Nuvi
Apr 11, 06:48 AM
Well, I can say this much:
I don't care if they change the interface, because if the new version doesn't fix the LONGSTANDING issues with FCP, my post house is dumping FCP and moving to Avid and I'll have to get used to a new interface anyway.
Sick of bad file handling, sick of flawed roundtripping, sick of ****** multicore support, sick of stupid little idiosyncrasies that make sense to nobody I've ever spoken to in the industry.
Apple needs to get their **** in gear or they're going to lose a lot of their FCP install base, not many places are happy with it anymore.
I don't think anyone is worried about interface changes. Its more of Apple "re-inventing" how NLE's work aka making it "iMoviePro". I fully agree with your gripes about where FCP is right now. We are moving rest our FCP suits to Avid MC if Apple can't pull it together. Regarding the move from FCP to Avid MC 5.5 - its is very easy due to 5.5 flexibility towards the way FCP editors used to work.
I don't care if they change the interface, because if the new version doesn't fix the LONGSTANDING issues with FCP, my post house is dumping FCP and moving to Avid and I'll have to get used to a new interface anyway.
Sick of bad file handling, sick of flawed roundtripping, sick of ****** multicore support, sick of stupid little idiosyncrasies that make sense to nobody I've ever spoken to in the industry.
Apple needs to get their **** in gear or they're going to lose a lot of their FCP install base, not many places are happy with it anymore.
I don't think anyone is worried about interface changes. Its more of Apple "re-inventing" how NLE's work aka making it "iMoviePro". I fully agree with your gripes about where FCP is right now. We are moving rest our FCP suits to Avid MC if Apple can't pull it together. Regarding the move from FCP to Avid MC 5.5 - its is very easy due to 5.5 flexibility towards the way FCP editors used to work.
Kevin Monahan
Apr 5, 06:20 PM
At present we have to re-encode a lot of our footage (7D / Minicam etc), and you don't need to do that in Premiere, it just plays on the timeline - however editing in that is quite frankly an exercise in sheer frustration and strange bugs.
I don't find it frustrating, in fact, it runs circles around FCP and I worked at Apple on 2 versions of the software, wrote a book and founded the first FCPUG.
As for strange bugs, please let me know what they are. Our users aren't complaining about anything strange.
If you do find something, please report it: Submit bugs to http://www.adobe.com/go/wish . More on how to give feedback: http://bit.ly/93d6NF
Best,
Kevin
I don't find it frustrating, in fact, it runs circles around FCP and I worked at Apple on 2 versions of the software, wrote a book and founded the first FCPUG.
As for strange bugs, please let me know what they are. Our users aren't complaining about anything strange.
If you do find something, please report it: Submit bugs to http://www.adobe.com/go/wish . More on how to give feedback: http://bit.ly/93d6NF
Best,
Kevin
cloudnine
Nov 28, 07:27 PM
"It would be a nice idea."
What does that mean? I have lots of nice ideas for getting money when I didn't do anything.
By this logic, shouldn't Universal also get royalties for every CD player, Cassette player, and radio sold?
Might as well cash in on the giant cash cow that is the iPod :rolleyes:
My thoughts exactly... "oh, well this ipod thing plays music and it's the best mp3 player out there... how can we get this to benefit us for absolutely no reason?"
asinine.
What does that mean? I have lots of nice ideas for getting money when I didn't do anything.
By this logic, shouldn't Universal also get royalties for every CD player, Cassette player, and radio sold?
Might as well cash in on the giant cash cow that is the iPod :rolleyes:
My thoughts exactly... "oh, well this ipod thing plays music and it's the best mp3 player out there... how can we get this to benefit us for absolutely no reason?"
asinine.
Pontavignon
Mar 31, 07:54 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
Finally Google admits Jobs was right about fragmentation and recognises that to fight Apple it must become Apple. But it won't admit it. Prepare for lots of "closed is open and open is closed" stuff. Plus: the state of emergency justifying this closure is temporary: sort of like in Syria 50 years ago.
You know, I am truly sorry for the idealists in the open source community. They deserve better.
