was announced Android would be licensed out to everyone. But for some reason the perennially clueless thought that it would work forever.
In the post-PC era, User Experience reigns supreme. But Apple already taught us that years ago.
So stop whoring out your lame beta OS, Google, and finally have some respect for your product.
Steve Jobs was right all along. All this open baloney falls apart pretty quick when you spread your crap around to anyone and everyone who can slam together a box.
Next on the list: tighter Android Marketplace controls and a fresh round of app rejections.
Then we'll here everyone say "of course, it had to happen, no big deal." Yeah, we ****ing told you like two years ago when it was announced Android would be licensed out to everyone. But for some reason the perennially clueless thought that it would work forever.
In the post-PC era, User Experience reigns supreme. But Apple already taught us that years ago.
Multimedia
Aug 21, 05:43 AM
I stopped by the Apple store tonight to play with a Macpro. I'm getting ready to buy and thought I'd get some hands on experience to see how it performed with Finalcut Pro. I was especially interested in how it handles playback of uncompressed footage.
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.That's great info. Would you please tell us:
1. How fast that is compared to what Mac model-speed you are currently using?
2. IE Were you impressed or not so impressed with how fast-slow it rendered?
3. What kind of speed were you expecting?
I'm no expert, but my guess is that the lack of RAM may have been the culprit. Need more independent tests like this from other FCP users. Thanks a lot. :)
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.That's great info. Would you please tell us:
1. How fast that is compared to what Mac model-speed you are currently using?
2. IE Were you impressed or not so impressed with how fast-slow it rendered?
3. What kind of speed were you expecting?
I'm no expert, but my guess is that the lack of RAM may have been the culprit. Need more independent tests like this from other FCP users. Thanks a lot. :)
grmatt
Apr 8, 08:29 AM
I had a strange experience at Best Buy. About two days before the iPad 2 came out I went to my local Best Buy to ask about availability on release day. The employee I spoke to told me essentially that I should wait. He told me the iPad 3 was coming this fall and I should either skip the iPad 2 or purchase something like the Zoom. I pressed him how could he possible know that, I said I read all the rumor mills and such and time and time again no one actually ever knows that information. He said "they all did" (best Buy employees) it was posted on there "E-Learnings" site which is basically an internal Best Buy training/notification/product information system.
So here is an employee telling me not to purchase an iPad 2 because he thought the Zoom was better AND I should just wait because iPad 3 was coming out this fall.
WTF?
Fandroid.
So here is an employee telling me not to purchase an iPad 2 because he thought the Zoom was better AND I should just wait because iPad 3 was coming out this fall.
WTF?
Fandroid.
daneoni
Aug 26, 03:47 PM
PowerBook G5 next tuesday?
mkruck
Apr 6, 04:02 PM
To each his one, yes; but exactly what does Android offer as a platform than iOS doesn't--and I don't mean multiple download sources. What "... more or different things..." are you doing on Android that can't be done on iOS?
The first couple if things that I appreciate on Andriod vs iOS:
1. Having a user accessible file system. I need the ability to store documents, images, etc., in a central location that's available to any app that can open it, without having to sync via iTunes or store in a cloud environment, which is a non-starter for me. I work in a classified environment. Cloud is a no-no. Syncing docs and images via iTunes specific to the app that generated them is a PITA.
2. I want my homescreen to look like my homescreen, as opposed to the 4x6 row of squares that iOS presents. If I want thumbnails of my wife and kids on my homescreen, I can do that. If I want stock updates, weather, twitter feeds, facebook nonsense, etc., etc., etc., displayed, I can do that.
3. Having a notification system that interrupts what I'm currently working on makes me crazy. I don't need a popup that demand user interaction to close.
There's three quick ones. I'm sure I can think of more given some time, but quite honestly, it's not my job to sell Xooms or Android devices.
The first couple if things that I appreciate on Andriod vs iOS:
1. Having a user accessible file system. I need the ability to store documents, images, etc., in a central location that's available to any app that can open it, without having to sync via iTunes or store in a cloud environment, which is a non-starter for me. I work in a classified environment. Cloud is a no-no. Syncing docs and images via iTunes specific to the app that generated them is a PITA.
2. I want my homescreen to look like my homescreen, as opposed to the 4x6 row of squares that iOS presents. If I want thumbnails of my wife and kids on my homescreen, I can do that. If I want stock updates, weather, twitter feeds, facebook nonsense, etc., etc., etc., displayed, I can do that.
3. Having a notification system that interrupts what I'm currently working on makes me crazy. I don't need a popup that demand user interaction to close.
There's three quick ones. I'm sure I can think of more given some time, but quite honestly, it's not my job to sell Xooms or Android devices.
meanmusic
Jul 20, 05:01 PM
According to Daily Tech Merom is already shipping! Intel announced it during Intel's Q2'06 earnings report. Is an upgraded MBP going to make an appearance at the WWDC?
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3421
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3421
blahblah100
Mar 31, 05:51 PM
I used to have a friend who would spend days tweaking the LINUX OS code so that his browser would look super duper cool.
How many people like that do you know?
Really? I would have thought he would have tweaked the code to the actual browser.
How many people like that do you know?
Really? I would have thought he would have tweaked the code to the actual browser.
stapler
Sep 13, 07:57 PM
I doubt anybody runs more than eight really hardcore apps at once.
baryon
Apr 10, 08:22 AM
I'm all in for something new in Video Editing. I find that FCP is way too old and clunky, and Premiere is the same thing with a better interface. I rarely use the Viewer anymore, and I hate having to render. I hate the various pixel aspect ratios and formats there are, including PAL and NTSC. I still think tape cameras are the best in quality, but the practicality of recording on a card or a hard drive will soon beat that.
