notabadname
Apr 18, 04:41 PM
all things d posted some images from the lawsuit
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/18/165102-iphone_galaxy_comparison.jpg
http://mobilized.allthingsd.com/20110418/apple-files-patent-suit-against-samsung-over-galaxy-line-of-phones-and-tablets/
Great comparison images.
Anyone unwilling to admit the clear "clone" job here and validity of Apple's complaint is, IMO, one of two things; an Apple-hater or blind.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/18/165102-iphone_galaxy_comparison.jpg
http://mobilized.allthingsd.com/20110418/apple-files-patent-suit-against-samsung-over-galaxy-line-of-phones-and-tablets/
Great comparison images.
Anyone unwilling to admit the clear "clone" job here and validity of Apple's complaint is, IMO, one of two things; an Apple-hater or blind.
amanset
Aug 2, 12:40 PM
To be clear... that was for the standalone iSight camera not the embedded iSight camera's available in the iMac, MacBook, MacBook Pro, etc.
Yeah I know, hence me thinking they might release a new iSight one of these days seeing as the old one can't be sold in Europe.
Yeah I know, hence me thinking they might release a new iSight one of these days seeing as the old one can't be sold in Europe.
snberk103
May 3, 10:52 PM
Lord, lol! :D
Feel sorry for you, bud. XD
One more Canadianism.... The Globe and Mail today was reporting on the Bin Laden raid. Apparently his balcony had a wall 2.2 metres high, just enough to conceal a man 6 ft 4 inch. You can't make this stuff up. Most Canadians just make the conversion and move on.:D
Feel sorry for you, bud. XD
One more Canadianism.... The Globe and Mail today was reporting on the Bin Laden raid. Apparently his balcony had a wall 2.2 metres high, just enough to conceal a man 6 ft 4 inch. You can't make this stuff up. Most Canadians just make the conversion and move on.:D
davegoody
Apr 27, 02:57 AM
Some designs changes i'd like to see (all the rest i'm fine with):
- Dust filters
- Thunderbolt ports, front and back (instead of one of the firewire ports)
- Usb 3.0 replacing usb 2.0 ports
- PSU on bottom to keep it cool
- HD's on bottom to keep them cool too
- At least one dedicated SSD bay
How exactly is a PSU at the bottom going to aid cooling? Heat Rises . . . . so anything above the PSU gets even hotter, this is why traditionally PSUs are at the top of the case.
- Dust filters
- Thunderbolt ports, front and back (instead of one of the firewire ports)
- Usb 3.0 replacing usb 2.0 ports
- PSU on bottom to keep it cool
- HD's on bottom to keep them cool too
- At least one dedicated SSD bay
How exactly is a PSU at the bottom going to aid cooling? Heat Rises . . . . so anything above the PSU gets even hotter, this is why traditionally PSUs are at the top of the case.
Cougarcat
Apr 23, 04:43 PM
I'm not impressed if this is where the iMac display is potentially going , the current GPUs can barely drive the resolutions they have now in anything other than simple desktop apps . , can you imagine what video card you would need to drive a game (say portal 2 which has low to modest requirements) at 30fps + on a screen with 3200 or higher resloution ?
I think Apple is simply futureproofing here, and we won't see Retina displays for 3+ years, when it would be more feasible.
I agree with you, though, it would be nice if Apple was more serious about their GPUs. Maybe the switch to retina will force them to be.
I think Apple is simply futureproofing here, and we won't see Retina displays for 3+ years, when it would be more feasible.
I agree with you, though, it would be nice if Apple was more serious about their GPUs. Maybe the switch to retina will force them to be.
Don't panic
May 4, 11:12 AM
in order to speed up the game:
i assume that either we find nothing or we disable a trap or we find a level treasure.
in any case those do not affect our immediate game, so I will already call turn2:
R1T2: Loras' group opens the top right door and moves into the next room
if in the start room we would have found something that might have affected our next move (like a special treasure of some sort, a map or the like) then please disregard the above decision.
i assume that either we find nothing or we disable a trap or we find a level treasure.
in any case those do not affect our immediate game, so I will already call turn2:
R1T2: Loras' group opens the top right door and moves into the next room
if in the start room we would have found something that might have affected our next move (like a special treasure of some sort, a map or the like) then please disregard the above decision.
puckhead193
Aug 3, 10:32 PM
god i hope its true. joshy needs a new imac :D
dlowe402
Nov 30, 06:42 AM
I have had a lot of Apple products in my life (see below) and I have a Treo650. I would dump it in a heartbeat and pick up an iPhone. Especially if it has intigration with iLife apps. I'm sick of having to run flakey software just to hear my phone. I'm on my second 650 in 6 months (Speaker quit working) and while the Palm OS is outdated, I wouldnt touch Windows Mobile with a 10' pole. I'm excited with the prospect of an Apple phone.