Finally Google admits Jobs was right about fragmentation and recognises that to fight Apple it must become Apple. But it won't admit it. Prepare for lots of "closed is open and open is closed" stuff. Plus: the state of emergency justifying this closure is temporary: sort of like in Syria 50 years ago.
You know, I am truly sorry for the idealists in the open source community. They deserve better.
DrRadon
Mar 22, 01:11 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Looking at these specs will be awsome while iPad users actualy have a ******** of Apps to actualy use their specs on. :rolleyes:
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Looking at these specs will be awsome while iPad users actualy have a ******** of Apps to actualy use their specs on. :rolleyes:
faroZ06
Apr 27, 08:43 AM
And once again people give Apple a pass for something that is clearly an issue.
You mean to tell me that Apple, a company that seems to release fairly solid software, "neglected" to test that when disabling an option called LOCATION SERVICES, that it actually disabled location checking properly? Are some of you really so Jobsian?
Call a spade a spade. There's no possible chance this was a mistake. They got caught. They should not be given a pass over it. If a user opts to disable Location Services, they were working under the false impression that their location was no longer being tracked. Seems mighty shifty to me. Doesn't matter how much data might have been user-identifiable. This sounds like something Google would do, not Apple.
Not really. Although location services does not delete the log when you turn it off, it does cease to record to it. I don't see what the problem with that is.
You mean to tell me that Apple, a company that seems to release fairly solid software, "neglected" to test that when disabling an option called LOCATION SERVICES, that it actually disabled location checking properly? Are some of you really so Jobsian?
Call a spade a spade. There's no possible chance this was a mistake. They got caught. They should not be given a pass over it. If a user opts to disable Location Services, they were working under the false impression that their location was no longer being tracked. Seems mighty shifty to me. Doesn't matter how much data might have been user-identifiable. This sounds like something Google would do, not Apple.
Not really. Although location services does not delete the log when you turn it off, it does cease to record to it. I don't see what the problem with that is.
Mr. Retrofire
Mar 26, 09:22 PM
It's crap that is no longer needed.
It sounds like you speak about your own posts.
You are in a progress trap (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_trap), kid. It feels good that you are not responsible for the use of nuclear weapons. I'm sure you would use them, if you could kill "Rosetta" with them.
Stuff that can be cut out but isn't, holds back progress.
Your logic is flawed, because Rosetta is already "cut out" in SL. It is a separate option, if you know what that means. No? Now explain, how you cut something out, which is already cut out.
Progress = cutting and more cutting and then perfecting what's left over.
*lol*
It is important to note, that Apples success and progress in emerging markets in the past 10 years is associated with iTunes (it is necessary to access your iDevices), and the iTunes success is based on your biggest foe: The Carbon API. Or in other words: Apple would not be as big as it is, if Carbon and iTunes did not exist in the past. Strange that you must see now, that your enemies are your friends (and you use them daily).
It sounds like you speak about your own posts.
You are in a progress trap (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_trap), kid. It feels good that you are not responsible for the use of nuclear weapons. I'm sure you would use them, if you could kill "Rosetta" with them.
Stuff that can be cut out but isn't, holds back progress.
Your logic is flawed, because Rosetta is already "cut out" in SL. It is a separate option, if you know what that means. No? Now explain, how you cut something out, which is already cut out.
Progress = cutting and more cutting and then perfecting what's left over.
*lol*
It is important to note, that Apples success and progress in emerging markets in the past 10 years is associated with iTunes (it is necessary to access your iDevices), and the iTunes success is based on your biggest foe: The Carbon API. Or in other words: Apple would not be as big as it is, if Carbon and iTunes did not exist in the past. Strange that you must see now, that your enemies are your friends (and you use them daily).
Mr. Mister
Jul 14, 06:55 PM
Power supply at the top? Blah! :mad: I hate the power supply on the top, not that
it would keep me from purchasing a new MacPro though. ;)
Power supplies produce a lot of heat. It makes great sense according to simply the most basic laws of thermodynamics.
it would keep me from purchasing a new MacPro though. ;)
Power supplies produce a lot of heat. It makes great sense according to simply the most basic laws of thermodynamics.
steadysignal
Apr 27, 08:02 AM
This is a lie
Keeping a database is logging ourbgeneral location. :mad:
correct. wasn't sure how long it would take for people in general to get up in arms about location privacy on the idevices... what did people think was going to happen??
such it is, our electronic tethers are really leashes.
