kev0476
Jul 20, 09:28 AM
New MacPro rev2.
8 cores = 24Ghz
(with Free fire extinguisher and ear plugs) :p
you need to do your math better, extra core = 1.5x - 1.8x speed increase. but still the same power usage as a normal core!
8 cores = 24Ghz
(with Free fire extinguisher and ear plugs) :p
you need to do your math better, extra core = 1.5x - 1.8x speed increase. but still the same power usage as a normal core!
leumluath
Aug 11, 11:56 AM
isn't it about time you guys got in line with the rest of the world? GSM has more than 81% of the world market.
...the GSM providers' coverage area is inadequate. I need a phone that works most everywhere (in the US), not just along expressways and in major cities. Bad as it is, CDMA is the only practical option for those of us who travel.
...the GSM providers' coverage area is inadequate. I need a phone that works most everywhere (in the US), not just along expressways and in major cities. Bad as it is, CDMA is the only practical option for those of us who travel.
highdefw
Apr 11, 10:23 AM
One more day and we'll know... Seriously, this better be one hell of an update.
blackcrayon
Mar 22, 05:02 PM
I can assure that doubling the 256MB of the first iPad is not enough for people that need a lot of multitask, like me.
...
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I like products, not brands.
Question: does anyone know if the A5 design could've fit 1 GB of RAM, or if anyone else is packaging more than 512 MB of RAM inside of their SoC? Just wondering, it may actually be a limitation of the A5's design(or at least one with a huge cost increase to overcome), but the other side is faster, lower latency memory. I don't know if Samsung will be using a similar design, but I don't think the Tegra 2 tablets have their memory "sandwiched" on top of the CPU cores, so to speak. Or maybe it makes no difference in the real world, guess I need an engineer to explain :)
...
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I like products, not brands.
Question: does anyone know if the A5 design could've fit 1 GB of RAM, or if anyone else is packaging more than 512 MB of RAM inside of their SoC? Just wondering, it may actually be a limitation of the A5's design(or at least one with a huge cost increase to overcome), but the other side is faster, lower latency memory. I don't know if Samsung will be using a similar design, but I don't think the Tegra 2 tablets have their memory "sandwiched" on top of the CPU cores, so to speak. Or maybe it makes no difference in the real world, guess I need an engineer to explain :)
georgethomas
Apr 7, 09:54 AM
haha u cant stop technology from growing. ;)
killmoms
Aug 17, 09:24 AM
Won't Adobe use Core Image when the Universal Binaries come out? If both Quads had the same high powered graphics card, the benchmarks may show them to be the same with Core Image tasks.
Hah! Adobe can't even be bothered to make a Cocoa-native version of Photoshop on the Mac. They won't use Core Image because it's an OS X-only technology which can't be ported to Windows without them having to (essentially) write their own framework to mimic its functionality.
Hah! Adobe can't even be bothered to make a Cocoa-native version of Photoshop on the Mac. They won't use Core Image because it's an OS X-only technology which can't be ported to Windows without them having to (essentially) write their own framework to mimic its functionality.
JS77
Mar 26, 08:23 AM
I'm really not looking forward to Lion at all. It just seems like a huge step backwards for those of us that use our computers as real computers and not toys. I have an ipad, an iphone and several macs, but they each have specific uses. I don't want my desktop machine to be anything like my ipad, one is for doing real work and doing my daily stuff on, the iOS gadgets are for fun games and browsing mostly.
I LOATH the whole idea of merging OSX and iOS, they shouldn't even be related. I hate how they are ruining expose, I really don't want my stuff groups by app, I want to see every window like it is now. I have no use for "full screen" apps, why would I waste all my screen real estate only showing one thing at a time? I hate the idea of getting programs through the app store on the Mac, I refuse to do that. I hate all the gesture crap going on, sure it's fine for laptop users, but it's of no use to me on my mac pro.
