Hellhammer
Apr 6, 11:11 AM
I am shocked that anyone finds this as a positive.
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
Then you want another drop of approaching 50% in graphics performance? Remember these IGPs clock in much lower than the STD voltage SB used in 13" MBP.
I find this completely backwards from Apple's current position on both CPU and graphics, and I don't think anyone would end up with a faster or better 13" MBA than the current generation. Apple would certainly have to bring back the backlit keyboard and introduce Thunderbolt to sucker anyone into buying such inferior junk! I would recommend people buy the current generation on clearance rather than lose performance everywhere like this. If this is the chip Apple uses in the 13" MBA, prepare for a big drop in capabilities!
I am still in shock anyone finds this a positive? Have you all read the clock speed? The facts about the chip and IGP in ultra low voltage variants?
I'm pretty sure you are aware that Apple would use LV CPU in 13", not ULV. That bumps us to 2.3GHz plus Turbo. You have said this yourself too and I already covered the reason in my other post.
This is just a MR article and surprisingly, they don't have much idea about the TDPs. Hopefully they will correct their article so people won't live in confusion.
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
Then you want another drop of approaching 50% in graphics performance? Remember these IGPs clock in much lower than the STD voltage SB used in 13" MBP.
I find this completely backwards from Apple's current position on both CPU and graphics, and I don't think anyone would end up with a faster or better 13" MBA than the current generation. Apple would certainly have to bring back the backlit keyboard and introduce Thunderbolt to sucker anyone into buying such inferior junk! I would recommend people buy the current generation on clearance rather than lose performance everywhere like this. If this is the chip Apple uses in the 13" MBA, prepare for a big drop in capabilities!
I am still in shock anyone finds this a positive? Have you all read the clock speed? The facts about the chip and IGP in ultra low voltage variants?
I'm pretty sure you are aware that Apple would use LV CPU in 13", not ULV. That bumps us to 2.3GHz plus Turbo. You have said this yourself too and I already covered the reason in my other post.
This is just a MR article and surprisingly, they don't have much idea about the TDPs. Hopefully they will correct their article so people won't live in confusion.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 10:48 AM
Why do you conflate homosexuality with abuse and paedophilia?
I'm not conflating them. See post 129.
I'm not conflating them. See post 129.
padr�
Sep 19, 01:12 PM
then i will have to work just a little bit harder i'm afraid ;)
i'll start with the 1 gig ram, maybe 2, and later i will be upgrading,it can't stay expansive forever.
thx again for your reply
i'll start with the 1 gig ram, maybe 2, and later i will be upgrading,it can't stay expansive forever.
thx again for your reply
Mr. Mister
Jul 14, 04:31 PM
If There's No BTO Option For A Single-processor 2.66 Configuration, That Will Be Frustrating™.
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.
milozauckerman
Jul 27, 06:49 PM
looking at reference systems - for $2049, Gateway's Core 2 Duo gets the 2.4GHz/4MB L2 cache Conroe, 2GB of RAM from the factory, an x1900 512MB graphics card, 320GB hard drive, card reader and DL DVD burner.
Apple had better step its game up compared to the prices/specs rumored last week. A weak graphics card and 512MB of RAM aren't going to cut it in the low tower, even if it does have XEON INSIDE or whatever the marketing pitch will be to distract us.
EDIT: Dell would be even cheaper, with a lesser video card, but there doesn't seem to be a way to separate the XPS 410 from the included 20in monitor as of now.
Apple had better step its game up compared to the prices/specs rumored last week. A weak graphics card and 512MB of RAM aren't going to cut it in the low tower, even if it does have XEON INSIDE or whatever the marketing pitch will be to distract us.
EDIT: Dell would be even cheaper, with a lesser video card, but there doesn't seem to be a way to separate the XPS 410 from the included 20in monitor as of now.
erockerboy
Aug 17, 01:07 PM
Great post - you said it all.