Keeping a database is logging ourbgeneral location. :mad:
correct. wasn't sure how long it would take for people in general to get up in arms about location privacy on the idevices... what did people think was going to happen??
such it is, our electronic tethers are really leashes.
mlayer
Mar 31, 03:12 PM
A big part of each Android OEM partner's strategy has been to differentiate by software, usually through skinning. I'm curious to know what this means for them when Ice Cream comes around. How limited will they be in terms of customization? And if differentiation is curtailed, how can the OEM's stand out? What's to stop some no-name upstart from undercutting all of them and eating their lunch? The era of the commodity smartphone has officially begun and it's a race to the bottom for Android partners. Apple may not win the market share war, but as long as they maintain margins, sell out every unit and maintain customer satisfaction, they'll be in an enviable position.
ThunderSkunk
Apr 10, 12:20 AM
Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic...
jackc
Aug 8, 05:16 AM
I hope there's been a significant overhaul in Spotlight, beyond what Steve hinted at already. There was no video demo on the website, so hopefully that's the case. It was a really underdeveloped feature in Tiger.
Iconoclysm
Apr 20, 04:23 PM
Are you aware that Apple copied the ibooks GUI from another software vendor? I remember seeing it years (like in G4 era) before ipad was out, before iBook. It was for keeping inventory of books on a mac.
I'm not gonna bother going looking for the link/screen shot but trust me, that look was used by another software vendor, BEFORE apple used it. And of course that's one reason this wasn't mentioned in the suit I'm assuming.
Edit:
Actually here it is.
http://www.delicious-monster.com/
Image (http://www.delicious-monster.com/images/librarypage/screenshots/inspector_0_topmatter.png)
Won apple design award in 2005. And when was iBooks introduced?
And the co-creator of that product is a UI Designer working on the iPad. Nice work.
I'm not gonna bother going looking for the link/screen shot but trust me, that look was used by another software vendor, BEFORE apple used it. And of course that's one reason this wasn't mentioned in the suit I'm assuming.
Edit:
Actually here it is.
http://www.delicious-monster.com/
Image (http://www.delicious-monster.com/images/librarypage/screenshots/inspector_0_topmatter.png)
Won apple design award in 2005. And when was iBooks introduced?
And the co-creator of that product is a UI Designer working on the iPad. Nice work.
camelsnot
Apr 8, 03:59 AM
You know that no one thinks that way right? I never understood all of these "fanboy" posts saying things that these mysterious "fanyboys" that I've never seen supposedly say.
You must not frequent Apple forums. There are quite a few people who think Apple can do no wrong and twist their own morals and thoughts to justify things that Apple does in these forums. They think they are Apple's personal crusaders. It's sad really, that some people can't think for themselves and they're so blinded by a tech company who could give two craps about them at the end of the day. While Apple does some good things for customers, it's not because they care. It's because they know by doing that, these customers will return. It's simple business, and $teve Job$ is a business and marketing god.
Good on Apple for keeping people so mentally invested in their company. It's a testament to the power of perception and lack of mental clarity from some of its consumers.
Charge on, Apple. :apple:
You must not frequent Apple forums. There are quite a few people who think Apple can do no wrong and twist their own morals and thoughts to justify things that Apple does in these forums. They think they are Apple's personal crusaders. It's sad really, that some people can't think for themselves and they're so blinded by a tech company who could give two craps about them at the end of the day. While Apple does some good things for customers, it's not because they care. It's because they know by doing that, these customers will return. It's simple business, and $teve Job$ is a business and marketing god.
Good on Apple for keeping people so mentally invested in their company. It's a testament to the power of perception and lack of mental clarity from some of its consumers.
Charge on, Apple. :apple:
theBB
Aug 11, 07:28 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)?
