Shoulf I get a retina macbook pro?

#81

I have a 680 at home, and I do a fair bit of work in both Soft and Maya, not to mention CUDA, that is tightly tied to the videocard.

I definitely got slapped in the face by the crippled double precision issues in some of the CUDA work, but I can say that once I had a decent driver/config combo down it was matching or outperforming by far the (f)4000 I use at work for in-app stuff.

I’m not a benchmark monkey, so all I have to offer is personal, but of actual usage scenarios.
Maybe presumptuously so, I also think that after writing enough CUDA deferred eval nodes in both Maya and ICE, not to mention performance testing the same things at work and at home, I would have noticed if the 680 was such a truly crap card :slight_smile:

Mudbox, Mari, Topogun and vegas GPU effects also all respond well.

As I mentioned in past threads, I have heard that rumor, repeatedly, but never from anybody I know, and I personally haven’t encountered it.
I can’t promise anybody a 6xx will be fine, because there’s statistical evidence it might not be according to the internets. I can say it might be worth at least trying, and doubting that those rumors still hold true, based on personal experience though.

The above also all holds true for my girlfriend’s Asus laptop with a 6xxM (tempted to say 650).

The artificially cripped DP issue though is very real, as is the usual ID/driver sham that are quadros, as proven by the hardware hack conversion of a 680 into a full kepler quadro I posted not long ago.

#82

Is Pathfinder really slower than finder? Let say for a folder full of pictures or quicktimes…

#83

So let me clear this out, I wont have any problems with windows + retina while using zbrush, 3ds max, maya or browsing due to weird resolution stuff? If that’s right im cool with it :slight_smile:

#84

Never used it.

#85

You won’t, but be ready to lose some eyesight.
I don’t know about Max, but ZBrush is entirely propietary widgets, on a 27" at a slightly less dense res than a retina display some of the things that you HAVE TO click (IE: axis in the transform or deform subpalettes) are small. Like sniper steady small to hit with a pentip click.
I have a very steady hand and perfect eyesight, and still can be irritated by it once in a while, and if I have to do a lot of tweaks in a row will normally grab the mouse.

Maya is kinda meh in how it scales, but not as brutal as in general it doesn’t go for so many densely packed text widgets.

So, no, no “technical” problems, but you will struggle with the res some times, and that holds true on os-X and win both, and it’s not Apple’s or MS’s fault, it’s just not all software has quite caught up to the idea of people having micro pitch displays.

#86

The fact that OS X dont show the folders first in finder really turn me off. Thus the pathfinder/totalfinder need. Also tabs between folders will be neat!

This video really sold it to me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20YfqvI0uDs

#87

The fact that OS X dont show the folders first in finder really turn me off.

I don’t quite understand what you mean.

#88

Well, when you open a folder that have files and folders inside it, it’s all mixed up. On windows, the folders are always going to be on top of the list, even if it’s a Z.

#89

Ah - I fucking hate that. It makes no sense because you spend more brain energy than if it’s simply alphabetically ordered. You have to consciously think “Is this a folder or a file” and then scroll accordingly. If you took that one step further and made all element types (symlinks, fonts, whatever) sort differently, you’d be wasting an incredible amount of time. There are some Linux desktops that do this and it’s insane.

I realize this seems like a matter of personal preference, but this is one case where I honestly can see no benefit to sorting one thing before the other. Hit the letter to select item and you’re closer to it. In Windows, you hit a letter and it selects a folder. Bleh.

#90

You’re kind of alone in that though :slight_smile:
The option would be nice, it’s since the day the first ls executable was written that directories are offered before files, and there’s an irrefutable logic of tree VS node ordering to doing it that way, it’s not just some arbitrary convention that’s now outdated (and search functionalities being both poor and slow, not to mention badly presented, don’t help the matter by abstracting the tree structure away like it might happen on websites).

If you sincerely think it’s annoying (displaying directories first), I have to say you are the first person ever I hear taking that position. The fact there are enhancements and alternatives that are massively popular practically on that feature alone tells a long story.

When I navigate a structure I want to be presented further navigation BEFORE I see all the nodes contained in the current waypoint, becuase 99% of the time you will need to navigate several times to reach one file node, not the other way around.
The example of ordering by type before you do by name is also N/A, as directories (and symlinks to directories) are singular, in their being part of navigation, while files no matter the type aren’t. They do deserve singular status on account of having a singular and most important functionality in interacting with file systems.
It’s a fairly basic and obvious option in UI design of trees.

