calderone
Apr 3, 08:17 PM
I'm sorry, but either you shouldn't be in FS mode in the first place or you must be absurd to think it's not easy to have to move your mouse all the way to the top in order to reveal the address bar.
I actually hate FS mode. But I dont see much sense in hiding the address bar, an often used feature of a browser.
I personally us shortcuts to interact with the address bar, I don't want a delay in my interaction if it is hidden.
It doesn't matter though, I hate FS mode and I am absurd.
I actually hate FS mode. But I dont see much sense in hiding the address bar, an often used feature of a browser.
I personally us shortcuts to interact with the address bar, I don't want a delay in my interaction if it is hidden.
It doesn't matter though, I hate FS mode and I am absurd.
toddybody
Apr 19, 02:15 PM
Seriously?! How long have you been waiting? Since last refresh?
Keep dreaming. They couldn't even get a Radeon HD 5770, let alone a 5850. The best that could be done was a 5750 in the 27", and while it's not a terrible GPU, it's certainly nowhere near pro-level.
Lulz to that. It's not like those things weren't key to the Early 2011 MacBook Pros being as critically acclaimed as they are now.
No. While Mac mini updates could be right around the corner, the two are on different release timelines and aren't always released at the same time. Essentially, it's irrelevant.
If the 5750 was the best that we got on the highest end model of current, then I'd be shocked if we got anything past 6770. We're definitely not getting cards that use up as much power as the iMac itself or require a second six-pin connector in the Desktop PCIe equivalent.
Since July 2010; not even a full year really.
Sure, but that doesn't mean it'll ever happen.
How many of those machines have you seen naked? As in, without the glass or panel with bare innards in full view? My guess is not very many. They don't have the room to engineer a better video card in the 27". It's almost a wonder they even have the room for something like the Radeon HD 5750 in what they have now. It's not like they took the design of the 21.5", gave it a larger chasis and screen and suddenly had more room to play with. Even so, as it stands, both sizes of iMac get extraordinarily hot. Sure, the 5750 in the Mid-2010 27" model draws less heat than the 4850 in the Late-2009 27" model, but that difference is negligible and even with a 6 series GPU's improvement, I doubt the difference will be substantial enough to warrant THAT much more power relative to the 6 series' lineup.
So, no, they couldn't engineer THAT much better of a card if they wanted. Not without making the iMac thicker than it already is. But it's Apple, they never do.
%IMG_DESC_3%
%IMG_DESC_4%
%IMG_DESC_5%
%IMG_DESC_6%
%IMG_DESC_7%
%IMG_DESC_8%
%IMG_DESC_9%
%IMG_DESC_10%
%IMG_DESC_11%
%IMG_DESC_12%
%IMG_DESC_13%
%IMG_DESC_14%
%IMG_DESC_15%
%IMG_DESC_16%
%IMG_DESC_17%
%IMG_DESC_18%
%IMG_DESC_19%
Keep dreaming. They couldn't even get a Radeon HD 5770, let alone a 5850. The best that could be done was a 5750 in the 27", and while it's not a terrible GPU, it's certainly nowhere near pro-level.
Lulz to that. It's not like those things weren't key to the Early 2011 MacBook Pros being as critically acclaimed as they are now.
No. While Mac mini updates could be right around the corner, the two are on different release timelines and aren't always released at the same time. Essentially, it's irrelevant.
If the 5750 was the best that we got on the highest end model of current, then I'd be shocked if we got anything past 6770. We're definitely not getting cards that use up as much power as the iMac itself or require a second six-pin connector in the Desktop PCIe equivalent.
Since July 2010; not even a full year really.
Sure, but that doesn't mean it'll ever happen.
How many of those machines have you seen naked? As in, without the glass or panel with bare innards in full view? My guess is not very many. They don't have the room to engineer a better video card in the 27". It's almost a wonder they even have the room for something like the Radeon HD 5750 in what they have now. It's not like they took the design of the 21.5", gave it a larger chasis and screen and suddenly had more room to play with. Even so, as it stands, both sizes of iMac get extraordinarily hot. Sure, the 5750 in the Mid-2010 27" model draws less heat than the 4850 in the Late-2009 27" model, but that difference is negligible and even with a 6 series GPU's improvement, I doubt the difference will be substantial enough to warrant THAT much more power relative to the 6 series' lineup.
So, no, they couldn't engineer THAT much better of a card if they wanted. Not without making the iMac thicker than it already is. But it's Apple, they never do.
