Earendil
Nov 27, 04:33 PM
I'd just like to agree with those who have pointed out that the main thing Apple's monitor division should be worrying about is price, not new sizes - the Apple logo can bear a certain price premium but not that much, especially as they don't yet include Apple-specific goodness such as integrated isight etc.
*smacks head on desk*
Beating a dead horse...
In October, I considered a 23" ACD at �848 inc. VAT, delivery and 3yrs of Applecare cover.
Instead, I phoned Dell and got the 24" 2407WP for �549.08 inc. VAT, delivery and 4yrs next business day swap-out cover. For the Apple, I would have had to pay a premium of 55% and got 1yr less cover.
Good for you.
Yeah Apple is really screwing us over, man oh man. And look at NEC, they must be absolutely mad to charge $2000 for their MultiSync LCD2190UXi (http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=10754) :rolleyes:
You made the right choice for your needs and your price. You bought a consumer monitor.
If people want to say that Apple should make a consumer level LCD (for cheap) than say so. But please, for the love of all things, stop dissing on Apple monitors just because you are happy with a Dell and they are cheaper. Many people are Happy with cheapo computers, and if all you need is to write and print word documents, do not buy an Apple computer. However that doesn't mean that Apple doesn't make a computer worth it's weight in gold... for those that need it.
If you don't need color accuracy, DO NOT BUY AN APPLE MONITOR, there are cheaper monitors that, though less accurate, will satisfy you just fine.
*smacks head on desk*
Beating a dead horse...
In October, I considered a 23" ACD at �848 inc. VAT, delivery and 3yrs of Applecare cover.
Instead, I phoned Dell and got the 24" 2407WP for �549.08 inc. VAT, delivery and 4yrs next business day swap-out cover. For the Apple, I would have had to pay a premium of 55% and got 1yr less cover.
Good for you.
Yeah Apple is really screwing us over, man oh man. And look at NEC, they must be absolutely mad to charge $2000 for their MultiSync LCD2190UXi (http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=10754) :rolleyes:
You made the right choice for your needs and your price. You bought a consumer monitor.
If people want to say that Apple should make a consumer level LCD (for cheap) than say so. But please, for the love of all things, stop dissing on Apple monitors just because you are happy with a Dell and they are cheaper. Many people are Happy with cheapo computers, and if all you need is to write and print word documents, do not buy an Apple computer. However that doesn't mean that Apple doesn't make a computer worth it's weight in gold... for those that need it.
If you don't need color accuracy, DO NOT BUY AN APPLE MONITOR, there are cheaper monitors that, though less accurate, will satisfy you just fine.
AppliedVisual
Oct 23, 11:11 AM
I've read that even the current MBP supports 4gigs.
Apple just doesn't offer it in their store since the CPU can only address around 3,2gigs (like every other 32bit cpu).
Unfortunately, the current MBP is restricted to about 3.2GB because of the 32bit CPU *AND* the 32bit i945 chipset. Intel won't have a 64bit mobile chipset until they ship Crestline (the i965 mobile chipset for Santa Rosa). So, unless Crestline is ready early and Apple has some sort of exclusive agreement, the updated MBP still will not allow anyone to use more than approximately 3.2GB of RAM.
In a 32bit system, the 32bit CPUs and/or chipsets can address a total memory capacity of 4GB. But this 4GB address window must account for all memory I/O addresses, BIOS/ROM as well as video memory in addition to the actual RAM heap. That is why when you install 4GB of RAM, you essentially miss out on the last 600 to 800 MB. Also why the C2D/Merom iMac systems can only be configured with up to 3GB of RAM. Apple probably figured they didn't need to sell people RAM that they can't use. Some PC vendors still sell 4GB installed into such systems even though it can't all be used because by installing two matched 2GB modules, the dual-channel performance benefits are there, just not the last 800MB.
Apple just doesn't offer it in their store since the CPU can only address around 3,2gigs (like every other 32bit cpu).
Unfortunately, the current MBP is restricted to about 3.2GB because of the 32bit CPU *AND* the 32bit i945 chipset. Intel won't have a 64bit mobile chipset until they ship Crestline (the i965 mobile chipset for Santa Rosa). So, unless Crestline is ready early and Apple has some sort of exclusive agreement, the updated MBP still will not allow anyone to use more than approximately 3.2GB of RAM.
