MicroByte
Sep 12, 06:19 PM
I got Night Sky (very dark blue).
Man, I would have picked that one up immediately! I cannot believe those were the only 3 colors mine had, I'm gonna try the other BB tomorrow.
So how do you like it? Does it seem like it would last?
Man, I would have picked that one up immediately! I cannot believe those were the only 3 colors mine had, I'm gonna try the other BB tomorrow.
So how do you like it? Does it seem like it would last?
HecubusPro
Aug 24, 07:36 PM
nice one... was looking to buy a mini to 'integrate' into my CAR... might wait now, then pick up a core solo intel for cheap! hopefully....
http://www.kusnetz.net/prius/
I have a Prius, and when I saw this guy put a mac mini in his Prius, I nearly died with envy. I would love to do this, but I have feeling the cost/trouble would be way out of my realm, and I don't know that I would trust someone to void the warranty on my car.:)
Still it's a cool idea.
http://www.kusnetz.net/prius/
I have a Prius, and when I saw this guy put a mac mini in his Prius, I nearly died with envy. I would love to do this, but I have feeling the cost/trouble would be way out of my realm, and I don't know that I would trust someone to void the warranty on my car.:)
Still it's a cool idea.
Leoff
Nov 27, 09:05 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
lorien
Nov 29, 05:15 PM
Where else can they go? The brain, I guess?
Oh, and one more thing...
Ever get tired of listening to music? Well no more sore ears or tangled headphones....
Introducing the iThink. Join the Apple cybernetic collective today. Leave your troublesome Microsoft existence and join us in a world that just works!
Starting at just $ 999
Peace of mind.... forever
<scrolling text reads "Implants sold separately">:p
Oh, and one more thing...
Ever get tired of listening to music? Well no more sore ears or tangled headphones....
Introducing the iThink. Join the Apple cybernetic collective today. Leave your troublesome Microsoft existence and join us in a world that just works!
Starting at just $ 999
Peace of mind.... forever
<scrolling text reads "Implants sold separately">:p
timmillwood
Oct 23, 09:34 AM
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/intelcoreduo.html
That no longer exists. Go to the mbp page and click the core duo icon, and I get a page not found.
This will probably change by the time anyone verifies it. :rolleyes:
This is getting very annoying!!!
It is old news, the page its supposed to link to http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/intel.html
That no longer exists. Go to the mbp page and click the core duo icon, and I get a page not found.
This will probably change by the time anyone verifies it. :rolleyes:
This is getting very annoying!!!
It is old news, the page its supposed to link to http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/intel.html
OhEsTen
Nov 15, 10:50 AM
How can this get negative votes? In fact, how do a lot of perfectly benign threads get negative votes? Are there just members out there who vote negative on everything?
Actually, it's a little known fact that Steve Ballmer frequents this site.... So I attribute all the negative votes to him clicking the "negative" button until he gets tired.... as you can see he doesn't have very much endurance....
Actually, it's a little known fact that Steve Ballmer frequents this site.... So I attribute all the negative votes to him clicking the "negative" button until he gets tired.... as you can see he doesn't have very much endurance....
zoozx
Sep 7, 08:12 AM
Nice idea, lets give communism another shot!
A good idea, just poorly executed.
Actually makes more sense than the system we have now.
A good idea, just poorly executed.
Actually makes more sense than the system we have now.
stefan15
Sep 6, 05:39 PM
Really confused as to why they just didn't skip to Core2.
tny
Aug 7, 08:11 AM
Let me steer this off topic real quick. I have read before that Apple has two OS teams so "in theory" Leopard would, in fact, be Panther 2.0 and 10.7 would be Tiger 2.0. Again, in theory� Can someone clear that up?
Nope. Here's how it works, usually (not saying this is what Apple does, but nearly everyone else does this, so ...). You've got one master codebase, called the "trunk." Everyone works with that. When it's time to start working toward a release candidate, you copy off the code base and create what's called a "branch."
Changes to the trunk are rarely back-ported to the branch (it usually depends upon whether they are bug fixes or new features; bug fixes, often are back-ported if they aren't risky; new features almost never); any changes to the branch which are relevent to the trunk *are* ported to the trunk (since most of them are bug fixes, and the rest are probably new features whose loss might be noticed in the next release).