I think all this is just a dumbing down of what is an amazing OS. I don't use my mac with dual displays anything like I'd use an iPad, so why put that crap in there? I just don't like the direction they are taking OSX in general, and I doubt I will upgrade from snow leopard. To me this is very sad news, the day OSX and iOS merge is the day the mac dies.
110% with you buddy.
I LOATH the whole idea of merging OSX and iOS, they shouldn't even be related. I hate how they are ruining expose, I really don't want my stuff groups by app, I want to see every window like it is now. I have no use for "full screen" apps, why would I waste all my screen real estate only showing one thing at a time? I hate the idea of getting programs through the app store on the Mac, I refuse to do that. I hate all the gesture crap going on, sure it's fine for laptop users, but it's of no use to me on my mac pro.
I think all this is just a dumbing down of what is an amazing OS. I don't use my mac with dual displays anything like I'd use an iPad, so why put that crap in there? I just don't like the direction they are taking OSX in general, and I doubt I will upgrade from snow leopard. To me this is very sad news, the day OSX and iOS merge is the day the mac dies.
110% with you buddy.
boncellis
Jul 20, 10:22 AM
As far as the name goes, how about the "Mac Quattro Pro." ;) Then maybe Apple could acquire the rights to the software and include it in the iWork suite...
Number 41
Apr 11, 01:48 PM
My 3GS (bought launch day '09) is starting to show it's age -- I'm seeing more "Searching..." and "No Service" when using 3G, and it's been forcing me to dump back to Edge on a more regular basis. Additionally, the battery is really not where it was when I first bought the phone.
I'm eligible to upgrade, but I don't want to lose all my app investment by going over to Android (plus, I'm just not a Google fan -- seems like they're trying to control everything on the internet these days) and I'm certainly not going to buy a phone made of glass that's almost a year old.
Apple needs to hurry up and make the 5 happen.
I'm eligible to upgrade, but I don't want to lose all my app investment by going over to Android (plus, I'm just not a Google fan -- seems like they're trying to control everything on the internet these days) and I'm certainly not going to buy a phone made of glass that's almost a year old.
Apple needs to hurry up and make the 5 happen.
shrimpdesign
Aug 7, 11:56 PM
does anyone see a potential for a security breach with the ichat feature that lets you take over someone's desktop? (the purpose is of course to collaborate or to help them fix a problem)
I think it's an invitation .. like "Come share my screen with me" not "Let me use your screen"
So basically you have to allow your screen to be shared with someone you don't trust ... which is generally a bad idea anyways.
If there's a problem, you can always unplug the computer.
I think it's an invitation .. like "Come share my screen with me" not "Let me use your screen"
So basically you have to allow your screen to be shared with someone you don't trust ... which is generally a bad idea anyways.
If there's a problem, you can always unplug the computer.
alent1234
Mar 22, 01:40 PM
Is this a joke? What specs? Where are the apps, where are amazing games, where are publications and magazines? No where to be found.
Playbook will not even scratch the surface - you heart it here first.
lulz:apple:
the web is not an app
Playbook will not even scratch the surface - you heart it here first.
lulz:apple:
the web is not an app
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 04:20 AM
I'm sorry, Bill, but your logic has one big flaw.
If you decided to live celibately while other heterosexuals are open to have sex in a [monogamous] relationship, that's fine by me but what you're implying is that every homosexual should be celibate, so what's the point of being attracted to the same-sex at all in your logic?
I believe you have to label yourself asexual from now on, since not having or craving sex makes you neither a homosexual nor heterosexual.
I believe that every "gay" person should be celibate. I also think opposite-sex monogamous marriage is the only appropriate context for sex.
I'm heterosexual. I still feel opposite-sex attraction, but my sex drive has been weak for years. I'm grateful for that weakness, too, because I don't see others as mere objects.