Surely
Nov 25, 10:50 AM
Any Army surplus store will carry it.
Or, you can check the image url, see that it's an image from Amazon, search Amazon for "messenger bag", and it will be the first search result.
:D
Or, you can check the image url, see that it's an image from Amazon, search Amazon for "messenger bag", and it will be the first search result.
:D
DrFrankTM
Aug 25, 09:23 AM
am I right in thinking that there is still no way to do extended desktop (two monitors displaying different stuff) on a Mini?
Hmmm... To cook an extended desktop on a Mini (sort of), you need:
1-) A Mac Mini
2-) An old Mac with a screen - mine is an old iBook G3
3-) A router
4-) Synergy
5-) Some kind of script - Automator does the job - to turn Synergy into a start-up item on both computers
Ok, it obviously doesn't give you two screens on your Mini, but you can cut and paste between screens, and use only one keyboard and mouse to control both, which is pretty sweet. Personally, I use my Mini for any kind of heavy workloads and the iBook for the small stuff. The lack of extended desktop was almost a show-stopper for me but, in the end, Synergy provides me with all the screen space I need. If you really need more than that though, maybe the Mini isn't the right machine.
EDIT: For example, I run Skype on my iBook. There is no difference whatsoever to me whether it is on my iBook or my Mini. You can use the secondary screen for a bunch of apps like those that do not really need to run on your Mini.
Hmmm... To cook an extended desktop on a Mini (sort of), you need:
1-) A Mac Mini
2-) An old Mac with a screen - mine is an old iBook G3
3-) A router
4-) Synergy
5-) Some kind of script - Automator does the job - to turn Synergy into a start-up item on both computers
Ok, it obviously doesn't give you two screens on your Mini, but you can cut and paste between screens, and use only one keyboard and mouse to control both, which is pretty sweet. Personally, I use my Mini for any kind of heavy workloads and the iBook for the small stuff. The lack of extended desktop was almost a show-stopper for me but, in the end, Synergy provides me with all the screen space I need. If you really need more than that though, maybe the Mini isn't the right machine.
EDIT: For example, I run Skype on my iBook. There is no difference whatsoever to me whether it is on my iBook or my Mini. You can use the secondary screen for a bunch of apps like those that do not really need to run on your Mini.
eddietr
Jan 11, 09:44 PM
Seeing how many people complained about the new keyboards, a touch keyboard would generate even more flamed passions...
True.
But I actually loved the keyboard when I used it. So much so that I bought one for my MP.
True.
But I actually loved the keyboard when I used it. So much so that I bought one for my MP.
CIA
Apr 12, 08:34 PM
Supposedly the guy behind this new version is also the criminal that destroyed iMovie a few years back. God I hope FC8 isn't ANYTHING like iMovie. Old editors are too set in our ways to switch over to a iMovie/Sony Vegas style of editing. I need a preview window, and a Timeline Window. Just like when I edited on tape.
Thanks.
(AlsoPleaseAdd64Bit,dedicatedBackgroundTimeLineRenderingOnUserDefined#ofCores&fasterCodecExports..kkthxbye)
Thanks.
(AlsoPleaseAdd64Bit,dedicatedBackgroundTimeLineRenderingOnUserDefined#ofCores&fasterCodecExports..kkthxbye)
RichP
Jan 1, 05:53 PM
Wow, only a week away...
nice post BlueVelvet Ive read it before, but it is always applicable
Here's hoping there is something completely new or unexpected released!
nice post BlueVelvet Ive read it before, but it is always applicable
Here's hoping there is something completely new or unexpected released!
Porco
Apr 19, 04:55 PM
I've been putting a family member off buying an iMac for months in order to wait for the new ones, I hope the updates are very soon.
ericinboston
Apr 26, 12:51 PM
"Amazon" is a generic term and should not be used for a store name.
Amazon is not a generic term. It is, however, the name of a single river on planet Earth...among a few other names/uses ("the Amazon", "Amazon basin", "Amazon Women").
Where else have you seen/heard the term Amazon in a generic sense? Some examples of a generic term are (at least have been generic over the past 75+ years):
light bulb
door
wood
lock
Amazon is not a generic term. It is, however, the name of a single river on planet Earth...among a few other names/uses ("the Amazon", "Amazon basin", "Amazon Women").