My Stuff:
Mackbook Pro 15" 2.16 ghz w/Glossy Screen:D
Powerbok 12" (Cat killed it though) :mad:
Silver iPod mini
iPod Shuffle
Palm Treo650
Wife's Stuff:
Intel iMac Core Duo 2ghz
iPod Nano
Other:
iMac G5
20gb Ipod (Sons)
Pink iPod Mini (Daughters)
Airport Wireless Home Network
My Stuff:
Mackbook Pro 15" 2.16 ghz w/Glossy Screen:D
Powerbok 12" (Cat killed it though) :mad:
Silver iPod mini
iPod Shuffle
Palm Treo650
Wife's Stuff:
Intel iMac Core Duo 2ghz
iPod Nano
Other:
iMac G5
20gb Ipod (Sons)
Pink iPod Mini (Daughters)
Airport Wireless Home Network
patrickkidd
May 6, 05:00 AM
I would like to hear what sorts of reason Apple would use to make such a decision, if believable at all. If the architecture is headed in the right direction, then it would be nice to know why. At the end of the day, the ppc to intel switch had a relatively small impact on the rest of us.
darrens
Aug 5, 03:04 AM
First, Apple's apps were easier to port because they were already XCode. So it was fairly easy for Apple to just recompile with the new compiler.
Are you sure that's true for all of them? They haven't owned Logic very long, and some of the others started life outside of Apple. I'm sure they had a few issues there.
Second, Adobe was using a lot of CodeWarrior code and it would be far more difficult to convert. Also having X86 code compiled using MS VStudio doesn't help Adobe to be ahead in generating X86 code under XCode because they run under a completely different GUI and access different libraries.
They have the MacOS X GUI code - that doesn't change for Intel - the OS is the same. The core logic endianness doesn't depend on the compiler - the code would be cross-platform and compile on GCC and Visual Studio anyway. Sure they have to deal with a few Codewarrior issues - but they have to do that for the new version anyway. It's not like they'd have to do it twice.
Third, even Apple released the UB code with a new updated version of their pro apps. Adobe's CS3 was not due for a year and a half.
True - but not all Apple's pro apps had a significant level of new features - they were just an interim release.
Fourth, Adobe announced their plans early on so that everyone would know what to expect.
Yes - don't expect us to be as pro-active as we've been in the past. I can remember when Apple went PPC - Adobe had an accelerator out for Photoshop close to the release date of the PPC Macs, and the fully PPC version followed shortly after.
My point about intuit is that Apple announced the transition before Intuit even began work on Quicken 2007. Quicken hardly relies on any graphics code, is mostly text, and number based. Yet they chose to ignore converting to UB code even though now would be perfect timing to do so. In addition they have not announced any plans to create UB's in the future.
This is also the sort of app that gets the least advantage from conversion. It's still a fair amount of work to change development environments when there's no real advantage to it. Especially when Intuit is really given token support to the Mac anyway.
Sure quicken will run with Rosetta, but is that what we want from developers. Forget about modernizing their code because they can make it run in an artificial emulated environment.
With that logic Intuit should have stuck with OS9 versions of quicken as it could always be run fine in classic.
It's hardly the same - you have to boot a second copy of MacOS to run a classic app (which is really slow) and it doesn't integrate seamlessly. You can hardly tell an app is running in Rosetta - there's no visual difference.
Are you sure that's true for all of them? They haven't owned Logic very long, and some of the others started life outside of Apple. I'm sure they had a few issues there.
Second, Adobe was using a lot of CodeWarrior code and it would be far more difficult to convert. Also having X86 code compiled using MS VStudio doesn't help Adobe to be ahead in generating X86 code under XCode because they run under a completely different GUI and access different libraries.