I don't see any point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the same sex, since I think homosexuality is a psychological problem caused by nurture, not by nature. My mom used to counsel same-sex-attracted people when she was a nurse and a counselor at a local drug rehabilitation hospital. Her patients liked her, even after he told them that she thought same-sex sex was never okay. They respected her for her honesty. She was brave enough to tell them some things that they didn't want to hear, because she knew that they needed to hear them. Political correctness is evil when it prevents people from saying things that others need to hear for their own good.
In about 1962, Pope John XXII refused to condemn heresies because he thought mercy was better than severity. But he ignored that people sometimes need to be severe to show their love for others. I'm all for tact and gentleness. But I'm against political correctness that protects feeling at the expense of the potentially offended person's physical, psychological, or moral wellbeing. John XXIII was like a doctor who would say, "I don't want to talk about killing bacteria, cancer cells, and so on. I think I should just promote good heath." But what if the patient died because, say, the doctor refused to do chemo or wouldn't tell a patient that without it, she would die of cancer? Is the doctor being kind? Is he being negligent? If he doesn't care enough about his patients to tell them bad news that they need to hear, he should stop seeing them.
Here at the board, the others are welcome believe anything they want to believe about me. If I make some enemies by merely saying what I believe, then that gives me a chance to love them. But I refuse to be politically correct.
If you decided to live celibately while other heterosexuals are open to have sex in a [monogamous] relationship, that's fine by me but what you're implying is that every homosexual should be celibate, so what's the point of being attracted to the same-sex at all in your logic?
I believe you have to label yourself asexual from now on, since not having or craving sex makes you neither a homosexual nor heterosexual.
I believe that every "gay" person should be celibate. I also think opposite-sex monogamous marriage is the only appropriate context for sex.
I'm heterosexual. I still feel opposite-sex attraction, but my sex drive has been weak for years. I'm grateful for that weakness, too, because I don't see others as mere objects.
I don't see any point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the same sex, since I think homosexuality is a psychological problem caused by nurture, not by nature. My mom used to counsel same-sex-attracted people when she was a nurse and a counselor at a local drug rehabilitation hospital. Her patients liked her, even after he told them that she thought same-sex sex was never okay. They respected her for her honesty. She was brave enough to tell them some things that they didn't want to hear, because she knew that they needed to hear them. Political correctness is evil when it prevents people from saying things that others need to hear for their own good.
In about 1962, Pope John XXII refused to condemn heresies because he thought mercy was better than severity. But he ignored that people sometimes need to be severe to show their love for others. I'm all for tact and gentleness. But I'm against political correctness that protects feeling at the expense of the potentially offended person's physical, psychological, or moral wellbeing. John XXIII was like a doctor who would say, "I don't want to talk about killing bacteria, cancer cells, and so on. I think I should just promote good heath." But what if the patient died because, say, the doctor refused to do chemo or wouldn't tell a patient that without it, she would die of cancer? Is the doctor being kind? Is he being negligent? If he doesn't care enough about his patients to tell them bad news that they need to hear, he should stop seeing them.
Here at the board, the others are welcome believe anything they want to believe about me. If I make some enemies by merely saying what I believe, then that gives me a chance to love them. But I refuse to be politically correct.
Popeye206
Apr 25, 02:58 PM
This...
You are explicitly asked if you want Google to collect this information.
You can say NO. It does reduce the accuracy of some programs when you opt out, but YOU have the choice.
You do have the option to enable this feature at any time if you feel you need too.
Same on the iPhone... this is not what we're talking about here. Application tracking has always been opt in or out.
This is just a database of cell tower pings. That's all. it's shared with NO ONE and goes nowhere except on your phone. It's like your web browser cache.
You are explicitly asked if you want Google to collect this information.
You can say NO. It does reduce the accuracy of some programs when you opt out, but YOU have the choice.
You do have the option to enable this feature at any time if you feel you need too.
Same on the iPhone... this is not what we're talking about here. Application tracking has always been opt in or out.
This is just a database of cell tower pings. That's all. it's shared with NO ONE and goes nowhere except on your phone. It's like your web browser cache.
layte
Mar 31, 03:04 PM
From now on, companies hoping to receive early access to Google's most up-to-date software will need approval of their plans.
