URFloorMatt
May 5, 01:40 AM
Only on an Apple forum, when new features are raised as possibilities, does a sizeable minority of posts involve griping about "Why would you want to do that?!" or "What kind of stupid feature is that?"
I don't see what's so hard to accept that some times, in some instances, some people might find use of over-the-air updates. Given that Apple always releases new iOS updates at 1pm during weekdays, when the vast majority of us are at work, I can easily invision scenarios where there's a cool new feature in a point update that everyone wants to give a spin. Why not start the download at work so it's ready to test drive before you leave the office?
And, to all those citing bandwidth constraints as curtailing this behavior: Verizon users have no such constraints.
I don't see what's so hard to accept that some times, in some instances, some people might find use of over-the-air updates. Given that Apple always releases new iOS updates at 1pm during weekdays, when the vast majority of us are at work, I can easily invision scenarios where there's a cool new feature in a point update that everyone wants to give a spin. Why not start the download at work so it's ready to test drive before you leave the office?
And, to all those citing bandwidth constraints as curtailing this behavior: Verizon users have no such constraints.
haysoos123
Apr 13, 09:08 PM
Speaking of Quicktime 7 - know anything that adds those features back?
You can install Quicktime 7 again from your Snow Leopard disc, it's in something like the 'extras' folder. It doesn't replace Quicktime X though; you'll have both.
You can install Quicktime 7 again from your Snow Leopard disc, it's in something like the 'extras' folder. It doesn't replace Quicktime X though; you'll have both.
jaxstate
Aug 29, 09:25 AM
That's the main reason I'm upgrading. I know it will last atleast 4-5 years.
I don't know what people are fussing about. If these price points are true, Windows Vista is pretty cheap.
Remember, if you buy Vista, it'll most likely last at least 4-5 years before the next paid upgrade, unlike with OS X where if you want the latest and greatest, you're looking at an upgrade almost every year.
Vista looks to be a big jump from WinXP too, and seems a lot more mac-like. Complain all you want, but more competition puts Cupertino into a sweat and drives Apple into innovating even more. Support for Direct X 10 is going to be felt in about 1-2 years when people start getting DX10 graphics cards and more games take advantage of it.
I don't know what people are fussing about. If these price points are true, Windows Vista is pretty cheap.
Remember, if you buy Vista, it'll most likely last at least 4-5 years before the next paid upgrade, unlike with OS X where if you want the latest and greatest, you're looking at an upgrade almost every year.
Vista looks to be a big jump from WinXP too, and seems a lot more mac-like. Complain all you want, but more competition puts Cupertino into a sweat and drives Apple into innovating even more. Support for Direct X 10 is going to be felt in about 1-2 years when people start getting DX10 graphics cards and more games take advantage of it.
frozencarbonite
Aug 3, 05:25 PM
I guess I'll connect to my ethernet for now to be on the safe side until we get more information.
appleguy123
May 4, 10:28 PM
I'm not too sure how 3d screens work, but don't they devote half of the pixels to the right eye, and half to the left? If so, could you turn 3D off and have a double resolution retina display?
skunk
Apr 2, 09:27 AM
I sometimes wonder what the world would be like today if over the last 30 years we had spent 80% of our military budget on actually productive *****.10% would be a good start.
ZoomZoomZoom
Aug 29, 09:20 AM
I don't know what people are fussing about. If these price points are true, Windows Vista is pretty cheap.
Remember, if you buy Vista, it'll most likely last at least 4-5 years before the next paid upgrade, unlike with OS X where if you want the latest and greatest, you're looking at an upgrade almost every year.
Vista looks to be a big jump from WinXP too, and seems a lot more mac-like. Complain all you want, but more competition puts Cupertino into a sweat and drives Apple into innovating even more. Support for Direct X 10 is going to be felt in about 1-2 years when people start getting DX10 graphics cards and more games take advantage of it.
Remember, if you buy Vista, it'll most likely last at least 4-5 years before the next paid upgrade, unlike with OS X where if you want the latest and greatest, you're looking at an upgrade almost every year.
Vista looks to be a big jump from WinXP too, and seems a lot more mac-like. Complain all you want, but more competition puts Cupertino into a sweat and drives Apple into innovating even more. Support for Direct X 10 is going to be felt in about 1-2 years when people start getting DX10 graphics cards and more games take advantage of it.