They have the MacOS X GUI code - that doesn't change for Intel - the OS is the same. The core logic endianness doesn't depend on the compiler - the code would be cross-platform and compile on GCC and Visual Studio anyway. Sure they have to deal with a few Codewarrior issues - but they have to do that for the new version anyway. It's not like they'd have to do it twice.
Third, even Apple released the UB code with a new updated version of their pro apps. Adobe's CS3 was not due for a year and a half.
True - but not all Apple's pro apps had a significant level of new features - they were just an interim release.
Fourth, Adobe announced their plans early on so that everyone would know what to expect.
Yes - don't expect us to be as pro-active as we've been in the past. I can remember when Apple went PPC - Adobe had an accelerator out for Photoshop close to the release date of the PPC Macs, and the fully PPC version followed shortly after.
My point about intuit is that Apple announced the transition before Intuit even began work on Quicken 2007. Quicken hardly relies on any graphics code, is mostly text, and number based. Yet they chose to ignore converting to UB code even though now would be perfect timing to do so. In addition they have not announced any plans to create UB's in the future.
This is also the sort of app that gets the least advantage from conversion. It's still a fair amount of work to change development environments when there's no real advantage to it. Especially when Intuit is really given token support to the Mac anyway.
Sure quicken will run with Rosetta, but is that what we want from developers. Forget about modernizing their code because they can make it run in an artificial emulated environment.
With that logic Intuit should have stuck with OS9 versions of quicken as it could always be run fine in classic.
It's hardly the same - you have to boot a second copy of MacOS to run a classic app (which is really slow) and it doesn't integrate seamlessly. You can hardly tell an app is running in Rosetta - there's no visual difference.
Eddyisgreat
Apr 26, 02:15 PM
If the iPhone were buy one get two free as well then I bet those numbers would be different :D
Vulpinemac
Apr 25, 09:43 AM
It exists. There's no reason for it to exist. You can't disable it. And there are HUGE privacy implications should the file be accessed without your permission - by thieves, stalkers (or worse), advertisers, police, etc. - none of whom can access your cell company's location records, except authorities, and even then only by subpoena. Which means a judge has to agree that there's a good reason for them to need it.
Why is the file even there in the first place?
Ok, granted, it exists; what makes you think there's no reason for it to exist? Are you an Apple engineer? Obviously not. Should you disable it? I don't think so. Yes, there are privacy implications, but if the data is not collected by Apple and is inaccessible to anyone without physical access to the phone, then the majority of those implications are pure conjecture without any evidence to support it.
On the other hand, by the phone having a database of cell towers and wifi hotspots, transfer of signal can be made much more efficiently by on-board software and automatic connection to known Wi-Fi locations is automatic, not forcing you to manually locate and connect every time. Among other things, this saves on battery power by eliminating the searching a phone has to do each time it loses signal as you move around. If you've done any long-distance travelling, I'm sure you can remember how your cell phone drank its battery in hours while you drove down the highway, yet after the first one or two trips along a given route, the iPhone seems to increase battery life when repeating that route. Logically speaking, the file really does improve the user experience.
Why is the file even there in the first place?
Ok, granted, it exists; what makes you think there's no reason for it to exist? Are you an Apple engineer? Obviously not. Should you disable it? I don't think so. Yes, there are privacy implications, but if the data is not collected by Apple and is inaccessible to anyone without physical access to the phone, then the majority of those implications are pure conjecture without any evidence to support it.
On the other hand, by the phone having a database of cell towers and wifi hotspots, transfer of signal can be made much more efficiently by on-board software and automatic connection to known Wi-Fi locations is automatic, not forcing you to manually locate and connect every time. Among other things, this saves on battery power by eliminating the searching a phone has to do each time it loses signal as you move around. If you've done any long-distance travelling, I'm sure you can remember how your cell phone drank its battery in hours while you drove down the highway, yet after the first one or two trips along a given route, the iPhone seems to increase battery life when repeating that route. Logically speaking, the file really does improve the user experience.
lilo777
Apr 26, 04:32 PM
This is obvious because iOS is from one company...selling iOS devices. Android is o. Every other device that really isn't any competition if u ask me...every HTC, motorola , are now stocking android that they just got lazy. "oh we just made a quad core with 7 cameras...let's add android...perfect..exactly like an evo"....boring...some say "oh iOS isn't exciting" in earlier posts are wrong...not that I'm a fanboy to iOS..I'm a fanboy to the best I see..and android for a fact isn't...every damn android device has nothing different then just cameras...evo..shift..thunderbolt...droid...it's just stupid...what happened to when cell phones competed for hardware and software?
