Huhn
Mar 22, 02:53 PM
According to the hate, Apple Fanboys are giving those new competitors....it seems like it is the first real competition. Get out of your homes guys and girls and compare.... I own an iPhone 4 and a MBP, but came from and Android phone and guess what? The UI is way better than those ugly millions of square buttons that you see on the iPhone. I still prefer it...because of other reasons like battery and the built in ipod.
Samsung now has the thinnest Tablet with a dual core, plus still better camera and a much nicer UI. I would rather buy that one than the iPad, just because....uhm well i don�t have to send my files (all type of files) by email to myself to transfer them? and maybe i wanna exchange files with workmates without using an adapter the whole time. Maybe i really wanna use and work with that thing than playing games and watching movies or browsing (guess thats what 95% do with their iPad).
jonah falcon. jonah falcon
jonah falcon rolling stone.
Jonah Falcon|IMG_7055 IMG_7055
jonah falcon picture proof.
jonah falcon proof pic.
jonah falcon. jonah falcon
.JPG "jonah falcon worlds biggest.")
jonah falcon worlds biggest.
jonah falcon. jonah falcon
jonah falcon picture proof.
jonah falcon proof photo.
jonah falcon proof picture. Jonah Falcon: Σεξ: 10; Jonah Falcon: Σεξ: 10. gnasher729. Jul 27, 05:59 PM. but is still more productive because
jonah falcon proof picture. Jonah Falcon; Jonah Falcon. robotx21. Sep 19, 12:57 PM
jonah falcon worlds biggest.
jonah falcon proof picture. jonah-falcon; jonah-falcon. Rtamp;Dzine. Apr 27, 10:14 AM. Trump is a hero. :rolleyes:
jonah falcon proof picture. jonah-falcon-proof-photo; jonah-falcon-proof-photo. Michaelgtrusa. Apr 8, 01:59 AM. It depends on the store your at,
jonah falcon proof picture. jonah-falcon-proof; jonah-falcon-proof. ghall. Aug 25, 02:59 PM. Hey, I#39;m not about to complain, they sent me a brand new
jonah falcon proof photo.
jonah falcon proof pic. jonah
Samsung now has the thinnest Tablet with a dual core, plus still better camera and a much nicer UI. I would rather buy that one than the iPad, just because....uhm well i don�t have to send my files (all type of files) by email to myself to transfer them? and maybe i wanna exchange files with workmates without using an adapter the whole time. Maybe i really wanna use and work with that thing than playing games and watching movies or browsing (guess thats what 95% do with their iPad).
superleccy
Nov 28, 06:34 PM
No no no no no no NO. For all the reasons that everyone has already said.
:mad:
:mad:
ten-oak-druid
Apr 20, 08:32 AM
Samsung has no honor.
It seems their problem is that they had access to Apple's design and so were able to copy more closely than is usually the case with Apple competitors.
It seems their problem is that they had access to Apple's design and so were able to copy more closely than is usually the case with Apple competitors.
macDrewd
Mar 26, 07:01 AM
Please release OS X Lion on a cool Apple flash drive :cool:
Really don't want another DVD, my shelf is full!
Really don't want another DVD, my shelf is full!
Rt&Dzine
Apr 27, 08:54 AM
Funny I had to prove my education credentials and proof of citizenship for 3 companies that extend offers.
Is it really out of line for the president to furnish such information?
Did I cross the the line of being a racist?
He did furnish his official state-certified short-form birth certificate.
Is it really out of line for the president to furnish such information?
Did I cross the the line of being a racist?
He did furnish his official state-certified short-form birth certificate.
peterdevries
Apr 20, 12:24 AM
Alright, I was originally going to take Apple's side on this, since I could clearly see it looks a lot like iOS, but having looked at Samsung's F700, I don' think Apple has any right to sue..
Although the Samsung F700 has very simple icons, Apple clearly has the same placement of icons, even looking at the bottom you find the four dock like icons..
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9559/samsungf700cellular.jpg
I'd say that Apple copied Samsung :P.. Honestly I'm not one to take sides just because I like Apple Products, I just think its wrong to sue since Samsung clearly had this type of UI first.. Apple has no right to sue..