Well, let's see, about 20 years ago, a lot of countries in Europe, Asia and elsewhere decided on a standard digital cell phone system and called it GSM. About 15 years ago GSM networks became quite widespread across these countries. In the meantime US kept on using analog cell phones. Motorola did not even believe that digital cell phone had much of a future, so it decided to stay away from this market, a decision which almost bankrupted the company.
US started rolling out digital service only about 10 years ago. As US government does not like to dictate private companies how to conduct their business, they sold the spectrum and put down some basic ground rules, but for the most part they let the service providers use any network they wished. For one reason or another, these providers decided go with about 4 different standards at first. Quite a few companies went with GSM, AT&T picked a similar, but incompatible TDMA (IS=136?) standard, Nextel went with a proprietary standard they called iDEN and Sprint and Verizon went with CDMA, a radically different standard (IS-95) designed by Qualcomm. At the time, other big companies were very skeptical, so Qualcomm had to not only develop the underlying communication standards, but manufacture cell phones and the electronics for the cell towers. However, once the system proved itself, everybody started moving in that direction. Even the upcoming 3G system for these GSM networks, called UMTS, use a variant of CDMA technology.
CDMA is a more complicated standard compared to GSM, but it allows the providers to cram more users into each cell, it is supposedly cheaper to maintain and more flexible in some respects. However, anybody in that boat has to pay hefty royalties to Qualcomm, dampening its popularity. While creating UMTS, GSM standards bodies did everything they could to avoid using Qualcomm patents to avoid these payments. However, I don't know how successful they got in these efforts.
Even though Europeans here on these forums like to gloat that US did not join the worldwide standard, that we did not play along, that ours is a hodge podge of incompatible systems; without the freedom to try out different standards, CDMA would not have the opportunity to prove its feasibility and performance. In the end, the rest of the world is also reaping the benefits through UMTS/WCDMA.
Of course, not using the same standards as everybody else has its own price. The components of CDMA cell phones cost more and the system itself is more complicated, so CDMA versions of cell phones hit the market six months to a year after their GSM counterparts, if at all. The infrastructure cost of a rare system is higher as well, so AT&T had to rip apart its network to replace it with GSM version about five years after rolling it out. Sprint is probably going to convert Nextel's system in the near future as well.
I hope this answers your question.
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)?
Well, let's see, about 20 years ago, a lot of countries in Europe, Asia and elsewhere decided on a standard digital cell phone system and called it GSM. About 15 years ago GSM networks became quite widespread across these countries. In the meantime US kept on using analog cell phones. Motorola did not even believe that digital cell phone had much of a future, so it decided to stay away from this market, a decision which almost bankrupted the company.
US started rolling out digital service only about 10 years ago. As US government does not like to dictate private companies how to conduct their business, they sold the spectrum and put down some basic ground rules, but for the most part they let the service providers use any network they wished. For one reason or another, these providers decided go with about 4 different standards at first. Quite a few companies went with GSM, AT&T picked a similar, but incompatible TDMA (IS=136?) standard, Nextel went with a proprietary standard they called iDEN and Sprint and Verizon went with CDMA, a radically different standard (IS-95) designed by Qualcomm. At the time, other big companies were very skeptical, so Qualcomm had to not only develop the underlying communication standards, but manufacture cell phones and the electronics for the cell towers. However, once the system proved itself, everybody started moving in that direction. Even the upcoming 3G system for these GSM networks, called UMTS, use a variant of CDMA technology.
CDMA is a more complicated standard compared to GSM, but it allows the providers to cram more users into each cell, it is supposedly cheaper to maintain and more flexible in some respects. However, anybody in that boat has to pay hefty royalties to Qualcomm, dampening its popularity. While creating UMTS, GSM standards bodies did everything they could to avoid using Qualcomm patents to avoid these payments. However, I don't know how successful they got in these efforts.
Even though Europeans here on these forums like to gloat that US did not join the worldwide standard, that we did not play along, that ours is a hodge podge of incompatible systems; without the freedom to try out different standards, CDMA would not have the opportunity to prove its feasibility and performance. In the end, the rest of the world is also reaping the benefits through UMTS/WCDMA.
