Given compression techniques and it only saving changes, it probably only cuts your usable space in half. I don't think that's an unreasonable sacrifice in exchange for brainless backup.
The fact that it can be made to work with an off-site server makes it even more attractive.
The main question is the UI, and whether they can convey the complexities of version control in a way that actual people can use.
You know, I'm really starting to get tempted by a Mac. If they've got good updates for Mac Mini to give it some more power etc then I'm probably in there.
All in all though, this keynote was pretty weaksauce.
The Mac Pro and Xserves look sweet, but practically everyone was expecting them, and their awesomeness owes more to Intel than to Apple.
Time Machine is pretty, and looks simple to use, but (like I said before) there are some huge wrinkles to work out of version control before my grandma can use it. Even if you only allow one user to access the tree, you still have forking and merge issues to deal with.
As for the rest of the stuff, given the degree of rhetoric lobbed at Microsoft for "ripping off" Apple's good ideas, you'd think they'd have been a little more discrete when borrowing their "new feature" ideas from Outlook, GAIM, and every Linux window manager ever written.
Remember: when Microsoft does it, they're "Copycats", when Apple does it, it's "Innovation".
I think it really depends what you're using it for, and whether you need the extra horsepower/expandability.
Also keep in mind the inevitable move to quad-core Xeons this winter.
I'm using the macbook pro and I love it. You can't beat the portability, but it also depends on how long you expect your computer to last. Portables seem to date themselves quicker IMO, and they get a lot more wear and tear. I play bf2 and oblivion through bootcamp and it runs like a dream, so if it's performance you're worried about, it can handle a good deal. If you're doing video work though, I'd always reccomend a desktop (sorry i hate the term "tower").
Bergamot, quad-core Xeons in the portables? I find that hard to believe.
I don't do a whole lot of video work, and I don't necessarily need all that horsepower at this moment. The main reason I would get a desktop over a laptop are expandability.
LoOkOuT
✭
Comments
EDIT: Seems like a consumer-oriented version control system. Would be a little more impressive if Vista hadn't announced theirs last week.
The fact that it can be made to work with an off-site server makes it even more attractive.
The main question is the UI, and whether they can convey the complexities of version control in a way that actual people can use.
EDIT: Apparently "exciting updates to mail" means "letting Mail do what Outlook did a decade ago" Notes and to-do lists, woohoo.
There better be a big frickin' reveal at the end to justify spending 10 minutes talking about stale email functionality.
multiple logins, visibility, animated icons, video recording, and tabbed chats
I LUB YOU STEEVE JOBS
The Mac Pro and Xserves look sweet, but practically everyone was expecting them, and their awesomeness owes more to Intel than to Apple.
Time Machine is pretty, and looks simple to use, but (like I said before) there are some huge wrinkles to work out of version control before my grandma can use it. Even if you only allow one user to access the tree, you still have forking and merge issues to deal with.
As for the rest of the stuff, given the degree of rhetoric lobbed at Microsoft for "ripping off" Apple's good ideas, you'd think they'd have been a little more discrete when borrowing their "new feature" ideas from Outlook, GAIM, and every Linux window manager ever written.
Remember: when Microsoft does it, they're "Copycats", when Apple does it, it's "Innovation".
I've never owned a portable. Is it worth it?
I don't do a whole lot of video work, and I don't necessarily need all that horsepower at this moment. The main reason I would get a desktop over a laptop are expandability.
It's still a hard choice to make.