Where else have you seen/heard the term Amazon in a generic sense? Some examples of a generic term are (at least have been generic over the past 75+ years):
light bulb
door
wood
lock
syklee26
Sep 1, 01:13 PM
these prices seem a lot more like what I was thinking. Wishful? maybe, but this would be aggressive pricing, not keeping the current 17" and 20" where they are and throwing the 23" way over their marks.
iMac is already wildly popular. they have no reason for aggressive pricing.
iMac is already wildly popular. they have no reason for aggressive pricing.
noservice2001
Oct 23, 07:15 AM
o please red!!!
res1233
Apr 12, 09:54 PM
Because pros don't need features to make their life easier, and help automatically organise footage?
Exactly. Apple's philosophy with all their software is to make it powerful, yet simple so that you don't have to be a pro to figure out how to use it, at least the basics. You can use Mac OS X without ever touching the terminal or using Applescript, but if you're an advanced user, you have a ton of features available to you, should you chose to take advantage of them. I think that's the direction FCP has gone with this version.
Exactly. Apple's philosophy with all their software is to make it powerful, yet simple so that you don't have to be a pro to figure out how to use it, at least the basics. You can use Mac OS X without ever touching the terminal or using Applescript, but if you're an advanced user, you have a ton of features available to you, should you chose to take advantage of them. I think that's the direction FCP has gone with this version.
63dot
Jan 5, 09:05 PM
The MB W201 (1982-1993) was a brilliant small sedan, and you can still find them on the road today. Like any other German car, if you maintain it properly, it will run forever.
German, English, and Italian cars right out of the dealership are the coolest, best performing, best designed machines out there. And yes, they all need proper care.
It just that there are cars like cockroaches (not too expensive like a Carrera or Lambo and in no way as sexy) but they don't die, even when they are abused. Toyota pickups, Honda Accords (stock, not riced), and Volvos of old don't win style points, but they have the longevity that is legendary.
One of the coolest cars out there are most Jaguars from the 1970s until now, but I can't think of a car that breaks down more often, or is never seen in public if more than ten years old. There is no excuse for that. It's much more acceptable when a ten year old Yugo is not out on the road (when they hit that age back in the past) because they were very inexpensive. But at the same time period, dumping $25K or more into an XJ only to spend thousands more on repair on a car you would have to eventually sell is not acceptable.
A lawyer friend of mine got divorced and had to get rid of a car. She lived in a small, rented house and had no use for two cars. She was down to a rather new Honda Accord or a nice metallic green Jaguar 12 cylinder. She kept the Jag and dumped the Accord, which she got for top dollar. A few years later, she dumped the Jag. Not only was there the typical Jag problems that plague the maker, but the sun (near the ocean) did a job on the metallic green paintjob as it does to all metallic green paint jobs.
German, English, and Italian cars right out of the dealership are the coolest, best performing, best designed machines out there. And yes, they all need proper care.
It just that there are cars like cockroaches (not too expensive like a Carrera or Lambo and in no way as sexy) but they don't die, even when they are abused. Toyota pickups, Honda Accords (stock, not riced), and Volvos of old don't win style points, but they have the longevity that is legendary.
One of the coolest cars out there are most Jaguars from the 1970s until now, but I can't think of a car that breaks down more often, or is never seen in public if more than ten years old. There is no excuse for that. It's much more acceptable when a ten year old Yugo is not out on the road (when they hit that age back in the past) because they were very inexpensive. But at the same time period, dumping $25K or more into an XJ only to spend thousands more on repair on a car you would have to eventually sell is not acceptable.
A lawyer friend of mine got divorced and had to get rid of a car. She lived in a small, rented house and had no use for two cars. She was down to a rather new Honda Accord or a nice metallic green Jaguar 12 cylinder. She kept the Jag and dumped the Accord, which she got for top dollar. A few years later, she dumped the Jag. Not only was there the typical Jag problems that plague the maker, but the sun (near the ocean) did a job on the metallic green paintjob as it does to all metallic green paint jobs.
Peace
Jan 12, 01:39 PM
I've taken trips before where I used the superdrive to burn stuff to.
kntgsp
Sep 14, 10:46 AM
The way CR seems to approach it (and I might have to reread their article that they keep changing and updating and reaffirming and I lost interest a while ago) is as if they approached a computer review like this:
"The aluminum Macbook can survive a 3 foot fall and still function. The aluminum Macbook will not melt on the stove."