I think everyone has to remember that Apple took a HUGE PR risk by switching to intel and that it would be foolish to think that they didn't have a VERY GOOD REASON for doing it. As much as RISC is loved here, there really is no compelling reason to think that the G5 architecture stands much of a chance in this comparison. Furthermore, it is foolish to assume that a "up-to-date" G5 would fare any better, firstly because IBM has never stopped developing the G5 (its primary usage was IBM blade servers after all) and secondly because the Core 2 architecture as it stands now isn't being pushed to perform at its maximum levels. In the end, arrogance and pride has never helped anyone, its time to let go.
I think everyone has to remember that Apple took a HUGE PR risk by switching to intel and that it would be foolish to think that they didn't have a VERY GOOD REASON for doing it. As much as RISC is loved here, there really is no compelling reason to think that the G5 architecture stands much of a chance in this comparison. Furthermore, it is foolish to assume that a "up-to-date" G5 would fare any better, firstly because IBM has never stopped developing the G5 (its primary usage was IBM blade servers after all) and secondly because the Core 2 architecture as it stands now isn't being pushed to perform at its maximum levels. In the end, arrogance and pride has never helped anyone, its time to let go.
cmaier
Apr 19, 10:46 PM
But App Store is like Coke, right? Of course it's ok if Apple does it. They've becoming one of the most hypocritical companies on the planet. Maybe Steve suffers from extreme paranoia?
No. "App Store" wouldn't qualify as a famous mark, I should think.
Here's a website that lists some factors:
http://www.quizlaw.com/trademarks/what_is_a_famous_trademark.php
No. "App Store" wouldn't qualify as a famous mark, I should think.
Here's a website that lists some factors:
http://www.quizlaw.com/trademarks/what_is_a_famous_trademark.php
DoFoT9
Aug 8, 04:47 AM
i am looking forward to this game. i will be getting the US version though. i haven't pre-ordered or anything, but i still might
me too!! i am So excited! i wont pre order or anything, might save for a steering wheel though. :)
me too!! i am So excited! i wont pre order or anything, might save for a steering wheel though. :)
Doctor Q
Apr 25, 04:26 PM
Nike+iPod must be an even more serious privacy violation. After all, it knows how fast I'm going and my calories burned. And it sends the data to nikeplus.com! :eek:
Yeah, both iPhone/iPod and Nike+iPod store the information only on my device and sync it only to my other devices, sending it elsewhere only if I want. But if I can make money by suing about it then I'll ignore those inconvenient facts!
Yeah, both iPhone/iPod and Nike+iPod store the information only on my device and sync it only to my other devices, sending it elsewhere only if I want. But if I can make money by suing about it then I'll ignore those inconvenient facts!
Blue Velvet
Mar 22, 11:40 PM
Right, because there can't be any other reason why Blue Velvet, or myself, might support military intervention in Libya, but not Iraq. They are exactly the same situation after all.
Although I backed the implementation of a no-fly zone a few weeks ago, I wouldn't describe my position as one of wholehearted support. More a queasy half-hearted recognition that something had to be done and that all alternatives lead to rabbit holes of some degree or another. When all is said and done, my usual fallback position is an intense weariness at the evil that men do.
For the record, I actually supported (if silence is considered consent) both Gulf wars at the start; I believed in the fictional WMD, I believed it when Colin Powell held his little vial up at the UN... but I, like many was tied down with work and other concerns and was only paying cursory attention to the news at the time. Like Obama, I also initially supported the war in Afghanistan, or at least the idea of it, initiated by a Republican president, but since then it seems to have become a fiasco of Catch-22 proportions.
Slowly discovering the real agenda and true ineptness of the Bush administration was a pivotal point in my reawakening political understanding of US current affairs after reading Hunter Thompson for so many years. Disgusted and appalled at the casual way in which we all were lied to, I'm quite happy to hold my hands up and say 'I was wrong'.
Thing is about Obama, I never had any starry-eyed notion about him being a peace-maker. He's an American president, the incentives are cemented into the role as one of using power and protecting wealth. Not that many conservatives were paying attention at the time, but he stood up in front of the Nobel academy when accepting his Nobel Peace Prize and laid out a justification for war.