In a 32bit system, the 32bit CPUs and/or chipsets can address a total memory capacity of 4GB. But this 4GB address window must account for all memory I/O addresses, BIOS/ROM as well as video memory in addition to the actual RAM heap. That is why when you install 4GB of RAM, you essentially miss out on the last 600 to 800 MB. Also why the C2D/Merom iMac systems can only be configured with up to 3GB of RAM. Apple probably figured they didn't need to sell people RAM that they can't use. Some PC vendors still sell 4GB installed into such systems even though it can't all be used because by installing two matched 2GB modules, the dual-channel performance benefits are there, just not the last 800MB.
Panther71
Oct 21, 04:38 PM
I just received my Proporta aluminum-lined leather case. I got it from Amazon for $29.95 with free shipping. It is exactly what I was looking for in a case that will protect the screen when I have my Ipod Touch in my pocket. It is a quality built case at a very good price for a leather case.
AppleDroid
Apr 19, 12:12 PM
Honestly with the new Quad Core MBP lineup it makes much more sense to get a monitor and add it to your notebook than to get an iMac. (Unless you really need 16GB of ram vs 8GB).
I can see one day only having the Mac Pro for those of use that need one (video editing, digital creation etc) and the high-powered MBP for those who don't want a tower.
desktops are slowly but surely dying out. Notebooks are becoming more and more powerful and even moreso portable so what will an iMac offer that MacBooks won't have? Larger screen?
I can see one day only having the Mac Pro for those of use that need one (video editing, digital creation etc) and the high-powered MBP for those who don't want a tower.
desktops are slowly but surely dying out. Notebooks are becoming more and more powerful and even moreso portable so what will an iMac offer that MacBooks won't have? Larger screen?
Galaxas0
Apr 2, 11:00 PM
In Safari, you can now change the width of a page by moving the cursor to the scrollbar and you see the little "adjust width" icon. Drag that and the width of the page decreases/increases toward the center.
angelneo
Jan 11, 02:06 AM
It seems like a couple of males trying to strut their feathers to impress mates...But I don't see any mates. I'm confused.
This had me burst out laughing at your implication of that statement...
This had me burst out laughing at your implication of that statement...
Trauma1
Apr 21, 04:56 PM
Why would Apple release an iMac refresh a couple of months before a new OS debuts?
Because they did it with Snow Leopard and the MacBook, MacBook Pro, and MacBook Air in the summer of 2009.
Because they did it with Snow Leopard and the MacBook, MacBook Pro, and MacBook Air in the summer of 2009.
Spoony
Apr 26, 02:33 PM
This has nothing to do with the current case.
If you read below i said it had nothing to do with the current case but made me think of it.
If you read below i said it had nothing to do with the current case but made me think of it.
boncellis
Sep 6, 09:34 AM
My first instinct was that Apple stuck with Yonah in the Mini because of something they're about to introduce next week. The "streaming video" device could very well fill the set-top box niche that the Mini does, only at a lower price for the same remote media functions.
I was wondering which way it would go--I guess it's still up in the air. Basically I just see this as a $200 price drop, which is always welcome.
I was wondering which way it would go--I guess it's still up in the air. Basically I just see this as a $200 price drop, which is always welcome.
danvdr
Oct 23, 11:12 PM
FWI Dell Just Lowered The List Of All Their Monitors � 30" $1279 24" $679 Right Now (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productlisting.aspx?c=us&category_id=6198&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs). We paid $1349 last week in a sale and now it's been trumped. New 30" list is only $1599 and 24" list is $799.
2007FP 20" 1600x1200 is now only $359.20 (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-4687). This is amazing.
And the E207WFP 20" monitor (which seems to be comparable to the 2007FP minus a few bells and whistles (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productcompare.aspx?c=us&category_id=6198&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&p=320-4688~320-5123~)) is only $289.
2007FP 20" 1600x1200 is now only $359.20 (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-4687). This is amazing.
And the E207WFP 20" monitor (which seems to be comparable to the 2007FP minus a few bells and whistles (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productcompare.aspx?c=us&category_id=6198&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&p=320-4688~320-5123~)) is only $289.
k8to
Sep 6, 04:00 PM
No EMT64, no biscuit.
I wonder if Apple will be able to ship a monitorless, affordable, quiet core 2 computer before a boutique vendor fills the gap. If so, no mac for me!
