supremedesigner
Jul 18, 07:38 AM
This is bulls***! IF they want to do that way, then it's their loss! That is really stupid. I'd rather buy DVD instead of renting their cheapstake movies!
playaj82
Aug 16, 09:18 AM
I have no interest in downloading music on the go or waving around my songs wirelessly.
How about an iPod where we actually increase the quality of audio instead of compromising how everything sounds for the "latest" features. Now we put in even more weak audio components to make up for the lack of power because of a wireless feature.
Pfft
How about an iPod where we actually increase the quality of audio instead of compromising how everything sounds for the "latest" features. Now we put in even more weak audio components to make up for the lack of power because of a wireless feature.
Pfft
maverick808
Oct 24, 06:16 AM
The only stores I found still up were the US and Canada
US and Canada always go down last, they should be down in the next 10 minutes or so.
US and Canada always go down last, they should be down in the next 10 minutes or so.
daneoni
Aug 7, 03:27 AM
Anyone got any ideas of when the keynote starts in the good ol UK?, i'm guessing 6pm ish?
reel2reel
Apr 12, 09:55 PM
Here's hoping too. :)
Yeah, very interested to see how color correction workflow changes (or stays the same).
Yeah, very interested to see how color correction workflow changes (or stays the same).
Northgrove
May 3, 05:40 AM
In Lion a user simply needs to invoke the Launchpad, click and hold on the icon of the application they wish to delete, and when the icons begin to wiggle a cross appears on icons of apps installed via the Mac App Store. Clicking this cross brings up the message "Are you sure you want to delete the application...?", and clicking 'Delete' confirms and removes the app.
I hope I can right-click and delete them too. Pointless to click and wait while holding if you have an input device with more than one button... :rolleyes:
I hope I can right-click and delete them too. Pointless to click and wait while holding if you have an input device with more than one button... :rolleyes:
iTravis
Apr 26, 12:48 PM
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.
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.
PBF
Apr 3, 02:37 AM
- can press ctrl+up again to close Mission Control, doesnt work with ctrl-down for Expos� app windows though
That's because the 'control' button acts like a four-finger gesture. Same applies to ctrl+left arrow and ctrl+right arrow.
That's because the 'control' button acts like a four-finger gesture. Same applies to ctrl+left arrow and ctrl+right arrow.
DesignDJ
Oct 23, 08:50 AM
This news just in....
"My infant son began to cry when I placed the MacBook Pro in my shopping cart this morning, this is a clear indication that the MBP could be updated as soon as this week. More news to follow..."
"My infant son began to cry when I placed the MacBook Pro in my shopping cart this morning, this is a clear indication that the MBP could be updated as soon as this week. More news to follow..."
iOzzie
Mar 22, 10:06 PM
Long live the Classic.
My 160 is almost full, put me down for a refresh :)
My 160 is almost full, put me down for a refresh :)
Kilamite
Apr 21, 11:20 AM
Read the letter. I'd like an open response from Apple which specifically answers those questions.
appleguy123
Mar 22, 11:37 PM
I do think some people genuinely believe it's a choice. It's hard for some people to imagine that not everyone's minds work the same as theirs, and not just related to homosexuality. Chances are, someone who considers homosexuality a choice likely has issues with other groups of people as well.
I think that people who blelieve homosexuality is a choice have some degree of homosexual attraction andchoose not to act on it.
I think that people who blelieve homosexuality is a choice have some degree of homosexual attraction andchoose not to act on it.
Big D 51
Apr 11, 10:08 AM
Yes, but I prefer an automatic. I'm lazy :D
twoodcc
Apr 30, 06:07 AM
congrats to lyzardking for 7 million points!
i see your output is up! care to share what machines you got folding?
i see your output is up! care to share what machines you got folding?
afrowq
Apr 21, 12:34 PM
Performance and specifications determine whether or not it's a "Pro", not the people who use them. I'm not a professional race car driver, but my car has over 400hp. Does that mean that my car is not the high-performance sports car that the automotive world widely claims it to be?
And besides, how do you know those people aren't using heavy-duty applications? Is a thirty-second observation at Starbucks enough to justify such a statement?
Yes, a 30 second observation of people surfing FB on their Macbook (pros) is sufficient for me to assume that they are not performing complex video rendering or multi-filter Photoshop layering.
Laptops are not Pro machines. A 13" laptop with shared memory and a glossy screen is not professional. Unless your profession is being a writer. The "pro" moniker is a marketing ploy.
I realize the 15" and 17" are more powerful, but you still can't edit 4K RED footage on one, for example. But a Mac Pro? There's nothing professional you can throw at it that it can't do.
Also, regarding the car metaphor: put your 400hp car up against a NASCAR or Formula 1 vehicle and see how well it does on the racetrack against other REAL professional cars.