Of course, not using the same standards as everybody else has its own price. The components of CDMA cell phones cost more and the system itself is more complicated, so CDMA versions of cell phones hit the market six months to a year after their GSM counterparts, if at all. The infrastructure cost of a rare system is higher as well, so AT&T had to rip apart its network to replace it with GSM version about five years after rolling it out. Sprint is probably going to convert Nextel's system in the near future as well.
I hope this answers your question.
HecubusPro
Sep 19, 10:02 AM
But the implication that many posts had, such as that the world was coming to an end, was pretty darn ridiculous.
But do you honestly think people believe that? That's as silly as me asking you if you "honestly think people believe that."
Venting can sometimes turn into frustrated anger, transforming into "apple bashing" specific to this forum. I use discernment to simply ignore flame posts and move on to the posts that are intelligently worded, with thought behind them. This thread may host more of the former than the latter, but I just move beyond those. I don't become one of those people and vent angrily at how people are behaving either. I'm not their parent or their moderator.
So MBP with swappable HDD, magnetic latch, x1800, and merom. Discuss. :)
But do you honestly think people believe that? That's as silly as me asking you if you "honestly think people believe that."
Venting can sometimes turn into frustrated anger, transforming into "apple bashing" specific to this forum. I use discernment to simply ignore flame posts and move on to the posts that are intelligently worded, with thought behind them. This thread may host more of the former than the latter, but I just move beyond those. I don't become one of those people and vent angrily at how people are behaving either. I'm not their parent or their moderator.
So MBP with swappable HDD, magnetic latch, x1800, and merom. Discuss. :)
LagunaSol
Apr 6, 04:08 PM
Is every app in the app store of the same caliber as those few apps you named?
Did I say that? No. (Strawman alert.) But there are a lot. Far more than you'll find for Honeycomb, despite mobilehavoc's contention to the contrary.
I'm sure you'll be the first to dance happy around when in the future finally some 5 year old Android apps/games will get ported to iOS like it is now with Windows/MacOS.
Ah, Android gaming. You seem to have things reversed in your head:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JICitdMtY5U
Did I say that? No. (Strawman alert.) But there are a lot. Far more than you'll find for Honeycomb, despite mobilehavoc's contention to the contrary.
I'm sure you'll be the first to dance happy around when in the future finally some 5 year old Android apps/games will get ported to iOS like it is now with Windows/MacOS.
Ah, Android gaming. You seem to have things reversed in your head:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JICitdMtY5U
Consultant
Apr 19, 02:06 PM
What annoys me even more is that Apple always seems to make these claims that they made such and such first, and that Windows is copying Mac OS.. What annoys me is if you know a bit of the history you'll find that Apple copied Xerox interface, with permission of course, but it's not like they came up with it first..
Now they are making another claim that Samsung is copying..
WRONG. A lot of modern GUI elements are INVENTED by Apple:
http://obamapacman.com/2010/03/myth-copyright-theft-apple-stole-gui-from-xerox-parc-alto/
Now they are making another claim that Samsung is copying..
WRONG. A lot of modern GUI elements are INVENTED by Apple:
http://obamapacman.com/2010/03/myth-copyright-theft-apple-stole-gui-from-xerox-parc-alto/
Multimedia
Sep 14, 12:23 PM
i think they're coming up with 2 dual octo-core.......True That. But not until next summer 2007.
CANOLArabbit
Apr 7, 11:16 PM
I think this makes somewhat sense... When i went to best buy on launch day they ran out... and then i went back and they were doing $100 pre-orders to be put on a list (which i never ended up doing)... so what they did is had a ton of people pay a hundred bucks to put on a best buy gift card and then "shorten" the supply so that people would have to be impatient and go buy somewhere else--which forced people to spend that hundred dollars at BB.