There has to be a performance and workflow improvement, as syncing sound to video precisely is near impossible due to the huge amounts of lag.
This sounds like an interesting update!
There has to be a performance and workflow improvement, as syncing sound to video precisely is near impossible due to the huge amounts of lag.
This sounds like an interesting update!
admanimal
Apr 11, 12:03 PM
Where are all these bs claims coming from? Why wouldn't Apple release it in June as always?
There are a number of factors that would make a later release make sense. They probably want to converge the Verizon and AT&T hardware, plus wait for iOS 5 to be ready. The release of Lion could also play a small part.
I think everyone making the (pretty much insane) comments that this spells the end of the iPhone's dominance should wait and see what iOS 5 looks like and how the iPhone 5 takes advantage of it.
There are a number of factors that would make a later release make sense. They probably want to converge the Verizon and AT&T hardware, plus wait for iOS 5 to be ready. The release of Lion could also play a small part.
I think everyone making the (pretty much insane) comments that this spells the end of the iPhone's dominance should wait and see what iOS 5 looks like and how the iPhone 5 takes advantage of it.
DeathChill
Aug 7, 10:18 PM
Running the preview now... some nice developer level stuff that I cannot ebelish on however beyond what was talked about in the keynote.
The new Core Animation stuff looks simple yet powerful and will increase the visual effects and feedback that application can do with only minor work on their part.
Also new Xcode Tool capabilities are well... great to have (need to review what is available publicly before I can comment more).
Next spring Apple will have a good answer to Vista with little disruption to end users and developers (unlike Vista).
So it's fair to say that developers have received their copy of Leopard?
The new Core Animation stuff looks simple yet powerful and will increase the visual effects and feedback that application can do with only minor work on their part.
Also new Xcode Tool capabilities are well... great to have (need to review what is available publicly before I can comment more).
Next spring Apple will have a good answer to Vista with little disruption to end users and developers (unlike Vista).
So it's fair to say that developers have received their copy of Leopard?
conradzoo
Aug 11, 05:49 PM
Confused.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
C.:confused:
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
C.:confused:
NebulaClash
Apr 27, 09:53 AM
And I'm sure when the next Apple-gate story gets created, the blind fanbois will jump to their defense. :rolleyes:
And once again the Apple fans will turn out to have been correct.
And once again the Apple fans will turn out to have been correct.
rezenclowd3
Dec 9, 12:03 PM
This is hilarious:
GT5 physics are completely realistic (http://i.autoblog.com/2010/12/09/video-gt5-physics-are-completely-realistic/)
GT5 physics are completely realistic (http://i.autoblog.com/2010/12/09/video-gt5-physics-are-completely-realistic/)
MacBoobsPro
Jul 20, 08:34 AM
It's the future, you know, soon the clock speed will be irrelevant and we'll be expressing processor speed in number of cores octocore, hexacore, tricontradicore, hexacontetracore, hecticosoctocore, and such and such
You mean its the future today? I thought it was next week! :D
You mean its the future today? I thought it was next week! :D
twoodcc
Aug 12, 09:04 PM
I don't really care if you count the Prologues as full releases or not. The fact remains...
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
well again this is your opinion. we all have one. i personally think that if someone is into cars, they will care about their car. not everyone can afford the cars in the game, but it might be nice to see that car that you can afford and have in real life in the game. i mean, the game is meant for people into cars.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
just pointing out the facts. are you doing any different?
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
they have records for everything. like how much cheese you can eat, or whatever. that's what Guinness Records are
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great? so iPhone sales show nothing to how good it is? or iPod sales mean nothing to how well it is? of course it does. you make games to sell. if they don't sell, you stop making games. and then there wouldn't be this thread, b/c there would be no GT5.
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
well again this is your opinion. we all have one. i personally think that if someone is into cars, they will care about their car. not everyone can afford the cars in the game, but it might be nice to see that car that you can afford and have in real life in the game. i mean, the game is meant for people into cars.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
just pointing out the facts. are you doing any different?
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
they have records for everything. like how much cheese you can eat, or whatever. that's what Guinness Records are
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great? so iPhone sales show nothing to how good it is? or iPod sales mean nothing to how well it is? of course it does. you make games to sell. if they don't sell, you stop making games. and then there wouldn't be this thread, b/c there would be no GT5.
Stella
Apr 25, 02:19 PM
Apple may ( are probably ) innocent, but they mis managed this. If they pushed out an official press release to explain why this, instead of keeping quite then the whole thing would have blown over.
~Shard~
Aug 11, 02:45 PM
I would add
twoodcc
Apr 10, 08:55 PM
can't wait to see what it's all gonna be about! hope it ships soon!
Sydde
Mar 18, 02:07 AM
We can totally fix the deficit just by taxing the catholic church alone...
Probably not, but it would help a lot. Especially if we could tax them at unearned income rates. I say we should do it. Religious leaders are the source of a great many of this world's problem, it is time we charge them for the cleanup.
Probably not, but it would help a lot. Especially if we could tax them at unearned income rates. I say we should do it. Religious leaders are the source of a great many of this world's problem, it is time we charge them for the cleanup.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 25, 02:18 PM
Because Apple is not tracking you. Apple does not get any of that data, they will never see or touch it. It is data that is stored locally on your phone out of reach from everyone except you. "Apple tracks you" would mean that the phone is sending the data 'home', but it doesn't. APPLE HAS NO IDEA WHERE THE F YOU ARE OR WERE (and they probably couldn't care less)
Prove it.
Prove it.
TangoCharlie
Jul 20, 11:28 AM
any talk of a quad core merom or mobile cpu?
No. I shouldn't think any laptop will be getting Kentsfield for a while....
No. I shouldn't think any laptop will be getting Kentsfield for a while....