You are mocking the wrong companies. Quad Core Android phones? Tell us more about it. There are dual core phones and guess what - Apple will follow suit (with usual delay). Same goes with the cameras. Apple is lagging there too. Android phones and tablets get good stuff first (including cameras, and no, there are no Android phones with 7 cameras).
While Android phones may not be that different from each other (although physical keyboard, screen size, LTE etc. are not so small differentiators) it's still much better than iPhone situation: one model (and then a white one a year later).
You are mocking the wrong companies. Quad Core Android phones? Tell us more about it. There are dual core phones and guess what - Apple will follow suit (with usual delay). Same goes with the cameras. Apple is lagging there too. Android phones and tablets get good stuff first (including cameras, and no, there are no Android phones with 7 cameras).
While Android phones may not be that different from each other (although physical keyboard, screen size, LTE etc. are not so small differentiators) it's still much better than iPhone situation: one model (and then a white one a year later).
Reach9
Apr 20, 01:53 AM
I'm on the 3GS > iPhone 5 > iPhone 7 upgrade sequence. I'm glad to be on it. I don't like to be a Beta tester. If there is an unseen design flaw (antennagate), it will give Apple a full year to "hopefully" fix the issue. I plan on using this phone without a case, so I don't want any antenna issues. I'm doubtful the iPhone 5 will have a better antenna. The Verizon iPhone has the same issues as the ATT iPhone. If Apple was going to fix it, they would have fixed it then....
No Apple had to give Verizon customers the same iPhone 4, but the antenna was tweaked for the CDMA. Apple can't just give Verizon users iPhone 4.2 (working antenna).
I think a better antenna will be at the top of Apple's list for the iPhone 5. Also, i completely agree with you, the 3GS > iPhone 5 > iPhone 7 sequence is the best, and i've stuck on with my iPhone 3G so i could upgrade to the iPhone 5 and get into it.
Here's hoping for a bigger screen, 3.7"?
No Apple had to give Verizon customers the same iPhone 4, but the antenna was tweaked for the CDMA. Apple can't just give Verizon users iPhone 4.2 (working antenna).
I think a better antenna will be at the top of Apple's list for the iPhone 5. Also, i completely agree with you, the 3GS > iPhone 5 > iPhone 7 sequence is the best, and i've stuck on with my iPhone 3G so i could upgrade to the iPhone 5 and get into it.
Here's hoping for a bigger screen, 3.7"?
ElGringo
Aug 7, 04:01 PM
You know, I bought a dual core 2.0 G5 PowerMac a bit back for the ability to expand as needed. Since then I have added a second hard drive and NOT ONE PCIe card. Why? Because NO ONE out there makes a PCIe USB expansion card that is compatible with Deep Sleep Mode.
Maybe the new Mac Pro's will usher in some better options in this area. I don't want hubs and the subsequent extra wall warts that go with it. I want more USB prots, not more wall warts.
How long has PCIe been around in the PowerMac's and now Mac Pro's and there still isn't a solution for this????
Anyway, a bit of a sidetrack, but the new Mac Pro's do look sweet!!
Maybe the new Mac Pro's will usher in some better options in this area. I don't want hubs and the subsequent extra wall warts that go with it. I want more USB prots, not more wall warts.
How long has PCIe been around in the PowerMac's and now Mac Pro's and there still isn't a solution for this????
Anyway, a bit of a sidetrack, but the new Mac Pro's do look sweet!!
Vegasman
Apr 5, 06:57 PM
And while this little Apple - Toyota "thingy" is happening, Microsoft announces a joint press announcement with Toyota:
http://www.winrumors.com/microsoft-and-toyota-announce-joint-press-event-for-april-6/
http://www.winrumors.com/microsoft-and-toyota-announce-joint-press-event-for-april-6/
macaddict06
Jul 21, 03:00 PM
Noo...! My MacBook is out of date before its even arrived :eek:!!!!!!
Well, no it's not.