"The plastic Toshiba can survive a 2.8 foot fall and still function. The plastic Toshiba will melt on the stove."
They then give excess weight to the latter statements about each laptop despite it not really being a normal use scenario and declare the Toshiba not recommendable. So what's the point? Is "not melting on a stove" an advantage? Sure. Is there a reason you should have a computer on a stove? No.
It seems like it's more fair to stress the importance of the initial normal use results than the secondary observations that have nothing to do with everyday usage and are not representative of what people will be doing with the device.
Of course that kind of reasoning is often met with "you can't tell a user how they should use a device". I agree, you can't. However when you label something not recommendable based essentially entirely on the extra -3dB attenuation (compared to my Galaxy S) and the fact that if you place the device on a flat surface and bridge the antenna with your finger you get the same extra -3dB attenuation, I fail to see the credible argument.
/yes I realize the pinky finger attenuation while laying a phone on a table is not destructive like cooking a laptop is. They are both about as relevant to everyday usage in my opinion.
"The aluminum Macbook can survive a 3 foot fall and still function. The aluminum Macbook will not melt on the stove."
"The plastic Toshiba can survive a 2.8 foot fall and still function. The plastic Toshiba will melt on the stove."
They then give excess weight to the latter statements about each laptop despite it not really being a normal use scenario and declare the Toshiba not recommendable. So what's the point? Is "not melting on a stove" an advantage? Sure. Is there a reason you should have a computer on a stove? No.
It seems like it's more fair to stress the importance of the initial normal use results than the secondary observations that have nothing to do with everyday usage and are not representative of what people will be doing with the device.
Of course that kind of reasoning is often met with "you can't tell a user how they should use a device". I agree, you can't. However when you label something not recommendable based essentially entirely on the extra -3dB attenuation (compared to my Galaxy S) and the fact that if you place the device on a flat surface and bridge the antenna with your finger you get the same extra -3dB attenuation, I fail to see the credible argument.
/yes I realize the pinky finger attenuation while laying a phone on a table is not destructive like cooking a laptop is. They are both about as relevant to everyday usage in my opinion.
twoodcc
Jan 23, 12:46 AM
congrats to zim for 4 million points!
lordonuthin
Apr 14, 06:26 PM
So I should put the -bigadv into my i7, it's not a great i7 I think its at 1.66ghz and in a laptop. Should I risk it? How can I maximise the PPD from my i7 as its only doing like 1-2k a day I think.
1.66 Ghz and a laptop isn't going to make it for bigadv units they need to be completed within about 3-4 days to make it worthwhile and I doubt your machine would make that time frame. An overclocked i7 920 at about 3-4? Ghz will work. My i7 920 is not overclocked so I don't do bigadv units on it and it also is running 3 gpu's so it has some overhead from them.
1.66 Ghz and a laptop isn't going to make it for bigadv units they need to be completed within about 3-4 days to make it worthwhile and I doubt your machine would make that time frame. An overclocked i7 920 at about 3-4? Ghz will work. My i7 920 is not overclocked so I don't do bigadv units on it and it also is running 3 gpu's so it has some overhead from them.
Object-X
Nov 28, 04:48 PM
PS, that isn't hard :rolleyes:
I just noticed that you are the same person I just (imho) shredded in two different posts above. Care to make a stand against anything I said as a direct response to your points? Or are you just gonna feed off someone else and reiterate yourself again?
I don't have time to answer your lengthy response point for point at the moment, maybe later tonight.
So, since my subjective opinion means nothing to you, I offer the following reveiw for your consideration from AnandTech. They compare the Apple and Dell 20" monitors. The link is the last page which has the conclusions, you can read the whole thing if you like.
The short of it is, in their technical opinion the Dell is better than the Apple. What's that? A "consumer" monitor is better than a "pro" monitor? Say it ain't so.
http://www.anandtech.com/displays/showdoc.aspx?i=2400&p=11
So, I'll stick to my guns and say the Apple 20" monitor isn't worth the price they are asking, and they are keeping it high it to encourage iMac purchases over a mini/cinema combo. It's only an opinion. I don't mean to come off like I know more than I do. My opinion is based only on my experiance with both monitors and my own decison making process based on price and budget. Since we can't see the actual sales numbers there is no way to prove/disprove anything.
Oh, and the Dell was purchased for me by my work, the Apple by me for my home.