Sure, but did Samsung patent it?
It's not about 'who copied who?', but 'who copied after who patented?'
All the corporations mentioned in this thread are dinosaurs and know what type of business they are in. If they fail to patent their (good) ideas than it's a given that someone else eventually will. Doesn't matter whether we or anyone thinks that's right or wrong. It's normal business practice. Any corporation thet develops products in a hot contested market like this and doesn't play this game will lose business or cash.
Although the Samsung F700 has very simple icons, Apple clearly has the same placement of icons, even looking at the bottom you find the four dock like icons..
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9559/samsungf700cellular.jpg
I'd say that Apple copied Samsung :P.. Honestly I'm not one to take sides just because I like Apple Products, I just think its wrong to sue since Samsung clearly had this type of UI first.. Apple has no right to sue..
Sure, but did Samsung patent it?
It's not about 'who copied who?', but 'who copied after who patented?'
All the corporations mentioned in this thread are dinosaurs and know what type of business they are in. If they fail to patent their (good) ideas than it's a given that someone else eventually will. Doesn't matter whether we or anyone thinks that's right or wrong. It's normal business practice. Any corporation thet develops products in a hot contested market like this and doesn't play this game will lose business or cash.
kcmac
Mar 26, 12:07 PM
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Lion offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
The people that read sites such as macrumors is minuscule in comparison to the number of apple users out there. There will be nothing slow about the adoption of Lion. Just as all of the versions before it. In fact, I am betting on a faster than normal adoption.
You will be foolish to wait around unless you want to get buried in the on-slaught of new and improved apps to take advantage of Lion from day one.
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
The people that read sites such as macrumors is minuscule in comparison to the number of apple users out there. There will be nothing slow about the adoption of Lion. Just as all of the versions before it. In fact, I am betting on a faster than normal adoption.
You will be foolish to wait around unless you want to get buried in the on-slaught of new and improved apps to take advantage of Lion from day one.
satty
Jul 20, 09:10 AM
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
But as some already pointed out, many applications can't use multiple cores, therefore you won't get any performance improvements with multi cores.
But as some already pointed out, many applications can't use multiple cores, therefore you won't get any performance improvements with multi cores.
iLilana
Apr 8, 01:19 AM
bestbuy (and futureshop..same company) insist apple purchasers buy their own over priced ****** extended warranty on apple products. I'm not sure its allowed by apple or not but it seems a bit shady. I hate shopping in those places.
bushido
Apr 11, 11:33 AM
"analyst" needs a new meaning in the dictionary right next to "source"
i'm now an analyst and say it'll come out at some point before iPhone 6
i'm now an analyst and say it'll come out at some point before iPhone 6
RichP
Jul 14, 03:59 PM
Ha, when I posted a while back that using Dell as a guide, Xeon processors were feasible, I was ignored, now it seems totally reasonable...
Anyway, I dont see why people make sure comparisons to Windows machines now that we are running Intel hardware. Apple is not building Windows machines, they are building Apple machines that run OSX. Benchmarks will be made, and at times Apple isnt going to win them. But its the OSX experience, and its stability as a platform, that is going to be a selling point, not the all out speed of the top-of-the-top Intel processor (the highest end PC processors always carry a heavy premium; its difficult to say that the yield of what we are shown as the highest available G5 is similar to the yields intel has for their high end)
I just have my fingers crossed that we see some cool "fast-OS switching" in Leopard with these machines.
Anyway, I dont see why people make sure comparisons to Windows machines now that we are running Intel hardware. Apple is not building Windows machines, they are building Apple machines that run OSX. Benchmarks will be made, and at times Apple isnt going to win them. But its the OSX experience, and its stability as a platform, that is going to be a selling point, not the all out speed of the top-of-the-top Intel processor (the highest end PC processors always carry a heavy premium; its difficult to say that the yield of what we are shown as the highest available G5 is similar to the yields intel has for their high end)
I just have my fingers crossed that we see some cool "fast-OS switching" in Leopard with these machines.