Ted13
Sep 4, 07:52 AM
I certainly hope that the resolution on the Apple Movie Store will be AT LEAST 480x720 (aka 480P). Otherwise, between Netflix and super cheap DVDs these days, I don't see how Apple can compete with lower than DVD resolution.
If they are really smart (and the studios play ball, which is doubtful) they would go straight to 1080P.
If they are really smart (and the studios play ball, which is doubtful) they would go straight to 1080P.
Satoneko
Oct 12, 03:23 AM
My set up:
SevenInchScrew
Oct 2, 12:00 AM
One great thing I realized the other day is that the drop shield power up or whatever its called also restores your health which is awsome.
Yea, they wanted to combine some of the old Equipment items from Halo 3 to make them more useful. Drop Shield is a mix of the old Bubble Shield and the Regen. Active Camo mixes the old Camo and the Radar Jammer. But while it does make you invisible and jam your enemies radar, it also muffles your audio and jams your radar as well. Also, the Armor Lock puts off an EMP like effect, much like the old Power Drain, though you are obviously stuck in one place when using it. Lots of risk-reward involved in them.
I wasn't really sure how I would like the Armor Abilities, and the limited time I got with the Beta back in May didn't really help, since they were all a little broken then. But now, after playing quite a lot of Reach, I'm really enjoying them. It is really nice to always have them to use. The one-time use of the old equipment really did hinder their usage, so I can see why Bungie wanted to change. Sprint is my go-to piece, but I use Drop Shield a lot when playing Firefight.
Yea, they wanted to combine some of the old Equipment items from Halo 3 to make them more useful. Drop Shield is a mix of the old Bubble Shield and the Regen. Active Camo mixes the old Camo and the Radar Jammer. But while it does make you invisible and jam your enemies radar, it also muffles your audio and jams your radar as well. Also, the Armor Lock puts off an EMP like effect, much like the old Power Drain, though you are obviously stuck in one place when using it. Lots of risk-reward involved in them.
I wasn't really sure how I would like the Armor Abilities, and the limited time I got with the Beta back in May didn't really help, since they were all a little broken then. But now, after playing quite a lot of Reach, I'm really enjoying them. It is really nice to always have them to use. The one-time use of the old equipment really did hinder their usage, so I can see why Bungie wanted to change. Sprint is my go-to piece, but I use Drop Shield a lot when playing Firefight.
goosnarrggh
Nov 7, 09:08 AM
hmm... but shouldn't they wait until 802.11n becomes more than just a draft of a format?
Other products, including a few from Apple, are using draft-n hardware already.
Maybe they won't be 100% compliant, but unless something earth shattering happens before 802.11n is finalized, I'd expect that many draft-n products could be made compatible with equipment using the the final standard, with little more than a firmware change.
And wasn't 802.11g still in the draft stage when it was introduced in the AirPort Extreme? (Extreme was introduced on January 7, but 802.11g was not ratified until June 2003.)
Other products, including a few from Apple, are using draft-n hardware already.
Maybe they won't be 100% compliant, but unless something earth shattering happens before 802.11n is finalized, I'd expect that many draft-n products could be made compatible with equipment using the the final standard, with little more than a firmware change.
And wasn't 802.11g still in the draft stage when it was introduced in the AirPort Extreme? (Extreme was introduced on January 7, but 802.11g was not ratified until June 2003.)
BigBeast
Apr 2, 06:50 AM
A crap camera will never take a great picture, despite the hands it is in. It might take something vaguely enigmatic on some level, but with bad lens, inability to capture colors, or faulty mechanics/electronic, it will be nothing more than a crippling piece of equipment.
A good photographer can frame, layer, focus the subject, and compose well. Yes, you don't need a "good" camera for those qualities, but you need a well-creafted camera to back up and improve on the photographer's skills.
Sorry to say, but your are mistaken. People have been taking phenomenal photos without the cameras sold today. Cameras of yesterday were not as accurate nor precise as they are today, yet incredible photos have been taken for quite some time. How is that?
A good photographer can frame, layer, focus the subject, and compose well. Yes, you don't need a "good" camera for those qualities, but you need a well-creafted camera to back up and improve on the photographer's skills.
Sorry to say, but your are mistaken. People have been taking phenomenal photos without the cameras sold today. Cameras of yesterday were not as accurate nor precise as they are today, yet incredible photos have been taken for quite some time. How is that?