Emphasis on the important bit for those who didn't bother to actually read the article. If you want to wait a bit, you can get the code and do whatever you want. Well that's my reading of it anyway, but please, don't let get in the way of giving the new enemy number one a good kicking.
Emphasis on the important bit for those who didn't bother to actually read the article. If you want to wait a bit, you can get the code and do whatever you want. Well that's my reading of it anyway, but please, don't let get in the way of giving the new enemy number one a good kicking.
Cruzer442
Apr 11, 11:52 AM
My 3Gs contract ends in June and Apple will be pushing it's luck for me to go half a year without me being tempted to jump platforms instead of waiting for the iPhone 5.
I'm in this boat to. I'm noticing my battery life is deteriorating also - never owned an iPhone this long. Also my GF has Verison Droid that just kicks my ass; better reception, faster, cool apps -e.g. voice to SMS. I can wait until July but late fall? IDK.
I'm in this boat to. I'm noticing my battery life is deteriorating also - never owned an iPhone this long. Also my GF has Verison Droid that just kicks my ass; better reception, faster, cool apps -e.g. voice to SMS. I can wait until July but late fall? IDK.
Thunderhawks
Mar 31, 03:55 PM
Good. I hope they take one of the last strengths of the iPad ecosystem away from it.
Hey, are you sure you want to state that Apple has anything that is good?
You are admitting they have "strengths" even if this is the last one.
And, let's even assume that happens and Apple goes under, all their products tank and and and.
What benefit would you have from that?
Any positive thoughts in your head? You know all the negative stress Apple seems to give you will eventually cause health issues.
Hey, are you sure you want to state that Apple has anything that is good?
You are admitting they have "strengths" even if this is the last one.
And, let's even assume that happens and Apple goes under, all their products tank and and and.
What benefit would you have from that?
Any positive thoughts in your head? You know all the negative stress Apple seems to give you will eventually cause health issues.
davidcmc
Mar 22, 07:08 PM
This is one reason why Microsoft Office requires more and more RAM and CPU every time a new version is released.
Microsoft Office 2007 (Windows) and 2011 (Mac) are not slow.
They may be slow in your super �ber Mac from which uses the super �ber Core 2 Duo, but it's certainly not in my sister's Core i3 notebook.
Your machine is outdated. I hope you're not using it as a reference to judge Microsoft Office performance.
Microsoft Office 2007 (Windows) and 2011 (Mac) are not slow.
They may be slow in your super �ber Mac from which uses the super �ber Core 2 Duo, but it's certainly not in my sister's Core i3 notebook.
Your machine is outdated. I hope you're not using it as a reference to judge Microsoft Office performance.
janstett
Oct 23, 11:44 AM
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
kdarling
Apr 20, 10:46 AM
http://cultofmac.cultofmaccom.netdna-cdn.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Screen-shot-2011-04-19-at-8.37.05-PM.png
feel free to point out how difficult it is to see any similarities...
Choosing icons that have taken on universal meanings and thus are similar, is quite a bit different from direct copying, of which we see none.
The closest ones in that group are probably the phones, and yet if you search for a phone icon on the web, or even on cell phone buttons, probably a quarter of them are slanted. Moreover, green is an extremely common color for the primary phone button, which is why Apple chose it themselves.
The use of rounded square icon backgrounds is a bit more damning, but still a style choice. Also, Apple's has a shadow and my Fascinate doesn't have the rounded square on most anyway.
Btw, I have noticed that Apple hasn't tried to claim ownership of the twirling wait symbol, but a lot of us were using that before they were.
I think Apple might have much better luck showing that the Galaxy phone shape greatly resembles the 3GS.
feel free to point out how difficult it is to see any similarities...
Choosing icons that have taken on universal meanings and thus are similar, is quite a bit different from direct copying, of which we see none.