Multimedia
Aug 19, 08:51 PM
I also find it amusing when I see posters participating in Macpro discussions when they have publicly stated that they have no intention of buying a Macpro. WTF?? Don't they have a life outside of macrumors? If I owned a G5 Quad and had no intention of buying a Macpro, I'd be spending all of my spare time doing cool stuff with my machine... instead of wasting that time participating in discussions that have nothing to do with me. I might read though some of the threads now and then, just to keep up with technology - but to particpate and debate, what a waste. I guess some folks have no life.While it is true I have no life, it is not true I have fully decided to skip buying a Mac Pro. These discussions have lead me to a place of indecision about it rather than what I previously thought, which was to skip it. I never intended to talk anyone out of buying one if they want one. And I never intended to talk bad dirt against it. My apologies to anyone who thought I did. :(
My hearty congratulations to all who have taken the Mac Pro plunge already.
I am also waiting to see what the full scope of Core 2 offerings will be as I want a 17" Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro more first.
As far as the comment that Toast and Handbrake can use all four cores goes, Toast definitely does in the Mac Pro and if you add a significant action to the Quad G5, it will negatively impact the 2-3 core performance of Handbrake as well as Toast. That is what I meant. If it wasn't clear before now, I apologize for the imcomplete explanation of my meaning.
I feel misunderstood by some of you. No harm intended. Not anti-Mac Pro at all. Not trying to ratinoalize Quad G5 as somehow better - no way. Not trying to negatively impact Mac Pro sales. I'm totally Pro Mac Pro. Regret the misunderstanding. Wish I hadn't hurt some people's feelings. :o
My hearty congratulations to all who have taken the Mac Pro plunge already.
I am also waiting to see what the full scope of Core 2 offerings will be as I want a 17" Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro more first.
As far as the comment that Toast and Handbrake can use all four cores goes, Toast definitely does in the Mac Pro and if you add a significant action to the Quad G5, it will negatively impact the 2-3 core performance of Handbrake as well as Toast. That is what I meant. If it wasn't clear before now, I apologize for the imcomplete explanation of my meaning.
I feel misunderstood by some of you. No harm intended. Not anti-Mac Pro at all. Not trying to ratinoalize Quad G5 as somehow better - no way. Not trying to negatively impact Mac Pro sales. I'm totally Pro Mac Pro. Regret the misunderstanding. Wish I hadn't hurt some people's feelings. :o
portishead
Apr 9, 02:06 AM
Professional Editor for about 10 years. I came up before the DV revolution, and before Final Cut even existed. Before Non linear editing even existed really - or at least was widely used. It's crazy how far the editing world has come when I look back.
I did my first non-linear editing on an Amiga video toaster. I also learned Media 100 & Premiere. I have used FCP on and off since version 1.0. I used Avid Professionally around 5 years, and now back on FCP for about 4 years. It's not really my choice, I use what my employer uses. Avid was great when I used it but the editing world is growing so fast. I didn't like the closed system, and the expensive hardware. I will say I was faster on an Avid than I probably ever will be in Final Cut. Maybe that's my own laziness, but whatever...
So here we are in 2011. It seems Premiere has come on strong and is doing good things. I will most likely never use it though. I really like Final Cut, but if Apple ever got out of the game, I'd go back to Avid. It is my opinion that Avid is better for narrative, but Final Cut is better for a more diverse set of projects. For what I do at my job, Final Cut works fine, and I prefer it over Avid.
People spend a lot of time arguing, but they are just editing systems. They all do essentially the same thing. Some edit software may have better features, or better compatibility with certain things, but software is always changing anyway.
I think Final Cut has been ahead of the game for most of the past 10 years. In the last year, maybe 2, I think it has lost ground to Premiere and Avid. It's normal. You can't be on top all of the time. I am hoping with this next release, it will put Final Cut back on top for the foreseeable future.
Edit software is getting very good. I think we are very close to hitting a sweet spot. I cannot speak for Avid or Premiere since I haven't used them in several years but for Final Cut some things need to improve. I think the biggest problem is quicktime itself. It's become bloated with all the focus on iTunes music, and film. Apple needs to do something about this. It also needs to be 64-bit and use processing/memory better. Also better integration with Video cards. Also RGB 444 doesn't work in Final Cut. Compressor is horrible and outdated. I like Motion just fine although I would prefer a few interface tweaks which I won't get into. I don't ever use Soundtrack because I think it's horrible, and I have the luxury of having an audio guy at work.