Ted Witcher
Apr 13, 03:55 PM
As an aside, that little localized color-correcting demo (watch the video of the event) is more sophisticated than Aperture's Brushes approach. It would be nice to see that feature move over to stills. And if FCX can render all that heavy video that quickly and in the background, why does it still take more than, say, instantly to load a RAW file? They need to put that guy Randy Ubillos in charge of the Aperture team for next rewrite.
spillproof
May 4, 11:07 PM
That will do wonders for my battery life.
But, the further I can get away from physically connecting to a computer for syncing and backing up, the happier I will be. Steps in the right direction.
But, the further I can get away from physically connecting to a computer for syncing and backing up, the happier I will be. Steps in the right direction.
micvog
Sep 6, 08:57 AM
I believe the GeForce 7600 GT is on par with the X1800 GT, faster in some cases, slower in others. It's a pretty good graphics card. I would just like to see the GeForce 7600 GT bump out the 7300 GT on Mac Pro.
Does anyone know how the 7300GT compares to the X1600? I am leaning towards the 20" to replace my 17" rev. A iMacG5, but would upgrade to the 24" is the GPU is a big bump.
Does anyone know how the 7300GT compares to the X1600? I am leaning towards the 20" to replace my 17" rev. A iMacG5, but would upgrade to the 24" is the GPU is a big bump.
dagger55
Mar 28, 08:50 PM
Didn't have time to get the PO approved before it sold out.... really disappointed. anyone know if you can get on a wait list?
hatehereyes
Oct 26, 12:44 AM
I really hope you're being funny. You're a much more active member than I, but it's "fliquo.". Someone even has a sig stating something like, "the screensaver is fliquo, the answer is always fliquo."
JESSICA never jokes!:rolleyes::rolleyes:
JESSICA never jokes!:rolleyes::rolleyes:
Mad4WDW
Mar 14, 03:44 PM
Here's one from me, my first post on the photography forum here. Hope you like it. Its about textures, colours and shapes :-)
Greg
Greg
TheNerdyNurse
Mar 23, 03:23 PM
Eh, you misunderstood me. The main point I was making is that the wife should not be able to prevent such a purchase IF THEY CAN AFFORD IT. In many cases, money itself is not an issue in such a purchase, as the wife would not blink twice in spending that amount on something SHE wants. My point was that sometimes they refuse things simply because they dont see it benefitting THEM- and that is something selfish, and shows a lack of respect. Of course if the guy is blowing $$ on an iPad when they're having trouble putting food on the table, thats an issue. My post wasnt centered on these cases. It made the assumption that it could comfortably be afforded, but which the wife doesnt see the value in it for herself, which is the sole reason of the refusal or the demand that it be returned. And Ive seen this on many, many occasions. I know this guy that brings in 6 figures a yr, yes his wife (who brings in nothing) controls the bank account. The guy has no balls, his wife dictates the purchases, buys whatever the hell she pleases, and gets upset when he spends on anything without consulting her. She doesnt let him buy **** he wants, the cost of which is a drop in the bucket compared to the income he makes, simply because SHE doesnt see the value in it. But like I said, the guy has no balls and takes it, while she spends thousands on shoes, etc without needing to consult him.But hey, some people love that ****. Sometimes you need to do things that give you individual pleasure in a marriage, not always 'pleasure as a unit'.
Just don't forget that the concept of selfishness goes both ways.
Its not always the wife is trying to be controlling and wants things only for herself. Its often that the wife is trying to plan for a furture, as someone else mentioned. I just think that is should be a give and take, and honestly, if my husband came home after spending $500 on anything, without consulting me, I'd be fairly upset. Unless he spent like $500 on a suitcase that had $100k in it... well I think i'd get over it. But now, that ain't never happening.
Its not about asking permission, it is about making decisions together that effect your overall well being. $500 is alot of money to alot of people. And if $500 isn't alot, then no, you wouldn't have to ask. But just because you can still put food on the table, even if you buy that ipad, that is still not a good reason to not discuss the purchase with your significant other. It may not be taking food out of your mouth today, but it could be used for something more productive in the future. Your wife/husband may already be thinking along those lines... which is why you should discuss a $500 purchase with them.
But this is just my humble opinion. Not saying it is appropriate for everyone, but this is the respect I think I deserve in my marriage.
And just for further insight, I am the sole breadwinner in my house, and it still took me 4 months, multiple discussions with my husband (in which he always encouraged me to buy it), and the ability to justify it as a learning tool for my son in order to buy my iPad... and food stayed on my table the whole time.