Since the second Gulf War, the entire circus has been one of my occasional interests, because I've never seen a political process elsewhere riddled with so many bald-faced liars, grotesque characters and half-baked casual hate speech. What power or the sniff of it does to people, twisting them out of shape, is infinitely more interesting and has more impact on us than any other endeavour, except for possibly the parallel development of technology.
George W. Bush is responsible for another calamity: me posting in PRSI, one of my many occasional weaknesses.
Although I backed the implementation of a no-fly zone a few weeks ago, I wouldn't describe my position as one of wholehearted support. More a queasy half-hearted recognition that something had to be done and that all alternatives lead to rabbit holes of some degree or another. When all is said and done, my usual fallback position is an intense weariness at the evil that men do.
For the record, I actually supported (if silence is considered consent) both Gulf wars at the start; I believed in the fictional WMD, I believed it when Colin Powell held his little vial up at the UN... but I, like many was tied down with work and other concerns and was only paying cursory attention to the news at the time. Like Obama, I also initially supported the war in Afghanistan, or at least the idea of it, initiated by a Republican president, but since then it seems to have become a fiasco of Catch-22 proportions.
Slowly discovering the real agenda and true ineptness of the Bush administration was a pivotal point in my reawakening political understanding of US current affairs after reading Hunter Thompson for so many years. Disgusted and appalled at the casual way in which we all were lied to, I'm quite happy to hold my hands up and say 'I was wrong'.
Thing is about Obama, I never had any starry-eyed notion about him being a peace-maker. He's an American president, the incentives are cemented into the role as one of using power and protecting wealth. Not that many conservatives were paying attention at the time, but he stood up in front of the Nobel academy when accepting his Nobel Peace Prize and laid out a justification for war.
Since the second Gulf War, the entire circus has been one of my occasional interests, because I've never seen a political process elsewhere riddled with so many bald-faced liars, grotesque characters and half-baked casual hate speech. What power or the sniff of it does to people, twisting them out of shape, is infinitely more interesting and has more impact on us than any other endeavour, except for possibly the parallel development of technology.
George W. Bush is responsible for another calamity: me posting in PRSI, one of my many occasional weaknesses.
nerveosu
Aug 7, 04:31 PM
The star field background for Spaces was Tacky.
Vegasman
Apr 27, 09:08 AM
Side story: the credit card companies know exactly where I am better then the cell companies. Every time I swipe my credit or debit card, they know where I am. When I travel for vacation, I am very likely to get a call from my credit card company (on my cell) asking where, when and how long I will be traveling. They know every store and every purchase I've ever made on a credit card.
Are you somehow trying to imply that because the credit card company knows so much about you that it is OK to keep that information unencrypted on your phone and backup on your computer?
All people are asking for is that personal information is kept encrypted and secured. No more. No less.
Are you somehow trying to imply that because the credit card company knows so much about you that it is OK to keep that information unencrypted on your phone and backup on your computer?
All people are asking for is that personal information is kept encrypted and secured. No more. No less.
Anonymous Freak
Jul 15, 02:16 PM
Can anyone tell me the purpose of dual drive slots nowadays? I can see the use for them (and had computers with) when they were limited to one function, i.e. DVD-ROM for one and a CD-RW for the other but now that everything can happen in one drive with speed not being an issue, is it really nececcary to have two?
Early Blu-Ray burners can't read or write CDs, and are slow at DVDs. Maybe we'll see a Blu-Ray burner and a high-speed DVD�R(W)/CD-R(W).
Early Blu-Ray burners can't read or write CDs, and are slow at DVDs. Maybe we'll see a Blu-Ray burner and a high-speed DVD�R(W)/CD-R(W).
pkson
Apr 10, 08:36 PM
Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic...