I think Final Cut is a pretty good program and if Apple puts in a little more work it can be great. Different people have different workflows and want different things out of their edit systems. It's pointless arguing about specific features.
I LOVE ProRes and it has absolutely saved editing for me. I love editing and I'm exciting for what the next version of Final Cut will bring. Sorry for the rant this should have been a blog post instead.
I did my first non-linear editing on an Amiga video toaster. I also learned Media 100 & Premiere. I have used FCP on and off since version 1.0. I used Avid Professionally around 5 years, and now back on FCP for about 4 years. It's not really my choice, I use what my employer uses. Avid was great when I used it but the editing world is growing so fast. I didn't like the closed system, and the expensive hardware. I will say I was faster on an Avid than I probably ever will be in Final Cut. Maybe that's my own laziness, but whatever...
So here we are in 2011. It seems Premiere has come on strong and is doing good things. I will most likely never use it though. I really like Final Cut, but if Apple ever got out of the game, I'd go back to Avid. It is my opinion that Avid is better for narrative, but Final Cut is better for a more diverse set of projects. For what I do at my job, Final Cut works fine, and I prefer it over Avid.
People spend a lot of time arguing, but they are just editing systems. They all do essentially the same thing. Some edit software may have better features, or better compatibility with certain things, but software is always changing anyway.
I think Final Cut has been ahead of the game for most of the past 10 years. In the last year, maybe 2, I think it has lost ground to Premiere and Avid. It's normal. You can't be on top all of the time. I am hoping with this next release, it will put Final Cut back on top for the foreseeable future.
Edit software is getting very good. I think we are very close to hitting a sweet spot. I cannot speak for Avid or Premiere since I haven't used them in several years but for Final Cut some things need to improve. I think the biggest problem is quicktime itself. It's become bloated with all the focus on iTunes music, and film. Apple needs to do something about this. It also needs to be 64-bit and use processing/memory better. Also better integration with Video cards. Also RGB 444 doesn't work in Final Cut. Compressor is horrible and outdated. I like Motion just fine although I would prefer a few interface tweaks which I won't get into. I don't ever use Soundtrack because I think it's horrible, and I have the luxury of having an audio guy at work.
I think Final Cut is a pretty good program and if Apple puts in a little more work it can be great. Different people have different workflows and want different things out of their edit systems. It's pointless arguing about specific features.
I LOVE ProRes and it has absolutely saved editing for me. I love editing and I'm exciting for what the next version of Final Cut will bring. Sorry for the rant this should have been a blog post instead.
Thomas Veil
Mar 17, 01:32 PM
Agreed. I'm getting tired of these sensational, histrionic and downright dishonest threads.Me too. It's getting so I can open the thread, look at the first couple of sentences and realize the rest isn't worth spending my time on.
PeterQVenkman
Apr 6, 09:10 AM
Youre aware the newest mbp (high end) 15, and 17 haveva 1gb graphics memory, right?
CUDA is an nVidia technology. The MBP's and Mac Pro's all have ATI/AMD cards. I don't believe the mercury engine works on anything but nVidia cards
Real-time effects with GPU acceleration
Adobe Premiere Pro CS5 requires a 64-bit operating system and works hand-in-hand with NVIDIA� CUDA� technology. The Mercury Playback Engine uses NVIDIA GPU cards to provide a GPU-accelerated 32-bit color pipeline, and most popular effects have been rewritten to run on it � for example, effects like color correction, the Ultra keyer, and motion control all run in real time..
Of course, Apple could finally implement Open CL. I've seen some great particle fluid demos in Blender that are based off of OpenCL and ran on AMD cards.
CUDA is an nVidia technology. The MBP's and Mac Pro's all have ATI/AMD cards. I don't believe the mercury engine works on anything but nVidia cards
Real-time effects with GPU acceleration
Adobe Premiere Pro CS5 requires a 64-bit operating system and works hand-in-hand with NVIDIA� CUDA� technology. The Mercury Playback Engine uses NVIDIA GPU cards to provide a GPU-accelerated 32-bit color pipeline, and most popular effects have been rewritten to run on it � for example, effects like color correction, the Ultra keyer, and motion control all run in real time..