1) it is just as fast now as it will be when you get it (read: speed won't decline)
2) As a computer owner, you know something better is coming. It's just like buying a car - buy for what you need now, worry about upgrading when the time comes
3) The MacBook won't see an upgrade for a few months - maybe a speed bump in September, but otherwise, I wouldn't expect Core2Duo in it by maybe December or MWSF '07. Till then, your MB will be perfectly fine.
Well, no it's not.
1) it is just as fast now as it will be when you get it (read: speed won't decline)
2) As a computer owner, you know something better is coming. It's just like buying a car - buy for what you need now, worry about upgrading when the time comes
3) The MacBook won't see an upgrade for a few months - maybe a speed bump in September, but otherwise, I wouldn't expect Core2Duo in it by maybe December or MWSF '07. Till then, your MB will be perfectly fine.
chaoticbear
Apr 11, 08:29 AM
I've read 2 pages, and that's 2 pages more than I should. I can't parse this in any way other than to answer it as 2; I agree that it is written ambiguously - while a calculator is cold and impersonal, I see it as a numerator of 48 and a denominator of 2(9+3). It's not the 2 camp doing multiplication before division out of some misunderstand of how order of operations works, it's us completing all the operations in the denominator before we solve the fraction. I assume any time I see a division symbol that it takes the place of a bar in traditional handwriting.
Unfortunately, there's not any way to express this clearly in a single line without some more parentheses. If you presented me with the expression "a/b(c+d)" in any form, I'd parse it the same way every time. If you are intending for the problem to read in such a way to get 288, I'd expect to see "(a/b)(c+d)".
Unfortunately, there's not any way to express this clearly in a single line without some more parentheses. If you presented me with the expression "a/b(c+d)" in any form, I'd parse it the same way every time. If you are intending for the problem to read in such a way to get 288, I'd expect to see "(a/b)(c+d)".
dukebound85
May 4, 05:22 PM
It is the international system, and it does adopt the metric units, and yes the military time is less confusing also.
Not if you are not use to it
I can register 7pm alot faster than 1900
Not if you are not use to it
I can register 7pm alot faster than 1900
rdowns
Apr 14, 12:30 PM
I am not sure why the increasing erosion of the middle class and income discrepancy between the haves, and have nots, isn't realized as a major security problem in the US. The working middle class and poor can only be pushed around so much until somebody is going to get pissed off. A socialist/populist revolt ala Egypt is not inconceivable.
Our financial situation is recognized by some as a great threat. (http://www.disinfo.com/2010/09/the-single-biggest-threat-to-u-s-national-security-is-its-debt/)
In February the head of U.S. intelligence � Dennis Blair � said that the global financial crisis was the largest threat to America�s national security. All of America�s intelligence agencies apparently agreed.
The same month, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff � Admiral Mullen � also agreed.
Now, Mullen is focusing on a specific economic threat. Specifically, Mullen is focusing on the debt:
The national debt is the single biggest threat to national security, according to Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Tax payers will be paying around $600 billion in interest on the national debt by 2012, the chairman told students and local leaders in Detroit.
�That�s one year�s worth of defense budget,� he said, adding that the Pentagon needs to cut back on spending.
But at least war is good for the economy, right? At least spending on defense will help the economy recover and climb out of this pit of debt, no?
Actually, no...
Our financial situation is recognized by some as a great threat. (http://www.disinfo.com/2010/09/the-single-biggest-threat-to-u-s-national-security-is-its-debt/)
In February the head of U.S. intelligence � Dennis Blair � said that the global financial crisis was the largest threat to America�s national security. All of America�s intelligence agencies apparently agreed.
The same month, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff � Admiral Mullen � also agreed.
Now, Mullen is focusing on a specific economic threat. Specifically, Mullen is focusing on the debt:
The national debt is the single biggest threat to national security, according to Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Tax payers will be paying around $600 billion in interest on the national debt by 2012, the chairman told students and local leaders in Detroit.
�That�s one year�s worth of defense budget,� he said, adding that the Pentagon needs to cut back on spending.
But at least war is good for the economy, right? At least spending on defense will help the economy recover and climb out of this pit of debt, no?
Actually, no...
Steve121178
May 6, 05:48 AM
Windows 8 being available on ARM platforms would make this move, albeit a bold one, pretty viable.
Windows 8 will also run on Tablet PC's, hence the ARM support. ARM chips will not find their way into laptop & desktop PC's.