And just a funny aside. The Dell was stolen a few months ago by theives who broke into our offices. They took our Dell monitors and a Dell Precision workstation but left my $2000 Powermac G5 the Dell monitor was plugged into. Go figure. :rolleyes:
I got a 23" cinema to replace the Dell.
I just noticed that you are the same person I just (imho) shredded in two different posts above. Care to make a stand against anything I said as a direct response to your points? Or are you just gonna feed off someone else and reiterate yourself again?
I don't have time to answer your lengthy response point for point at the moment, maybe later tonight.
So, since my subjective opinion means nothing to you, I offer the following reveiw for your consideration from AnandTech. They compare the Apple and Dell 20" monitors. The link is the last page which has the conclusions, you can read the whole thing if you like.
The short of it is, in their technical opinion the Dell is better than the Apple. What's that? A "consumer" monitor is better than a "pro" monitor? Say it ain't so.
http://www.anandtech.com/displays/showdoc.aspx?i=2400&p=11
So, I'll stick to my guns and say the Apple 20" monitor isn't worth the price they are asking, and they are keeping it high it to encourage iMac purchases over a mini/cinema combo. It's only an opinion. I don't mean to come off like I know more than I do. My opinion is based only on my experiance with both monitors and my own decison making process based on price and budget. Since we can't see the actual sales numbers there is no way to prove/disprove anything.
Oh, and the Dell was purchased for me by my work, the Apple by me for my home.
And just a funny aside. The Dell was stolen a few months ago by theives who broke into our offices. They took our Dell monitors and a Dell Precision workstation but left my $2000 Powermac G5 the Dell monitor was plugged into. Go figure. :rolleyes:
I got a 23" cinema to replace the Dell.
LeeTom
Mar 22, 04:11 PM
October 23rd, 2011 is the iPod's 10th birthday. I bet they will release a version this fall to commemorate it, if not a special edition of some kind. Maybe they'll let Jony do what he did with the 20th anniversary macintosh and make an $8,000 iPod with an OLED display and graphine processor just because they can.
63dot
Jan 6, 10:13 AM
If properly maintained, mileage holds no bounds! BMW's will go to 250k easy.
Any car will go 250K miles if properly maintained, yet some cars would need more proper maintenance.
There is nothing better looking on the inside and out as the new BMWs, and if I could have a company car for 5 years, it would be a BMW. But today's BMW (engine longevity wise) is not the same company in any way as the one who put together the very rugged 2002 model. There may not have been the same attention to looks and style, but what counted was that the engine was made to last forever. You wouldn't believe how many of those rusted out and ripped up 2002s there are out there, but they keep on going. Kids get them from their parents and soon grandkids will have them from their grandparents.
That being said, today's automobile safety standards are far more strict. If I got hit, or crashed, I would want to be in a new BMW with airbags vs. an old BMW 2002. And I am sure the new BMW could simply kill the 2002 on a slalom course. And as far as chick magnets (or what some guys use as an accessory), the new BMWs have all the looks going for it.
The maintenance on indestructible cars like the BMW 2002 series, and cars like my 70s/80s Volvo DL-GL series amounts to making sure the upholstery is not too ripped up and the rust is kept to a minimum (bondo, sanding, etc) but what you have is a car, as ugly as the weather and age can pit the hell out of it, which will go for 40 or 50 years without any major engine work. And to be fair, my mechanic says the new Volvo engines of the last decade are pretty fragile. A three year old Volvo engine appears to have more wear than my '84's engine according to him. Of course, the sheer durability and weight of my old Volvo engine does amount to a heavier car that doesn't handle any better than a school bus, and gets terrible mileage. ;)
And when you look at where American cars used to be in terms of reliability compared to anything post 1970s, it's sad. Take a look at Cuba who got left behind after Fidel Castro. Many of the cars people have that are still running are 1950s American cars, back when America used to build everlasting cars.
Any car will go 250K miles if properly maintained, yet some cars would need more proper maintenance.
There is nothing better looking on the inside and out as the new BMWs, and if I could have a company car for 5 years, it would be a BMW. But today's BMW (engine longevity wise) is not the same company in any way as the one who put together the very rugged 2002 model. There may not have been the same attention to looks and style, but what counted was that the engine was made to last forever. You wouldn't believe how many of those rusted out and ripped up 2002s there are out there, but they keep on going. Kids get them from their parents and soon grandkids will have them from their grandparents.