Of course, Apple could finally implement Open CL. I've seen some great particle fluid demos in Blender that are based off of OpenCL and ran on AMD cards.
gnasher729
Aug 18, 03:31 PM
Thats showing that the quad core Mac Pro is essentially the same speed as dual core Mac Pro. To translate it to normal mac scenario: If apple releases a 2.66GHz Conroe iMac/Mac/whathaveyou it will be able to crunch through FCP/Photoshop/etc faster than a Mac Pro because it can use regular DDR2 and won't suffer from horrendous memory latency.
It only shows that one company can expect to get massive complaints from its customers soon about its crappy software. An H.264 encoder can easily use two dozen cores if they are there (apart from the fact that it might be limited by the speed of the DVD drive if you encode straight from DVD); there is no reason at all why this software shouldn't be twice as fast on a Quad core and four times as fast on an eight core machine.
It only shows that one company can expect to get massive complaints from its customers soon about its crappy software. An H.264 encoder can easily use two dozen cores if they are there (apart from the fact that it might be limited by the speed of the DVD drive if you encode straight from DVD); there is no reason at all why this software shouldn't be twice as fast on a Quad core and four times as fast on an eight core machine.
samcraig
Apr 27, 08:41 AM
I looked at the map from a recent road trip. It showed cell towers 50 miles off the route I was on--probably next towers over in case I headed that direction. It's the apple bashing trolls who are blowing this way out of proportion.
No it's not.
And I think MOST people aren't blowing anything out of proportion. Being concerned about tracking information/privacy issues is important. Most people (stop generalizing just because some on this board are) are NOT over-reacting but were calling for deeper investigation into the issue.
No it's not.
And I think MOST people aren't blowing anything out of proportion. Being concerned about tracking information/privacy issues is important. Most people (stop generalizing just because some on this board are) are NOT over-reacting but were calling for deeper investigation into the issue.
Sped
Aug 7, 04:58 PM
Not a glimpse of the Finder...! :eek:
Here, here. I have been a very happy Mac fan for several years now, but the Finder is a POS. Although specifically mentioning a new Finder might be considered acknowledgment that it stinks, I think Steve could couch it in favorable language. Bottom line, Leopard better FTFF.
Here, here. I have been a very happy Mac fan for several years now, but the Finder is a POS. Although specifically mentioning a new Finder might be considered acknowledgment that it stinks, I think Steve could couch it in favorable language. Bottom line, Leopard better FTFF.
anomie
Apr 11, 02:19 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; de-de) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
Lol, Power of Hardware? Then where is the android Retina Display device?
I Don't Care about dual Core mobile processors. And neither do the 90% Not-Nerd-customers.
Lol, Power of Hardware? Then where is the android Retina Display device?
I Don't Care about dual Core mobile processors. And neither do the 90% Not-Nerd-customers.
SevenInchScrew
Nov 24, 01:20 PM
...I can't say how this compares to GT4 but so far it's been amazing
You have 800 cars exactly as they were in GT4, so you'll get a good idea. :p
My buddy picked this up today, so I'll be checking it out on Friday when we hang out. I'm not buying it without trying first. It will be interesting to see how well it plays. After waiting 6 years for another full Gran Turismo, I have big expectations. But hey, even if it doesn't play as well as I'm hoping, the photo mode looks excellent. I can spend a LOT of time in there.
You have 800 cars exactly as they were in GT4, so you'll get a good idea. :p
My buddy picked this up today, so I'll be checking it out on Friday when we hang out. I'm not buying it without trying first. It will be interesting to see how well it plays. After waiting 6 years for another full Gran Turismo, I have big expectations. But hey, even if it doesn't play as well as I'm hoping, the photo mode looks excellent. I can spend a LOT of time in there.
digitalbiker
Aug 25, 03:59 PM
Another person who can never be satisfied.:rolleyes:
Kind of a rude reply to someone who is just posting their experience with Apple.
Without criticism there would never be a reason to improve anything.