Windows 8 will also run on Tablet PC's, hence the ARM support. ARM chips will not find their way into laptop & desktop PC's.
MikeTheC
Nov 26, 10:31 AM
There are already GNU/Linux based cellphones. And what about the iPhone implies that it would be open in a way that, say, an average Nokia isn't? I appreciate they ported GNU/Linux to the iPod, but for the most part the reason similar things haven't happened on more regular cellphones has been an issue of the amount of work involved, with it being somewhat harder to write a GSM stack from scratch and port a kernel than it is to simply port an off-the-shelf kernel. (And I guess there's the additional issue that there are six zillion cellphones using about one quillion completely incompatible hardware platforms, whereas there are only a handful of MP3 players and only one that's achieved marketshare heaven.)
Oh, sure. But GNU/Linux could slowly introduce a standardized set of cell phone hardware platforms to build from, just like Intel and AMD and ATI (now a part of AMD, of course) and NVidia produce reference platform hardware that then anyone can make a compatible motherboard/daughter card from, what needs to happen is to have one particularly successful and particularly popular cell phone interface, and then (potentially) everyone would be clamoring to sell it to their customers.
Now, the difference between cell phones and computers is in the history. Cell phones achieved popularity and mass market penetration before a unifying hardware platform or OS platform came into being; whereas computers didn't achieve that kind of success until afterward. So really the dynamic and all the sequencing here is different.
Oh, sure. But GNU/Linux could slowly introduce a standardized set of cell phone hardware platforms to build from, just like Intel and AMD and ATI (now a part of AMD, of course) and NVidia produce reference platform hardware that then anyone can make a compatible motherboard/daughter card from, what needs to happen is to have one particularly successful and particularly popular cell phone interface, and then (potentially) everyone would be clamoring to sell it to their customers.
Now, the difference between cell phones and computers is in the history. Cell phones achieved popularity and mass market penetration before a unifying hardware platform or OS platform came into being; whereas computers didn't achieve that kind of success until afterward. So really the dynamic and all the sequencing here is different.
coffey7
Jul 21, 09:32 PM
now if apple can build a laptop that won't give me a first degree burn we're in business :cool:
Tell me about it!
Tell me about it!
LobsterDK
Apr 24, 02:04 AM
I'm not impressed if this is where the iMac display is potentially going , the current GPUs can barely drive the resolutions they have now in anything other than simple desktop apps . , can you imagine what video card you would need to drive a game (say portal 2 which has low to modest requirements) at 30fps + on a screen with 3200 or higher resloution ? Well whatever that GPU is , apple will ship with the one released 2 years ago and half the RAM it shipped with on the PC .
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
Desktop rendering performance at a retina display resolution would not be an issue with any modern Mac that shipped with a retina display. As for games, you do not have to render the game at the native screen resolution. The OS X implementation will almost certainly be the same as the iOS implementation. That is, a doubling of the vertical and horizontal resolution.
A game running on a 3840x2160 retina display can render at 1920x1080. No filtering need be applied by the monitor as it is an exact multiple in each direction. A 1920x1080 output resolution from a game would look exactly the same on a 3840x2160 display as it would on a 1920x1080 display. Every 1 pixel in the rendered image would take up 4 pixels on the higher res display. You can test this out on your Mac now with any game that allows you to select a resolution that is half the vertical/horizontal resolution of your current monitor. That is assuming the display is not stupid enough to filter resolutions that are an even division of it's native resolution. Most won't apply any filtering in those cases.
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
Desktop rendering performance at a retina display resolution would not be an issue with any modern Mac that shipped with a retina display. As for games, you do not have to render the game at the native screen resolution. The OS X implementation will almost certainly be the same as the iOS implementation. That is, a doubling of the vertical and horizontal resolution.
A game running on a 3840x2160 retina display can render at 1920x1080. No filtering need be applied by the monitor as it is an exact multiple in each direction. A 1920x1080 output resolution from a game would look exactly the same on a 3840x2160 display as it would on a 1920x1080 display. Every 1 pixel in the rendered image would take up 4 pixels on the higher res display. You can test this out on your Mac now with any game that allows you to select a resolution that is half the vertical/horizontal resolution of your current monitor. That is assuming the display is not stupid enough to filter resolutions that are an even division of it's native resolution. Most won't apply any filtering in those cases.
No comments:
Post a Comment