:)
Just don't forget that the concept of selfishness goes both ways.
Its not always the wife is trying to be controlling and wants things only for herself. Its often that the wife is trying to plan for a furture, as someone else mentioned. I just think that is should be a give and take, and honestly, if my husband came home after spending $500 on anything, without consulting me, I'd be fairly upset. Unless he spent like $500 on a suitcase that had $100k in it... well I think i'd get over it. But now, that ain't never happening.
Its not about asking permission, it is about making decisions together that effect your overall well being. $500 is alot of money to alot of people. And if $500 isn't alot, then no, you wouldn't have to ask. But just because you can still put food on the table, even if you buy that ipad, that is still not a good reason to not discuss the purchase with your significant other. It may not be taking food out of your mouth today, but it could be used for something more productive in the future. Your wife/husband may already be thinking along those lines... which is why you should discuss a $500 purchase with them.
But this is just my humble opinion. Not saying it is appropriate for everyone, but this is the respect I think I deserve in my marriage.
And just for further insight, I am the sole breadwinner in my house, and it still took me 4 months, multiple discussions with my husband (in which he always encouraged me to buy it), and the ability to justify it as a learning tool for my son in order to buy my iPad... and food stayed on my table the whole time.
:)
JSchwage
Sep 12, 02:07 PM
I don't like the dark grey sliders.
Same with me. Why did they have to get rid of the Aqua style interface? I loved the glassy look before. But besides that, I love iTunes 7! :D
Same with me. Why did they have to get rid of the Aqua style interface? I loved the glassy look before. But besides that, I love iTunes 7! :D
nehunte
Nov 12, 10:46 AM
Anybody having issues with Facebook at all? It redirects me to mobile facebook half the time. I hope Apple can resolve these issues. They need people like Facebook on board with them.
Apple OC
Mar 11, 12:49 AM
Madoff wasn't in the government. That had nothing to do with the government (other than showcasing the joke our regulation system has become) so bringing it up doesn't even make sense.
As for the G20, do things like that happen often in Canada?
Also, we need to stop flip flopping between talking about Canada and the USA, or at least do a better job of distinguishing the two when putting numbers out there as it gets confusing.
I only used Madoff as an example as to how 65 Billion could easily just get squandered and disappear. The Government crooks seem not to get caught as easily as him.
As for flip flopping Canada and the US ... I think both countries are similar as to how our Governments waste money.
IMO the answer to our countries sinking financially rests with reckless spending and the answer is not drastically cutting the big services like Military, Education, Healthcare and such.
There is too much Government feeding at the trough on both sides of the border.
As for the G20, do things like that happen often in Canada?
Also, we need to stop flip flopping between talking about Canada and the USA, or at least do a better job of distinguishing the two when putting numbers out there as it gets confusing.
I only used Madoff as an example as to how 65 Billion could easily just get squandered and disappear. The Government crooks seem not to get caught as easily as him.
As for flip flopping Canada and the US ... I think both countries are similar as to how our Governments waste money.
IMO the answer to our countries sinking financially rests with reckless spending and the answer is not drastically cutting the big services like Military, Education, Healthcare and such.
There is too much Government feeding at the trough on both sides of the border.
vitaboy
Oct 16, 03:47 PM
We heard something really similar to that when every other company released video-playing mp3 players before Apple did, and Jobs said he didn't see anybody wanting to have portable video. Well, Apple bit its tongue and released it, calling it "innovation".
You know what, Steve never said Apple would NEVER do a video iPod. What he said was that video just didn't make sense at the time. For one thing, he said that there was practically zero demand from iPod users for video. Then he qualified his statement by saying that the situation might be different in the future, but the media being what it is, his comment was reduced to the overly simplistic (but easy to report), "APPLE WILL NEVER MAKE A VIDEO IPOD."
And for your information, the release of the video iPod was innovative because Apple launched it in conjunction with $1.99 music videos and TV shows on the iTunes Store. Less than a year later, there are like 250 TV shows you can buy on iTunes, from the latest hits like Grey's Anatomy to old classics like Knight Rider.