The car is nice, I'm sure, but is not a vehicle doing professional high performance driving. The same is true of macbook pros. They're solid machines, but they are not professional performance machines.
And besides, how do you know those people aren't using heavy-duty applications? Is a thirty-second observation at Starbucks enough to justify such a statement?
Yes, a 30 second observation of people surfing FB on their Macbook (pros) is sufficient for me to assume that they are not performing complex video rendering or multi-filter Photoshop layering.
Laptops are not Pro machines. A 13" laptop with shared memory and a glossy screen is not professional. Unless your profession is being a writer. The "pro" moniker is a marketing ploy.
I realize the 15" and 17" are more powerful, but you still can't edit 4K RED footage on one, for example. But a Mac Pro? There's nothing professional you can throw at it that it can't do.
Also, regarding the car metaphor: put your 400hp car up against a NASCAR or Formula 1 vehicle and see how well it does on the racetrack against other REAL professional cars.
The car is nice, I'm sure, but is not a vehicle doing professional high performance driving. The same is true of macbook pros. They're solid machines, but they are not professional performance machines.
Doctor Q
Nov 27, 02:03 PM
The advantage for Apple in having a 17" widescreen monitor would be that nobody (well, almost nobody in the market for a monitor) would be priced out of the choice to buy an Apple-branded one.
There will also be competing monitors at lower prices from other companies, but many people will opt to buy an Apple monitor to go with their Mac, from Mac mini to Mac Pro.
There will also be competing monitors at lower prices from other companies, but many people will opt to buy an Apple monitor to go with their Mac, from Mac mini to Mac Pro.
lorductape
Nov 27, 05:08 PM
I just hope they adjust their prices while they are at it. I love the Apple monitors but they are overpriced. Go to CompUSA and you can find at least 4-5 20" wide-screen monitors from $250-$399. At $699 they are way out or touch with the rest of the market. I could see paying a $100 premium at $499 but not $300.
I agree, however, you get what you pay for, as has been proven many times before by apple. how many other monitors of the pix. dimensions of the 30' are there on the market? the resolutions are amazing! also, I haven't seen many dvi's, it amazes me that most consumer monitors are still vga. price = quality when it comes to apple.
I agree, however, you get what you pay for, as has been proven many times before by apple. how many other monitors of the pix. dimensions of the 30' are there on the market? the resolutions are amazing! also, I haven't seen many dvi's, it amazes me that most consumer monitors are still vga. price = quality when it comes to apple.
Earendil
Nov 27, 09:49 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.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
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.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
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,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
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.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
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.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
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.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
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.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
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.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
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,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
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.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
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.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
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.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
hunkaburningluv
Mar 28, 06:28 AM
It is amazing how limited in vision some people are...
Seriously people stuck with this idea that the future of gaming is going to be non-portable systems with game controllers forever are going to be very disappointed in the future.
Ultimately gesture based movements and other mechanisms will be used for gaming, not a freaking glorified joystick. It is silly to believe otherwise.
Again people saying you couldn't play with a touchscreen device without looking at it have no imagination or understanding. Definately within two years you will be shown to be horribly wrong on this point.
You keep believing the future of gaming is going to remain in the hands of traditional 8 year console development cycles... It is not going to happen.
It would be like saying you can't play any real game on a console, you need a pc for it. I certainly can do much more in terms of controlling and playing a game on a computer than I can do with any console controller.
You really are deluded aren't you? You need to be REALISTIC about your expectations. You want to have a bet in this?
I'm calling BS right now - there will always be a place for pads/sticks/mouse/keyboard it gives a vastly better tactile experience than a touchscreen. Touch gaming will improve, I will agree, but the majority of core gamers won't be playing core games on the device.
Are you a gamer? Any gamer worth their salt is very much aware that the norm was a new gen every 5 years, not 8. But yeah, I'dsay we are probably looking at a 6/7 year cycle right now.
Anyhoo, I digress. I'm still calling BS. yeah, I'm sure mobile gaming will improve, but it' not going to replace consoles or PC's for core gamers.
I assume that's what you meant. Because we've seen touchscreen devices advance by leaps and bounds since June 2007. In two years' time it will very likely be an entirely new ballgame with such devices being a dominant force in tech, including gaming.
This little demo is just barely scratching the surface.
Really? Dominant as in more units out there or where it's a lead platform for development?
I mean, you could say that android has the mobile touch screen market zipped up, but we both know that's because there's so many different handset out there.... Yeah there will be a load out there, but it will never be the main cash cow for games developers - the money is in consoles and to a much lesser extent now, PC gaming.
You're sure about that? Considering the next Xbox isn't due for release till about 2015, and the PS4 probably later, and I'm pretty sure those systems will ship with controllers. The Kinect being an optional extra.