Kind of a cheap selfish way to make money. hundreds of pre-orders and then only a few ipad sales...
it still doesn't make sense to not sell what you have in stock though... stupid
Kind of a cheap selfish way to make money. hundreds of pre-orders and then only a few ipad sales...
it still doesn't make sense to not sell what you have in stock though... stupid
mc68k
Dec 9, 03:41 PM
for being part of the GT series it's very true to GT. i didnt even know about the premium vs standard or the 'blurred' graphics until it was pointed out to me. for what it is i'm very happy still. maybe when i get bored i'll start noticing everything. maybe due to me being behind the gaming curve.
the 'fun' part of the game is running out though. it'll be hard to win races from this point on. the license thing has always been an annoyance. i haven't even done one yet, just because i feel it's there for the sake of being there. i've done them in the past so nothing to prove. i'll do them for game completion and possible cars you can win.
i have xmas break coming up, so hopefully it doesn't get too old by then. i wish they had the weigert vector w8-- that was my favorite car in GT2.
the inside car view from the cobra 427 '66 was REALLY cool. i can't wait to max that car out on the tuning :)
the 'fun' part of the game is running out though. it'll be hard to win races from this point on. the license thing has always been an annoyance. i haven't even done one yet, just because i feel it's there for the sake of being there. i've done them in the past so nothing to prove. i'll do them for game completion and possible cars you can win.
i have xmas break coming up, so hopefully it doesn't get too old by then. i wish they had the weigert vector w8-- that was my favorite car in GT2.
the inside car view from the cobra 427 '66 was REALLY cool. i can't wait to max that car out on the tuning :)
wmmk
Jul 14, 06:07 PM
the question still remains--will the powermacs be able to use standard, off the shelf, pc video cards?
i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.
what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.
think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.
that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.
oh, btw, i did some of my own investigations and found this site:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html
which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.
i'v actually heard that with a normal PC, you can make almost any NVIDIA card compatible with mac, but it takes a bit of geekery and hackery.
i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.
what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.
think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.
that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.
oh, btw, i did some of my own investigations and found this site:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html
which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.
i'v actually heard that with a normal PC, you can make almost any NVIDIA card compatible with mac, but it takes a bit of geekery and hackery.
mdriftmeyer
Aug 26, 12:37 PM
California, it's replies like this that pisses switchers off, even seasones mac users get upset with these replies. What the hell is Rev A?. What idiot argument is this?. That's it ok for apple to make a ****ed-up product cause it's the first version?. What?.. apple just started making computers that they don't know how to make quality products until they already made the first version?. Apple should be horrified at your suggestion. Imagine if no one bought Rev A (whatever the **** that means) machines from Apple. APPLE WOULD GO BROKE!!. There's always Rev A machines when it comes to computers dude. The next mac pro upgrade will use a new processor, faster, new video, more ram, newer harddrive and becomes rev A cause THEY ARE THE FIRST APPLE PRODUCTS TO USE THE NEW UPGRADED PROCESSOR, NEW HARDDIVE, ETC. Really, stop with this nonsense. You are like the 10th idiotic apple fan I have read using this dumb argument.
Let's make it clear. The first revision of any highly integrated system is produced with an acceptable failure rate. With results coming in, failures recorded and internal testing continuous between the life of the first and second revision you will see a drop in failures in the next revision.
Every item that is in the next revision will have been tested, more flaws removed, etc. No piece of hardware is released with zero defects. [human interference aside such as dropping the product, overheating it, intentionally forcing failure]
If for every 1000 systems shipped approximately 20 fail, after a minimum predicted total hours, this 2% attrition rate is highly desirable. If you can't accept it you can stop using technology, now.
For every ten people bitching on this board about failures there is over 1,000 that don't.
Let's make it clear. The first revision of any highly integrated system is produced with an acceptable failure rate. With results coming in, failures recorded and internal testing continuous between the life of the first and second revision you will see a drop in failures in the next revision.
Every item that is in the next revision will have been tested, more flaws removed, etc. No piece of hardware is released with zero defects. [human interference aside such as dropping the product, overheating it, intentionally forcing failure]
If for every 1000 systems shipped approximately 20 fail, after a minimum predicted total hours, this 2% attrition rate is highly desirable. If you can't accept it you can stop using technology, now.
For every ten people bitching on this board about failures there is over 1,000 that don't.
Dunepilot
Nov 29, 08:13 AM
Stopping short of a foul-mouthed tirade against Universal and the other majors ... just.
Vinyl and FairplayAAC only for me these days. Screw these jokers.
Vinyl and FairplayAAC only for me these days. Screw these jokers.