That being said, today's automobile safety standards are far more strict. If I got hit, or crashed, I would want to be in a new BMW with airbags vs. an old BMW 2002. And I am sure the new BMW could simply kill the 2002 on a slalom course. And as far as chick magnets (or what some guys use as an accessory), the new BMWs have all the looks going for it.
The maintenance on indestructible cars like the BMW 2002 series, and cars like my 70s/80s Volvo DL-GL series amounts to making sure the upholstery is not too ripped up and the rust is kept to a minimum (bondo, sanding, etc) but what you have is a car, as ugly as the weather and age can pit the hell out of it, which will go for 40 or 50 years without any major engine work. And to be fair, my mechanic says the new Volvo engines of the last decade are pretty fragile. A three year old Volvo engine appears to have more wear than my '84's engine according to him. Of course, the sheer durability and weight of my old Volvo engine does amount to a heavier car that doesn't handle any better than a school bus, and gets terrible mileage. ;)
And when you look at where American cars used to be in terms of reliability compared to anything post 1970s, it's sad. Take a look at Cuba who got left behind after Fidel Castro. Many of the cars people have that are still running are 1950s American cars, back when America used to build everlasting cars.
rasmasyean
Apr 4, 05:07 PM
Well...at least someone from MSNBC agrees with me. :p
In Libya, West showcases new weapons for sale
Potential buyers from India to Brazil get to see Europe, US jets in action http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42420553/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/
I woulda thought the Middle East is most interested, but I suppose any emerging markets is fair game! :D
In Libya, West showcases new weapons for sale
Potential buyers from India to Brazil get to see Europe, US jets in action http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42420553/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/
I woulda thought the Middle East is most interested, but I suppose any emerging markets is fair game! :D
theBB
Jul 18, 12:18 PM
You cannot rent an HD movie from Blockbuster or Netflix, so what makes you think "Apple has to offer HD quality". There is no need to have better quality than competitors while also providing more convenience.
What is so wrong about stereo sound? A lot of people use the speakers of their TVs for the sound of a movie. Most movie do not really take advantage of sourround sound that much, where you feel like the sound is coming from the left or from behind etc. You might as well use your 5 speakers in stereo mode.
$2 per rental ain't gonna happen. That's a pipedream. If movie indutry is licensing movies to Movielink for $4-5, it is not gonna let Apple do this for much lower prices. At that price it would be much more expensive than Netflix and with a much smaller library, so my subscription will have to stay. I can only use Apple's service as an add-on, when I really want to watch a movie, but Netflix DVD is still in the mail. Besides, I would have to get a Mac mini for the living room. Well, the cost just keeps adding up.
What is so wrong about stereo sound? A lot of people use the speakers of their TVs for the sound of a movie. Most movie do not really take advantage of sourround sound that much, where you feel like the sound is coming from the left or from behind etc. You might as well use your 5 speakers in stereo mode.
$2 per rental ain't gonna happen. That's a pipedream. If movie indutry is licensing movies to Movielink for $4-5, it is not gonna let Apple do this for much lower prices. At that price it would be much more expensive than Netflix and with a much smaller library, so my subscription will have to stay. I can only use Apple's service as an add-on, when I really want to watch a movie, but Netflix DVD is still in the mail. Besides, I would have to get a Mac mini for the living room. Well, the cost just keeps adding up.
jav6454
Mar 24, 03:39 PM
Can anyone explain the nVidia hate?
Because they suck, and have put up subpar product offerings. Also, those products need a NUCLEAR REACTOR to power and burn houses quicker than gas does.
Because they suck, and have put up subpar product offerings. Also, those products need a NUCLEAR REACTOR to power and burn houses quicker than gas does.
dr Dunkel
Mar 24, 04:32 PM
I'll likely build a Hackintosh so as to prevent this problem in the future. That is unless Apple finally sells computers that can be repaired for less then the price of a new computer.
Why make such a computer when money so easily can be made selling you a new one... generally speaking, that is :D
But I agree, :apple: really should build a computer for the consumers that actually knows something about computers and are interested in the area. But I guess that would be bad business, as it would be impossible to sell parts att 200% of the normal price if that box could be opened by the user.
Why make such a computer when money so easily can be made selling you a new one... generally speaking, that is :D
But I agree, :apple: really should build a computer for the consumers that actually knows something about computers and are interested in the area. But I guess that would be bad business, as it would be impossible to sell parts att 200% of the normal price if that box could be opened by the user.
No comments:
Post a Comment