TL;DR: The inability to display directories before files is a universally recognized pain in the ass, to the same level of the lack of copy’n’paste in the first iPhone, that F*** knows why Apple stubbornly refuses to address, much like they took the “who needs copy and paste on a single app per screen device?!” position for quite a while after realizing how badly they messed that one up, until they slipped it in finally.

It makes no sense for the vast majority of the user base not having it at least as an option, and the fact that people put up with it or buy additional software to remedy it (which will not integrate with applications file menus more often than not, and even enhancements can be wonky) doesn’t mean it’s OK :stuck_out_tongue:

#91

For as much money and time Apple say they devote to usability, Finder is certainly a bit of a neglected red-headed step child. (no offence all of you red-headed step children out there, Steve Jobs loved you very much.)

#92

you’re all coming from Windows so you probably don’t know how the usability in the Finder actually works. OS X uses a lot of modifiers and slightly hidden features to accomplish its efficiency:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iORLxMF0TU

things like dragging and dropping folders into an open/save dialog to move there in the dialog. There are tons of these things. It may not seem practical to keep these from being immediately obvious but it beats the hell out of a ribbon.

#93

It’s a big assumption we’re all coming from windows :slight_smile:
I actually spend more time in Linux than anything, but that’s beside the point.
Finder has some nice features, quite a few, and in true Apple style the occasional glimpse of brilliance here and there that makes you go “oh, that’s clever”, but then it’s also objectively crap in some (significant) regards.

No offense meant (honestly, I mean none), but you are a bit of a Mac fedayin, and I think it’s affecting your judgement more than a bit if you think the inability to display directories before files isn’t all the way into retardation realms. It’s nothing to do with coming from windows or not, it’s a most intuitive thing, and the fact it’s been that way for ages everywhere else doesn’t make it dated, it makes it a sensible staple :slight_smile:

Anyway…

#94

I realize not all Mac things are the best way but you can’t argue with the fact that you literally expend more brain power trying to figure out if what you want is a folder or a file instead of just going to G in the list. You’re arguing against science, not personal preference

#95

That’s where we hold very different opinions, science doesn’t factor, but statistics do.
As you navigate down a tree, depending on depth, you will need to go down a directory more often than you will want to select a node inside one, therefore having the most common action (another directory) immediately available is a lot LESS brain power than having to hunt every single one of them until you finally get to the file, and only in that last action get a slight benefit.

If you want to go five directories down and select a file in example, you have five immediate actions and one expensive one with directories first.

The ONLY case where nodes and structures mixed wins is if you stay in the root, every other case directories first is more efficient by an order equivalent to depth.

To give you an idea, the subtree I’m working on now for the asset I’m working on is 8 deep, and there are many places in our structure where you might need to be up to a dozen deep (and I’ve worked in places which have even more depth biased structures than here). An inconditional approach like you outline would make it so I would -never- use a file browser, which is ok when operating on data for the sake of it since I use a shell, but intolerable when inside clients (Maya, Softimage and so on) where you only have browser widgets available.

I’m not arguing with science, I have a very, very solid understanding of the statistics and modelling of user interaction, I do it for a living. You are arguing against reliable, massively pooled statistics though :slight_smile:
It’s not an object of debate, it’s a well documented and proven model for the majority of the population.

#96

Any way to show the desktop when my screen is crowded? can’t seem to find that one too…

#97

Control panel, mission control
Set a key for show desktop

And yes, not sorting folders first is annoying as hell.

#98

I assign a hot corner to desktop in mission control. Ditto for all windows and all foreground app windows.

#99

thanks! very useful.

Edit;

Ditto for all windows and all foreground app windows.

                 could you extrapolate a bit more on this? I did apply ¨application window¨to the top right corner but all it does is isolate the currant window in a middle square. What is the utility of this?

thanks

#100

I now understand the ‘‘application windows’’ thing… it shows all the windows from ONE application. Useful for firefox for exemple. Great!

Another question;

Where all the minimized windows go? They don’t appear on the dock. I have to right click on finder, go at the top and click on them to make them reappear. It can’t be the only way to get them back!

A shortcut or hot corner for ‘‘show all windows’’ would be nice but I dont see any native way to do it.

In mission control, is there’s no way to right click the apps to close them? or do anything at all except selecting an item?