I always get a little peeved that people are so easily dismissive of the iTunes piece of the iPod pie. iPod wouldn't be where it is today without iTunes and the iTunes Store. If it took Apple 18 months to convince the music companies to sell their music for $0.99 on iTunes, then don't you think Apple made the right decision by waiting to launch the video iPod simultaneously with iTunes video offerings? iPod is nothing without content and Steve clearly believes that iPod should never lack for legal music/video content, ever.
I, for one, know from an Apple iPod engineer that Apple had a working video iPod in the labs more than 2 years ago, but it's quite clear that Steve had the patience and foresight to wait until the time was right for video, instead of launching a product into a vacuum. History is full of products that - while technical marvels - utterly failed because they were before their time. Newton was one. The Tucker automobile was another.
I'm a big iPod fan (i've purchased 3) but wireless capabilities is the way of the future. I don't see ourselves in 10 years still being limited by wired headphones and such. Maybe it'll be easier than the Zune (haven't seen the demo) but the idea of beaming a song for somebody else to download/hear is pretty cool to me.
Glad you are such a big fan of the iPod. :) I own 4 iPods myself. :-P
Your prediction about wireless isn't necessarily wrong, but what Steve understands is 1) timing is important and 2) technology in context is even more important. Microsoft never understood this - they're all about feature bullet points and will enthusiastically push out new tech that ends up being poorly implemented and doesn't even end up solving the problems that consumers face in using technology.
Zune is wireless for the sake of wireless. It's wireless crap. Having wireless will not make Zune a better device - in fact, I think most people will soon come to the conclusion that it's crap because there will be no other Zune users within 100 miles to "squirt" each other with.
What people seem to forget is that Apple isn't stupid. It's like all the bruhala that erupted last year when geeks of every stripe claimed iPod would finally be killed because the music cell phone would be the killer product. What's funny is how these people assume Apple suddenly sent all its engineers home and decided, "Well, we've sold 50 million iPods. Time to call it day. No new iPods, ever."
As is now all but certain, Apple has been working on an iPod phone for a while. So much for music phones killing the iPod - maybe this year's iPod, but Apple is not a company to stand still.
Same thing with wireless. What people seem to forget is that Apple already has shown the way in terms of wireless. I'm talking about the broadcasting features already built in to iTunes via Bonjour networking. If you go to any college dorm or library, you'll notice a few to a dozen iTunes music libraries that will show up in your iTunes. People are already streaming their music for free, direct from iTunes, over 802.11. iTunes Sharing has already been doing the "music community" thing for a long time now.
So it seems quite obvious to me that a wireless iPod will be able to pick up these local iTunes streams like a Mac or PC running iTunes can already do.
If Apple wanted to push the technology a bit, then iPods would be able to stream music iPod-to-Mac(s), iPod-to-PC(s), and iPod-to-iPod(s). None of these limited point-to-point crap like Zune. No slow, time-bomb file transfers. Instead, we'll see live streaming from one iPod to many iPods, PCs, or Macs. No music file will actually be transferred, just as in iTunes sharing, which allows Apple to avoid the messiness of wrapping files in DRM like with Zune. A wireless iPod could tune in simultaneously with many different streams at the same time, and it'd be instantaneous because no transfers actually occur.
Sure, you won't be able to take the streams with you, but wireless iPod with iTunes Sharing would be infinitely more usable and fun than some geeky, slow, unworkable Zune model.
So I say just wait. I mean, can you imagine how badly Zune will blow up after Microsoft has launched the product (when they've committed to expensive manufacturing and the R&D is finished) and Apple launches a wireless iPod that actually works like a wireless device is supposed to?
Remember - just think "iPod with iTunes Sharing" and compare that to Zune, and realize with a smile that Microsoft is rushing forward into one of the biggest trainwrecks in music history. Apple's just waiting for them to build up momentum so the spectacle will be spectacular when the tracks get cut out from under them! ;)
You know what, Steve never said Apple would NEVER do a video iPod. What he said was that video just didn't make sense at the time. For one thing, he said that there was practically zero demand from iPod users for video. Then he qualified his statement by saying that the situation might be different in the future, but the media being what it is, his comment was reduced to the overly simplistic (but easy to report), "APPLE WILL NEVER MAKE A VIDEO IPOD."
And for your information, the release of the video iPod was innovative because Apple launched it in conjunction with $1.99 music videos and TV shows on the iTunes Store. Less than a year later, there are like 250 TV shows you can buy on iTunes, from the latest hits like Grey's Anatomy to old classics like Knight Rider.