Aww, give them a break, they're probably just trying to keep with the 90's design of the UI. :D
Honestly, the website totally sucks. Looks like a get-rich-quick advertisement site. They might be FCP pros, but they know amateur HTML.
Aww, give them a break, they're probably just trying to keep with the 90's design of the UI. :D
Honestly, the website totally sucks. Looks like a get-rich-quick advertisement site. They might be FCP pros, but they know amateur HTML.
Chip NoVaMac
Apr 7, 11:38 PM
After reading more of the responses working retail I might be able to shed on some light as to why BB might hold back on selling what they have on hand.
As one poster mentioned BB store managers have a quota or sales goal to make each day it seems. The sad fact is that when hot products enter the market they can skew your sales data for that day, week, or month. So taking and throttling sales to make ones sales goal can help out the following year.
Sadly sometimes you get corporate HQ that is just focused in on gains over LY, never mind that hot product that was blowing off the shelves was the reason for it. In particular for a publicly traded company that has shareholders to answer to.
As an example; lets say the local BB store got a 100 iPad 2 64GB 3G's in this morning. That is about $83K in sales. And lets say they average sales without the iPad 2 for the same day LY was $500K. Next year that manager would be looking at needing a $583K to make his goal.
Bean counters at the corporate level don't care one red cent about any hot item that caused the spike. Nor do shareholders of public companies. I personally have seen in the past when the store I worked for made it goal for the day, hold back on processing an order till the next day to give us a jump on the next days sales. But NEVER to the point that customers with money in hand were denied buying the product right then and there.
And that is where I think BB is getting in trouble with Apple right now....
As one poster mentioned BB store managers have a quota or sales goal to make each day it seems. The sad fact is that when hot products enter the market they can skew your sales data for that day, week, or month. So taking and throttling sales to make ones sales goal can help out the following year.
Sadly sometimes you get corporate HQ that is just focused in on gains over LY, never mind that hot product that was blowing off the shelves was the reason for it. In particular for a publicly traded company that has shareholders to answer to.
As an example; lets say the local BB store got a 100 iPad 2 64GB 3G's in this morning. That is about $83K in sales. And lets say they average sales without the iPad 2 for the same day LY was $500K. Next year that manager would be looking at needing a $583K to make his goal.
Bean counters at the corporate level don't care one red cent about any hot item that caused the spike. Nor do shareholders of public companies. I personally have seen in the past when the store I worked for made it goal for the day, hold back on processing an order till the next day to give us a jump on the next days sales. But NEVER to the point that customers with money in hand were denied buying the product right then and there.
And that is where I think BB is getting in trouble with Apple right now....
netvvork
Apr 11, 01:27 PM
"the iPhone 5 won't be shipping until Fiscal 2012 (after September 2011)."
now if they could only tell us what comes after sunday.:D
now if they could only tell us what comes after sunday.:D
boncellis
Jul 20, 09:28 AM
...Quad Duo?
...Quadra Duo?
...the "holy hell this is faster than you'll ever need" Mac? :D
Ha, if only. ;) The difference between software developers "taking advantage" of new functionality and "bloatware" is a matter of semantics at times.
...Quadra Duo?
...the "holy hell this is faster than you'll ever need" Mac? :D
Ha, if only. ;) The difference between software developers "taking advantage" of new functionality and "bloatware" is a matter of semantics at times.
daveaudio
Aug 11, 12:53 PM
The US GSM carriers suck. T-Mobile has great customer service, but their coverage stinks. Cingular has great coverage, but they have BY FAR the worst customer service.
Plus EVDO beats the pants off of EDGE. And Verizon + Sprint + Amp'd + US Cellular + a bunch of other, smaller CDMA carriers account for over 60million potential customers in the US. If they only do a GSM version of the phone, it'll be a big mistake.
Hahahahaha you do not know much about the cell business here in the U.S. T-Mobile uses Cingulars network in a better part of the country, and Cingular uses T-Mobiles in the other parts, under a roaming deal agreement they made when Deustche Telecom bought Voicestream creating T-Mobile.