The closest ones in that group are probably the phones, and yet if you search for a phone icon on the web, or even on cell phone buttons, probably a quarter of them are slanted. Moreover, green is an extremely common color for the primary phone button, which is why Apple chose it themselves.
The use of rounded square icon backgrounds is a bit more damning, but still a style choice. Also, Apple's has a shadow and my Fascinate doesn't have the rounded square on most anyway.
Btw, I have noticed that Apple hasn't tried to claim ownership of the twirling wait symbol, but a lot of us were using that before they were.
I think Apple might have much better luck showing that the Galaxy phone shape greatly resembles the 3GS.
JonD25
Aug 8, 04:18 AM
This may have already been discussed somewhere, but the vast amount of threads on all the new Leopard stuff and the 10 pages of this thread are a bit to search through, so just ignore me if someone already brought it up.
Did anyone notice the new iChat got rid of the brushed metal? One of the things I was dissapointed to not see was the talk about an improved/different UI, particularly the banishment of brushed metal. Could this be a preview of that fact? Perhaps part of the "top secret" features to come?
Did anyone notice the new iChat got rid of the brushed metal? One of the things I was dissapointed to not see was the talk about an improved/different UI, particularly the banishment of brushed metal. Could this be a preview of that fact? Perhaps part of the "top secret" features to come?
ryanlaing
Apr 10, 01:41 AM
A bit of selective hearing on the part of MacRumors with the quotes they chose to use. At first the video sounds great, dude is hyping what he saw from Apple. But later he gets called out from another speculating Apple is making a very significant change and distancing Final Cut from the real 'pro' users, dumbing it down, etc, and the guy who has seen it gets real quiet.. He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
Personally I'm very interested to see what they do, I'm sure it will have huge improvements on real time rendering and performance, sounds like the whole thing is being rewritten. But it does worry me that the program could become more for mass audience and no longer the pro application it has been for the past decade.
Personally I'm very interested to see what they do, I'm sure it will have huge improvements on real time rendering and performance, sounds like the whole thing is being rewritten. But it does worry me that the program could become more for mass audience and no longer the pro application it has been for the past decade.
NoNameBrand
Jul 20, 01:04 PM
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
KnightWRX
Apr 9, 06:17 AM
Most people use their MBA for browsing, youtube videos, email, office apps and perhaps video conferencing. None of which will be bottlenecked by the Intel IGP. If you're doing something above and beyond this that will be negatively affected by the CPU, you are in fact, the minority.
Fixed that there for you. ;)
Goes both ways really. It's just that more casual tasks (ie, gaming and watching videos) max out the GPU more than they do the CPU. CPU bottlenecks are usually caused by niche tasks like video editing/raw photo editing/scientific number crunching.
Fixed that there for you. ;)
Goes both ways really. It's just that more casual tasks (ie, gaming and watching videos) max out the GPU more than they do the CPU. CPU bottlenecks are usually caused by niche tasks like video editing/raw photo editing/scientific number crunching.
MTD's Mac
Mar 26, 12:44 PM
I hate all the gesture crap going on, sure it's fine for laptop users, but it's of no use to me on my mac pro.
Wow, couldn't disagree more. Touch is the beginning of a radical new way to use a Mac. I have a Magic Trackpad for my desktop setup and with custom gestures from Better Touch Tool it's far superior to any combination of keyboard shortcuts, hot corners, and other intuitive time-savers. Yes, there's a learning curve, but Lion should mitigate that somewhat and besides, wasn't there a learning curve for every new I/O hardware?
Wow, couldn't disagree more. Touch is the beginning of a radical new way to use a Mac. I have a Magic Trackpad for my desktop setup and with custom gestures from Better Touch Tool it's far superior to any combination of keyboard shortcuts, hot corners, and other intuitive time-savers. Yes, there's a learning curve, but Lion should mitigate that somewhat and besides, wasn't there a learning curve for every new I/O hardware?
No comments:
Post a Comment