I always get a little peeved that people are so easily dismissive of the iTunes piece of the iPod pie. iPod wouldn't be where it is today without iTunes and the iTunes Store. If it took Apple 18 months to convince the music companies to sell their music for $0.99 on iTunes, then don't you think Apple made the right decision by waiting to launch the video iPod simultaneously with iTunes video offerings? iPod is nothing without content and Steve clearly believes that iPod should never lack for legal music/video content, ever.
I, for one, know from an Apple iPod engineer that Apple had a working video iPod in the labs more than 2 years ago, but it's quite clear that Steve had the patience and foresight to wait until the time was right for video, instead of launching a product into a vacuum. History is full of products that - while technical marvels - utterly failed because they were before their time. Newton was one. The Tucker automobile was another.
I'm a big iPod fan (i've purchased 3) but wireless capabilities is the way of the future. I don't see ourselves in 10 years still being limited by wired headphones and such. Maybe it'll be easier than the Zune (haven't seen the demo) but the idea of beaming a song for somebody else to download/hear is pretty cool to me.
Glad you are such a big fan of the iPod. :) I own 4 iPods myself. :-P
Your prediction about wireless isn't necessarily wrong, but what Steve understands is 1) timing is important and 2) technology in context is even more important. Microsoft never understood this - they're all about feature bullet points and will enthusiastically push out new tech that ends up being poorly implemented and doesn't even end up solving the problems that consumers face in using technology.
Zune is wireless for the sake of wireless. It's wireless crap. Having wireless will not make Zune a better device - in fact, I think most people will soon come to the conclusion that it's crap because there will be no other Zune users within 100 miles to "squirt" each other with.
What people seem to forget is that Apple isn't stupid. It's like all the bruhala that erupted last year when geeks of every stripe claimed iPod would finally be killed because the music cell phone would be the killer product. What's funny is how these people assume Apple suddenly sent all its engineers home and decided, "Well, we've sold 50 million iPods. Time to call it day. No new iPods, ever."
As is now all but certain, Apple has been working on an iPod phone for a while. So much for music phones killing the iPod - maybe this year's iPod, but Apple is not a company to stand still.
Same thing with wireless. What people seem to forget is that Apple already has shown the way in terms of wireless. I'm talking about the broadcasting features already built in to iTunes via Bonjour networking. If you go to any college dorm or library, you'll notice a few to a dozen iTunes music libraries that will show up in your iTunes. People are already streaming their music for free, direct from iTunes, over 802.11. iTunes Sharing has already been doing the "music community" thing for a long time now.
So it seems quite obvious to me that a wireless iPod will be able to pick up these local iTunes streams like a Mac or PC running iTunes can already do.
If Apple wanted to push the technology a bit, then iPods would be able to stream music iPod-to-Mac(s), iPod-to-PC(s), and iPod-to-iPod(s). None of these limited point-to-point crap like Zune. No slow, time-bomb file transfers. Instead, we'll see live streaming from one iPod to many iPods, PCs, or Macs. No music file will actually be transferred, just as in iTunes sharing, which allows Apple to avoid the messiness of wrapping files in DRM like with Zune. A wireless iPod could tune in simultaneously with many different streams at the same time, and it'd be instantaneous because no transfers actually occur.
Sure, you won't be able to take the streams with you, but wireless iPod with iTunes Sharing would be infinitely more usable and fun than some geeky, slow, unworkable Zune model.
So I say just wait. I mean, can you imagine how badly Zune will blow up after Microsoft has launched the product (when they've committed to expensive manufacturing and the R&D is finished) and Apple launches a wireless iPod that actually works like a wireless device is supposed to?
Remember - just think "iPod with iTunes Sharing" and compare that to Zune, and realize with a smile that Microsoft is rushing forward into one of the biggest trainwrecks in music history. Apple's just waiting for them to build up momentum so the spectacle will be spectacular when the tracks get cut out from under them! ;)
Eye4Desyn
Apr 13, 04:28 PM
Having just started filming weddings and shooting my first indie film, I cannot wait for this to arrive in the Mac App Store in June! Although I enjoy using iMovie, I feel a bit underwhelmed now with my use for the program. Being that this has a somewhat similar UI, I'm wondering if the learning curve won't be as steep. I'm just blown away with all the things they mentioned that happened on ingest. This will really free up a lot of time to focus on what matters - editing. Now if only :apple: will give some news on/release the new iMacs.
No comments:
Post a Comment