Plus EVDO beats the pants off of EDGE. And Verizon + Sprint + Amp'd + US Cellular + a bunch of other, smaller CDMA carriers account for over 60million potential customers in the US. If they only do a GSM version of the phone, it'll be a big mistake.
Hahahahaha you do not know much about the cell business here in the U.S. T-Mobile uses Cingulars network in a better part of the country, and Cingular uses T-Mobiles in the other parts, under a roaming deal agreement they made when Deustche Telecom bought Voicestream creating T-Mobile.
Evangelion
Sep 13, 01:10 PM
The OS takes advantage of the extra 4 cores already therefore its ahead of the technology curve, correct? Gee, no innovation here...please move along folks. :rolleyes:
Uh, last time I checked, Windows can take advantage of multiple cores just fine. Do you think that multithreading is some Black Magic that only MacOS can do? Hell, standard Linux from kernel.org can use 512 cores as we speak!
Related to this: Maybe not 512-way SMP, but here (http://www.linux-mips.org/wiki/IP27_boot_messages) is what it looks like when Linux boots on 128-way SGI Origin supercomputer. Note, the kernel that is booting is 2.4.1, which was released in early 2001. Things have progressed A LOT since those day.
OS X works with quad core == "Ahead of technology curve"... puhleeze!
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support
Windows works just fine with dual-core. It really does. To Wndows, dual-core is more or less similar to typical SMP, and Windows has supported SMP since Windows NT!
I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores.
Any reason why it wouldn't work? And did you even read the Anandtech-article? They conducted their benchmarks in Windows XP! So it obviously DID work with four cores! And it DID show substantial improvement in performance in real-life apps! Sheesh! Dial tone that fanboysihness a bit, dude.
Uh, last time I checked, Windows can take advantage of multiple cores just fine. Do you think that multithreading is some Black Magic that only MacOS can do? Hell, standard Linux from kernel.org can use 512 cores as we speak!
Related to this: Maybe not 512-way SMP, but here (http://www.linux-mips.org/wiki/IP27_boot_messages) is what it looks like when Linux boots on 128-way SGI Origin supercomputer. Note, the kernel that is booting is 2.4.1, which was released in early 2001. Things have progressed A LOT since those day.
OS X works with quad core == "Ahead of technology curve"... puhleeze!
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support
Windows works just fine with dual-core. It really does. To Wndows, dual-core is more or less similar to typical SMP, and Windows has supported SMP since Windows NT!
I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores.
Any reason why it wouldn't work? And did you even read the Anandtech-article? They conducted their benchmarks in Windows XP! So it obviously DID work with four cores! And it DID show substantial improvement in performance in real-life apps! Sheesh! Dial tone that fanboysihness a bit, dude.
AidenShaw
Mar 26, 11:23 PM
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.
Yes, we've heard of this - it's the "XP syndrome" all over again.
Yes, we've heard of this - it's the "XP syndrome" all over again.
Hal Jordan
Apr 11, 10:26 PM
No worries. I'm in need for a change. I've been impressed with the Galaxy S but not enough to get rid of my 3GS. But the Galaxy S2 looks AMAZING!!! 4.3 inch SuperAmoled Plus display, 1.2 GHz Dual Core, 1 GB RAM, 8 Meg rear camera, 2 Meg front Camera, Insanely wicked 1080P recording (shocked at how clean the recordings look), completely customizable UI, the list goes on an on.....It'll be a big change for me, but change happens. This thing is better equipped than a Tablet!!!! SOLD!!!!
swingerofbirch
Aug 7, 06:28 PM
http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/accessibility.html
From this site:
Closed captioning
QuickTime currently supports closed captioning by including a text track alongside audio and video content. But improved QuickTime support will automatically display the CEA-608 closed captioning text standard in analog broadcasts in the U.S.
-----
Anyone think this means support for Closed Captioning in iTunes video downloads? As a hearing-impaired Mac-User, the lack of subtitles/captions in the TV shows is the one thing keeping me from buying a bunch of them. I hope they address this issue soon...
