Converting OS X AddressBook to KAddress?

[Timothy A. Seufert]

At 3:44 PM -0500 8/20/02, Robert Brandtjen wrote:
>On Tuesday 20 August 2002 03:12 pm, Timothy A. Seufert wrote:
>>  You're not trying to start THAT stupidity again, are you?  Weren't
>>  you drubbed soundly enough before?  (Not that the link seems to have
>>  anything to do with your fantasy that Apple uses feature reduced
>>  video chips which, oddly enough, nobody has ever heard of but you...)
>
>Ok, Mr. Apple apologist, thats why the apple machines did so well in those
>bench marks.

Excuse me?  Where did I say that they *should* do well?  AE and 
Photoshop stress two things when used in the way that article's 
author did: CPU performance and memory throughput.  Current Macs are 
not going to win on either count.

Yes, I know that the article mentions After Effects tests that sound 
3D-ish.  AE doesn't use OpenGL or Direct3D to accelerate any of that, 
it just does it in software like it does all its other effects.

I just downloaded Adobe's trial version of AE5.5 (lacks only the 
ability to save projects and render final output, according to 
Adobe).  I ran Apple's OpenGL profiler on it.  Want to know how many 
GL calls the profiler recorded AE making (even as I fiddled around 
with its 3D features)?

Zero.  That's a big null.  Didn't even create an OpenGL context.

>Hey I know, lets all bury our heads in the sand and believe, verbatim,
>whatever steve jobs tells us to believe.

Hey I know, let's invent strawmen.  It's fun!

>Lets see you go into compusa, buy a geforce 3 ti400 and run it in your mac.

Didn't we go over this before?  Buy a GeForce3 (no Ti, just a plain 
old GF3, getting hard to find new these days) that is as close to the 
NVidia GF3 reference design as possible (since that's what Apple's 
board is based on), flash it with Apple's GF3 ROM, and it will work. 
A GF3 Ti won't work because Apple never shipped any video cards using 
the more recent GF3 Ti chips and their plain GF3 ROM doesn't 
understand them.

-- 
Tim Seufert