Kind of a rude reply to someone who is just posting their experience with Apple.
Without criticism there would never be a reason to improve anything.
epitaphic
Aug 17, 12:54 PM
The interesting thing to note from the Anandtech review is that to saturate a 2 core setup, all you need is one program. To saturate a quad, you need to be doing a bit more at the same time. To saturate an octo, you need to be doing a hell of a lot of things at the same time.
Now I don't know bout you lot, but there's only so much I can do at the same time. Sure it helps to be able to run anything I like and still use FCP with no performance hit. So I think a quad is perfect for that. But when it comes to 8+ cores, your actual workflow won't improve in the slightest unless it doesn't involve you having to do anything (eg run 4 instances of handbrake). I'm sure everyone once in a while has some work that can just be delegated to the CPU and it does its thing, but for the most part, where your attention and brain is needed, an 8 core will sit at least 50% idle.
Considering Clovertowns will have a slower, twice saturated FSB and lower clock speeds, most people will be better off (financially and productively) with Woodcrests. I'm just hoping that when octos are announced, the quads will drop in price.
Now if they start to optimise apps to take full advantage of more than 2 cores, that's a whole different ballgame ;)
Now I don't know bout you lot, but there's only so much I can do at the same time. Sure it helps to be able to run anything I like and still use FCP with no performance hit. So I think a quad is perfect for that. But when it comes to 8+ cores, your actual workflow won't improve in the slightest unless it doesn't involve you having to do anything (eg run 4 instances of handbrake). I'm sure everyone once in a while has some work that can just be delegated to the CPU and it does its thing, but for the most part, where your attention and brain is needed, an 8 core will sit at least 50% idle.
Considering Clovertowns will have a slower, twice saturated FSB and lower clock speeds, most people will be better off (financially and productively) with Woodcrests. I'm just hoping that when octos are announced, the quads will drop in price.
Now if they start to optimise apps to take full advantage of more than 2 cores, that's a whole different ballgame ;)
Ries
Apr 27, 09:45 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
It wouldn't hurt to actually read the article. I know this wouldn't allow you to write the gibberish that is your paranoia, so I can see why you wouldn't. They say very clearly that they will be releasing an update to the particular problem of location services. Also, the phone isn't logging your location if it is logging cell towers and some wifi hotspots. It's logging those locations.
And how close do you have to be before a wifi is logged? they reach what, 10-100meters? Take the log and triangulate the cell towers, since your properly most at work or at home, those two places will stand out in the data.
It wouldn't hurt to actually read the article. I know this wouldn't allow you to write the gibberish that is your paranoia, so I can see why you wouldn't. They say very clearly that they will be releasing an update to the particular problem of location services. Also, the phone isn't logging your location if it is logging cell towers and some wifi hotspots. It's logging those locations.
And how close do you have to be before a wifi is logged? they reach what, 10-100meters? Take the log and triangulate the cell towers, since your properly most at work or at home, those two places will stand out in the data.
SevenInchScrew
Sep 1, 11:38 AM
Time will tell i suppose, but it just doesnt make sense for them to gimp standard cars for no reason.
I think "gimping" the Standard™ cars is the wrong way to look at it. To me, it looks like they just chose to spend A LOT of effort modeling the Premium™ cars, and then just reuse what they had from before for the Standard™ cars.
Ideally, we would have 1,000 Premium™ cars, but that would either take a staff of about 500 people, or we'd be waiting for GT5 until 2015. Compromises had to be made. They could have done all 1,000 cars at an average detail level, or they could do a handful of them VERY high-res, and reuse some older cars. They obviously chose the 2nd option.
I think "gimping" the Standard™ cars is the wrong way to look at it. To me, it looks like they just chose to spend A LOT of effort modeling the Premium™ cars, and then just reuse what they had from before for the Standard™ cars.
Ideally, we would have 1,000 Premium™ cars, but that would either take a staff of about 500 people, or we'd be waiting for GT5 until 2015. Compromises had to be made. They could have done all 1,000 cars at an average detail level, or they could do a handful of them VERY high-res, and reuse some older cars. They obviously chose the 2nd option.
No comments:
Post a Comment