The branch keeps being used by one team that is working on, let's say, Tiger, right up through the release and during maintenance (10.4.1, 10.4.2, 10.4.3, etc. are all from the branch, not from the trunk), while another team keeps working on the trunk until the time they branch (10.5 Alpha) the next release (let's say Leopard). When the newer branch hits release, one of two things happen: either the team that did the development on the new branch continues doing maintenance (10.5.1, 10.5.2, 10.5.3), or the group that was doing maintenance on the earlier release does maintenance on the new branch and the folks who designed the new branch go back to work on the trunk until it's time to branch again (10.6, let's call it Lion). Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages.
I'm guess this it what is meant by "Apple has two teams working on OS X." Two teams, but only one code base trunk. And thus 10.4 is derived from 10.3, not 10.2.
Nope. Here's how it works, usually (not saying this is what Apple does, but nearly everyone else does this, so ...). You've got one master codebase, called the "trunk." Everyone works with that. When it's time to start working toward a release candidate, you copy off the code base and create what's called a "branch."
Changes to the trunk are rarely back-ported to the branch (it usually depends upon whether they are bug fixes or new features; bug fixes, often are back-ported if they aren't risky; new features almost never); any changes to the branch which are relevent to the trunk *are* ported to the trunk (since most of them are bug fixes, and the rest are probably new features whose loss might be noticed in the next release).
The branch keeps being used by one team that is working on, let's say, Tiger, right up through the release and during maintenance (10.4.1, 10.4.2, 10.4.3, etc. are all from the branch, not from the trunk), while another team keeps working on the trunk until the time they branch (10.5 Alpha) the next release (let's say Leopard). When the newer branch hits release, one of two things happen: either the team that did the development on the new branch continues doing maintenance (10.5.1, 10.5.2, 10.5.3), or the group that was doing maintenance on the earlier release does maintenance on the new branch and the folks who designed the new branch go back to work on the trunk until it's time to branch again (10.6, let's call it Lion). Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages.
I'm guess this it what is meant by "Apple has two teams working on OS X." Two teams, but only one code base trunk. And thus 10.4 is derived from 10.3, not 10.2.
cube
Mar 24, 04:15 PM
You got it wrong.
Llanos, Brazos and pretty much every Fusion platform does not compete against Sandy Bridge. No...
It competes against Intel's Atom platform. Atom CPU offerings beat the many of the offerings on the AMD side. However, on the GPU side, AMD has got Intel really well.
Anandtech did a nice little article on this. They found the whole Fusion concept and implementation as a whole beats Intel's Atom implementation overall for the HTPC. However, down to specifics, well I just discussed it.
Llano is not Atom-level hardware. That is Zacate/Ontario.
Llano is the mainstream Sandy Bridge competitor.
Llanos, Brazos and pretty much every Fusion platform does not compete against Sandy Bridge. No...
It competes against Intel's Atom platform. Atom CPU offerings beat the many of the offerings on the AMD side. However, on the GPU side, AMD has got Intel really well.
Anandtech did a nice little article on this. They found the whole Fusion concept and implementation as a whole beats Intel's Atom implementation overall for the HTPC. However, down to specifics, well I just discussed it.
Llano is not Atom-level hardware. That is Zacate/Ontario.
Llano is the mainstream Sandy Bridge competitor.
barkmonster
Apr 27, 06:26 AM
Yes Amazon jump on the "it's generic" bandwagon. :rolleyes:
Please lets just keep this thread about the response and not "But how is it generic. . ." "Apple didn't create App. . ." "Well Amazon is right it's generic. . ."
I don't think it's generic that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. I'm moving on.
In general, "Applications" are what Apple run on their Mac OS platform "Apps" are what they run on their iOS platform, a cut down version of Mac OS X with a cut down but related and familiar name.
Other operating systems (mobile based included) refer to software as "Programs". This has gone back as far as the days of DOS and Atari/Amiga.
Apple have so much prior use of both the term Application to refer to software and App as the shortened term for iOS that Amazon are just picking a fight because Apple offer their own alternative to the Kindle and they don't like the competition.
Please lets just keep this thread about the response and not "But how is it generic. . ." "Apple didn't create App. . ." "Well Amazon is right it's generic. . ."
I don't think it's generic that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. I'm moving on.
In general, "Applications" are what Apple run on their Mac OS platform "Apps" are what they run on their iOS platform, a cut down version of Mac OS X with a cut down but related and familiar name.