And I seriously doubt the iPad will could be seen as a serious competitor to Games Consoles and PC gaming, in the same way my calculator is a competitor to my iPhone because it performs a same function, better than my iPhone does.
you think? I suspect we'll see an announcement next year and a release in 2013 actually for the 360, the PS4 will probably be 2015. The 'WIIHD" or whatever it' called might be announced this year.........
Seriously people stuck with this idea that the future of gaming is going to be non-portable systems with game controllers forever are going to be very disappointed in the future.
Ultimately gesture based movements and other mechanisms will be used for gaming, not a freaking glorified joystick. It is silly to believe otherwise.
Again people saying you couldn't play with a touchscreen device without looking at it have no imagination or understanding. Definately within two years you will be shown to be horribly wrong on this point.
You keep believing the future of gaming is going to remain in the hands of traditional 8 year console development cycles... It is not going to happen.
It would be like saying you can't play any real game on a console, you need a pc for it. I certainly can do much more in terms of controlling and playing a game on a computer than I can do with any console controller.
You really are deluded aren't you? You need to be REALISTIC about your expectations. You want to have a bet in this?
I'm calling BS right now - there will always be a place for pads/sticks/mouse/keyboard it gives a vastly better tactile experience than a touchscreen. Touch gaming will improve, I will agree, but the majority of core gamers won't be playing core games on the device.
Are you a gamer? Any gamer worth their salt is very much aware that the norm was a new gen every 5 years, not 8. But yeah, I'dsay we are probably looking at a 6/7 year cycle right now.
Anyhoo, I digress. I'm still calling BS. yeah, I'm sure mobile gaming will improve, but it' not going to replace consoles or PC's for core gamers.
I assume that's what you meant. Because we've seen touchscreen devices advance by leaps and bounds since June 2007. In two years' time it will very likely be an entirely new ballgame with such devices being a dominant force in tech, including gaming.
This little demo is just barely scratching the surface.
Really? Dominant as in more units out there or where it's a lead platform for development?
I mean, you could say that android has the mobile touch screen market zipped up, but we both know that's because there's so many different handset out there.... Yeah there will be a load out there, but it will never be the main cash cow for games developers - the money is in consoles and to a much lesser extent now, PC gaming.
You're sure about that? Considering the next Xbox isn't due for release till about 2015, and the PS4 probably later, and I'm pretty sure those systems will ship with controllers. The Kinect being an optional extra.
And I seriously doubt the iPad will could be seen as a serious competitor to Games Consoles and PC gaming, in the same way my calculator is a competitor to my iPhone because it performs a same function, better than my iPhone does.
you think? I suspect we'll see an announcement next year and a release in 2013 actually for the 360, the PS4 will probably be 2015. The 'WIIHD" or whatever it' called might be announced this year.........
Hisdem
Jan 23, 10:54 PM
Im jealous, im regretting not getting a Subaru Legacy. I got a 2010 Ford Fusion, should have got the legacy for the good looks and the AWD.
I got a Fusion last year too, and if the Legacy was sold over here I would have had a tough choice! I would have ended up with the Legacy though for the looks. AWD is useless here, so really not a reason to get it. :o
I got a Fusion last year too, and if the Legacy was sold over here I would have had a tough choice! I would have ended up with the Legacy though for the looks. AWD is useless here, so really not a reason to get it. :o
dr Dunkel
Apr 20, 02:54 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; sv-se) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
2. HDMI out
Why would be ever see this on an iMac? Mac mini, yes (it was overdue). iMac, never.
HDMI-in would be nice :-)
2. HDMI out
Why would be ever see this on an iMac? Mac mini, yes (it was overdue). iMac, never.
HDMI-in would be nice :-)
bokdol
Aug 24, 11:15 PM
If you check CNET.com they acctually have a few... In about 15 minutes I can try to find some links for you, but if you want to do some quick searching yourself they have a few PC mini-like comps.
i was looking at dell and could not make one comparable.
thanks i'll check cnet
i was looking at dell and could not make one comparable.
thanks i'll check cnet
superleccy
Aug 24, 08:33 PM
To quote the Dictionary widget, Labor Day is "a public holiday or day of festivities held in honor of working people, in the U.S. and Canada on the first Monday in September, in many other countries on May 1."
Cheers!
Hurrah! All that and new Mac Minis too! Labor day is truly the finest of public holidays!
Thank you
SL
Cheers!
Hurrah! All that and new Mac Minis too! Labor day is truly the finest of public holidays!
Thank you
SL
daneoni
Nov 25, 12:03 AM
Couldn't care less about the movie to be honest, but to avoid being nagged as anti-social(i am)...
No comments:
Post a Comment