I am not hearing impaired, but I often watch TV and movies with the closed captioning on. I cannot really say what about it makes it more enjoyable to me--no one has ever understood why I do it, maybe it has to do with how I process information (I do have trouble listening in lecture classes, maybe a learning disability etc.), but my point is to say that I am also interested in getting closed captioning on iTunes shows.
I wrote to Apple on the feedback part of their web-site about this. I was wondering if you might know better what the law is about closed captioning. I always assumed it was required for network television shows. Is it not for network shows that appear online?
Anyhow, it's functionality I would definitely like to see.
From this site:
Closed captioning
QuickTime currently supports closed captioning by including a text track alongside audio and video content. But improved QuickTime support will automatically display the CEA-608 closed captioning text standard in analog broadcasts in the U.S.
-----
Anyone think this means support for Closed Captioning in iTunes video downloads? As a hearing-impaired Mac-User, the lack of subtitles/captions in the TV shows is the one thing keeping me from buying a bunch of them. I hope they address this issue soon...
I am not hearing impaired, but I often watch TV and movies with the closed captioning on. I cannot really say what about it makes it more enjoyable to me--no one has ever understood why I do it, maybe it has to do with how I process information (I do have trouble listening in lecture classes, maybe a learning disability etc.), but my point is to say that I am also interested in getting closed captioning on iTunes shows.
I wrote to Apple on the feedback part of their web-site about this. I was wondering if you might know better what the law is about closed captioning. I always assumed it was required for network television shows. Is it not for network shows that appear online?
Anyhow, it's functionality I would definitely like to see.
11thIndian
Apr 9, 02:32 PM
11thindian, do you still think it's only professionals that I know?
Of course not. The proliferation of people who say that they have migrated to another platform indicates that for varying reasons, be they technical, workflow, or otherwise... some have left FCP. There are reasons to do that. I would just rather people state personal experience for what it is; rather than paint broad, unsubstantiated remarks like, "Apple is bleeding market share to Premier!". State what's happening for you in your neck of the woods. That's educational for everyone, rather than being combative.
Heck, my first 4 years in NLE was on AVID. Why did I switch? Primarily because that's where my market was going. I couldn't stick with FCP if all my clients decided they were going to make a switch to another platform now.
My biggest confustion is with people already labelling this iMovePro. There's no solid evidence of this. Apple hasn't let the product lay fallow, they've recovered from an internal crossed wires as to platform direction in which resulted in a modest update with FCS3, but have been working on a complete rewrite.
If Apple were just delivering a reheated 64bit FCP7 that could play DSLR footage natively, THEN I'd be worried! But by all accounts they've rewritten from scratch, and completely rethought the product, the goals, the interface. That takes a lot more time and effort.
Until the cat is out of the bag, I prefer to be more interested than worried.
Of course not. The proliferation of people who say that they have migrated to another platform indicates that for varying reasons, be they technical, workflow, or otherwise... some have left FCP. There are reasons to do that. I would just rather people state personal experience for what it is; rather than paint broad, unsubstantiated remarks like, "Apple is bleeding market share to Premier!". State what's happening for you in your neck of the woods. That's educational for everyone, rather than being combative.
Heck, my first 4 years in NLE was on AVID. Why did I switch? Primarily because that's where my market was going. I couldn't stick with FCP if all my clients decided they were going to make a switch to another platform now.
My biggest confustion is with people already labelling this iMovePro. There's no solid evidence of this. Apple hasn't let the product lay fallow, they've recovered from an internal crossed wires as to platform direction in which resulted in a modest update with FCS3, but have been working on a complete rewrite.
If Apple were just delivering a reheated 64bit FCP7 that could play DSLR footage natively, THEN I'd be worried! But by all accounts they've rewritten from scratch, and completely rethought the product, the goals, the interface. That takes a lot more time and effort.
Until the cat is out of the bag, I prefer to be more interested than worried.