Other operating systems (mobile based included) refer to software as "Programs". This has gone back as far as the days of DOS and Atari/Amiga.
Apple have so much prior use of both the term Application to refer to software and App as the shortened term for iOS that Amazon are just picking a fight because Apple offer their own alternative to the Kindle and they don't like the competition.
BillyShears
Jan 13, 02:33 AM
GreenPeace will go Ape Shite if the MacBookAir is charged through induction. It will not be near as efficient in power transfer as a direct connection would be. (nothing transfers with 100% efficiency)
I can see GreenPeace attacking Apple now because the new notebooks will cause a 15% spike in electricity consumption, dumping 15% more carbon into the air. Death to Apple!
"There's CO2 in the air."
I can see GreenPeace attacking Apple now because the new notebooks will cause a 15% spike in electricity consumption, dumping 15% more carbon into the air. Death to Apple!
"There's CO2 in the air."
tristangage
Feb 18, 06:07 PM
What screensaver/program are you using in the top-right photo? Looks pretty sweet and I'm not sure what it is.
It isn't a screensaver, it's Geektool on his desktop.
It isn't a screensaver, it's Geektool on his desktop.
swingerofbirch
Jul 18, 02:45 AM
I think there already are online download rental sites, presumably for WMP a la Windows.
Rental makes more sense if the quality is comparable to the current shows they offer. Plus if you buy a movie, with the restrictions the way they are, you most likely won't be able to burn it to a DVD to watch on the plasmas everyone seems to be getting.
And if this truly is a service for some sort of iPod, then they won't be offering HD movies unless of course by some miracle they have an HD screen in the iPod (although HD at any conceivably sized iPod screen would be a waste).
I actually would like a subscription service for both movies and TV shows. I have spent way more than I care to think about on TV series, and honestly I can only watch them but so many times. What do I do with them now? I "own" them, but as we all know, I can't sell them.
Rental makes more sense if the quality is comparable to the current shows they offer. Plus if you buy a movie, with the restrictions the way they are, you most likely won't be able to burn it to a DVD to watch on the plasmas everyone seems to be getting.
And if this truly is a service for some sort of iPod, then they won't be offering HD movies unless of course by some miracle they have an HD screen in the iPod (although HD at any conceivably sized iPod screen would be a waste).
I actually would like a subscription service for both movies and TV shows. I have spent way more than I care to think about on TV series, and honestly I can only watch them but so many times. What do I do with them now? I "own" them, but as we all know, I can't sell them.
coolfactor
Aug 7, 07:48 AM
OS X needs a robust Security System Preference Panel that provides virus checking and other defenses and actively monitors for intrusions.
Go to Sharing preference pane, enable the Firewall, click Advanced, and enabling Firewall Logging.
Your wish just came true. All blocked intrusions are now logged for your perusal.
Go to Sharing preference pane, enable the Firewall, click Advanced, and enabling Firewall Logging.
Your wish just came true. All blocked intrusions are now logged for your perusal.
Mal67
Apr 20, 03:46 AM
I hope so, and I also hope they don't skimp out on the Mini.
According to the Buyer's Guide, it's been over 300 days since the Mini was updated and the average is 248 days. So they're a tad behind.
I don't think Apple have any excuses on this one. It's been far too long.
According to the Buyer's Guide, it's been over 300 days since the Mini was updated and the average is 248 days. So they're a tad behind.
I don't think Apple have any excuses on this one. It's been far too long.
peharri
Jul 18, 09:32 AM
...but why on Earth would Jobs announce this at a developer's conference?
WWDC showcases the new hardware and software, but this isn't either, it's a product of little or no interest to developers. It's the wrong audience.
A more realistic possibility is a seperate, unrelated, keynote. The iTunes Music Store was announced at a special event, and I'd imagine any "movie download service" would be announced similarly.
I don't think the idea is impossible. I can see a $5 fixed fee thing working quite well, with $1 going to Apple to cover their operating costs. They can probably get an hour or so of moderate, better-then-VHS-resolution, quality for 100 megabytes if they choose a reasonable codec. The system probably fits Apple better than a selling system, where questions like "I can burn my music to CD, how come I can't burn my movies to DVD" will be asked. The major issue I can forsee though is that most of us want to watch movies on a large screen. Most Mac users don't really have anything that would work for that. Perhaps a little, cheap, Firewire widget that does TV out should be in Apple's future.
WWDC showcases the new hardware and software, but this isn't either, it's a product of little or no interest to developers. It's the wrong audience.
A more realistic possibility is a seperate, unrelated, keynote. The iTunes Music Store was announced at a special event, and I'd imagine any "movie download service" would be announced similarly.
I don't think the idea is impossible. I can see a $5 fixed fee thing working quite well, with $1 going to Apple to cover their operating costs. They can probably get an hour or so of moderate, better-then-VHS-resolution, quality for 100 megabytes if they choose a reasonable codec. The system probably fits Apple better than a selling system, where questions like "I can burn my music to CD, how come I can't burn my movies to DVD" will be asked. The major issue I can forsee though is that most of us want to watch movies on a large screen. Most Mac users don't really have anything that would work for that. Perhaps a little, cheap, Firewire widget that does TV out should be in Apple's future.
GregA
Aug 24, 09:41 PM
I suspect we'll see slight case redesigns for Santa Rosa-based Macs. Santa Rosa will be the real Core 2 platform. This year's Meroms are a stopgap.Isn't everything a stop gap, in that sense? Just with sweet spots along the way :)
as well as include new WiFi and the "Robson" flash technology for fast-booting.I'll have to look up Robson... I imagine Boot Camp will work quite well if it only takes 10 seconds to switch from an active Mac to an active Windows machine...
as well as include new WiFi and the "Robson" flash technology for fast-booting.I'll have to look up Robson... I imagine Boot Camp will work quite well if it only takes 10 seconds to switch from an active Mac to an active Windows machine...
MCIowaRulz
Apr 12, 09:12 PM
You can follow this link
http://twitpic.com/photos/robimbs
Looks nice!
http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitpic/photos/large/275784142.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJF3XCCKACR3QDMOA&Expires=1302661762&Signature=frki81qIXmAgzK92lFfwqmHP8tQ%3D
http://twitpic.com/photos/robimbs
Looks nice!
http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitpic/photos/large/275784142.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJF3XCCKACR3QDMOA&Expires=1302661762&Signature=frki81qIXmAgzK92lFfwqmHP8tQ%3D
patrickdunn
Sep 9, 01:33 PM
Does anybody know how it will fit in a last gen case?
Chupa Chupa
Sep 1, 01:19 PM
Is there really a big market for a 23" iMac @ 2000? I hope this rumor is bogus. I'd much rather see Apple come out with a headless Gaming mid-tower with a Core 2 Duo Extreme and X1600 card. Dual HD bays and one optical bay. AP/BT built in. 3 PCIe slots (one used by X1600). I think that would would fill a gap Apple has in their consumer line-up right now.
FireStar
Oct 14, 03:59 PM
I didn't yet. I'm sort of torn. I keep trying to think why it would be good to have a "backup" case, but I really haven't come up with one, so it'll probably just go back. Just been too busy to do it. But 20 bucks is 20 bucks, I should definitely bring that sucker back.
I agree. I thought the light blue was.... Ugly, I guess. I much prefer the translucent black.
I agree. I thought the light blue was.... Ugly, I guess. I much prefer the translucent black.
Caitlyn
Sep 1, 12:57 PM
Wow, this would be amazing. Screw my plan to buy an ACD if this happens. A MacBook and a 23" iMac would look awesome on my new glass desk. ;)
It needs:
Glossy Screen (Even if it's only an option)
Up to 3GB RAM (at least; 4GB would be nice)
Merom (Obviously)
Extras that would be cool:
Option for Black
No Chin
That's all I can think of as the iMac is a quite capable, beautiful looking machine already. :)
This price range would seem fair to me:
17" iMac $1299
20" iMac $1499
23" iMac $1699
It needs:
Glossy Screen (Even if it's only an option)
Up to 3GB RAM (at least; 4GB would be nice)
Merom (Obviously)
Extras that would be cool:
Option for Black
No Chin
That's all I can think of as the iMac is a quite capable, beautiful looking machine already. :)
This price range would seem fair to me:
17" iMac $1299
20" iMac $1499
23" iMac $1699
motulist
Aug 6, 11:10 PM
Exciting though this is, try and get some sleep people. Most Mac nuts have had the experience of staying up all night before a big Apple show (as I have) and while it can be fun to do once, it also raises your hopes so much that you feel let down unless something truly spectacular is unveiled. Luckily for me I have to be all night for other reasons anyway ;)
No comments:
Post a Comment