I wonder if Apple will be able to ship a monitorless, affordable, quiet core 2 computer before a boutique vendor fills the gap. If so, no mac for me!
iJimmy
Feb 8, 11:08 AM
http://gallery.me.com/jimmy.nguyen/100033/IMG_3605/web.jpg?ver=12965306720001
dreamsburnred
Mar 24, 11:04 PM
A refresh is expected soon...
DewGuy1999
Feb 22, 07:39 PM
I wish I could find a Mini DisplayPort to DVI cable, but those don't seem to exist.
MonoPrice.com> CABLES > Video Cables - DisplayPort > Mini DisplayPort to DVI Cables (http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10246&cs_id=1024604)
MonoPrice.com> CABLES > Video Cables - DisplayPort > Mini DisplayPort to DVI Cables (http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10246&cs_id=1024604)
Yaboze
Mar 22, 11:20 PM
I love my classic and would buy another in a heartbeat if something happened to this one.
I hope they keep it around. :apple:
I hope they keep it around. :apple:
Evangelion
Aug 29, 01:23 PM
The pricelist from Intel themselves (PDF). (http://www.intel.com/intel/finance/pricelist/processor_price_list.pdf)
Core 2 Duo: Merom pricing.
Yonah prices in normal font, Merom in bold
1.66 GHz - $209/ $209
1.83 GHz - $241/ $241
2 GHz - $294/$294 etc. etc.
They cost the same! Intel hasn't announced any price drops yet.
you can be certain that the price-difference is there. since merom and yonah are 1:1 compatible, why would anyone use yonah istead of merom? but since the two will be sold side-by-side, yonah obviously has some benefits that merom does not have. and that benefit is most likely price.
Core 2 Duo: Merom pricing.
Yonah prices in normal font, Merom in bold
1.66 GHz - $209/ $209
1.83 GHz - $241/ $241
2 GHz - $294/$294 etc. etc.
They cost the same! Intel hasn't announced any price drops yet.
you can be certain that the price-difference is there. since merom and yonah are 1:1 compatible, why would anyone use yonah istead of merom? but since the two will be sold side-by-side, yonah obviously has some benefits that merom does not have. and that benefit is most likely price.
Eolian
Mar 23, 02:31 PM
You still don't get it. It is having all your music with you. The choice to play anything you feel in the mood to hear , not that you play it all from start to finish.
Exactly ~ does one read every book in the library when they walk in?
The folks that don't understand the Classic, well, they don't understand the Classic :rolleyes:
Exactly ~ does one read every book in the library when they walk in?
The folks that don't understand the Classic, well, they don't understand the Classic :rolleyes:
Snowy_River
Nov 15, 07:08 PM
Im really looking forwards to this, if the 8-core 2.66 Macpro its going to cost just a little more than a quad 3ghz Macpro, im going to be buying as soon as it hits the website...
As a recent Mac switcher, coming straight in with a base spec macpro(4x2.66/4gb/1750gbHDD), im now happy to invest in a more powerful machine.
My only concern is the heat... my current Macpro runs 24/7 and 95% of the time is at full load across all 4 cores... and its still silent with temps never going over 52c... will these quad core chips run much hotter, meaning the front fans have to spin faster/noisier to keep the machine cool?
Given your current machine, you might consider just swapping in new CPUs. :)
As a recent Mac switcher, coming straight in with a base spec macpro(4x2.66/4gb/1750gbHDD), im now happy to invest in a more powerful machine.
My only concern is the heat... my current Macpro runs 24/7 and 95% of the time is at full load across all 4 cores... and its still silent with temps never going over 52c... will these quad core chips run much hotter, meaning the front fans have to spin faster/noisier to keep the machine cool?
Given your current machine, you might consider just swapping in new CPUs. :)
evilgEEk
Sep 8, 08:01 PM
Number of posts in this thread seem to indicate that this update has been underwhelming
Well, the update certainly wasn't jaw-dropping, it was just a normal product cycle update. So in comparison to the new CPU's in the iMac, oh, and the whole 24" screen business, the mini update kind of pales in comparison.
That said, I did buy one today from CompUSA! :D I was very surprised that they had them in already, they even got some of the new low end iMacs yesterday, no 24 inchers yet.
So now my office will be pleasantly furnished with a new Mac mini, wireless keyboard and Mighty Mouse. Everyone else in the building runs Windows (although a few have ACD's), but it shouldn't be too difficult to convert them once they see my little powerhouse of a mini. My boss was already blown away when I showed it to him, he called in three other people to look at it.
Fish in a barrel, my friends. ;)
Well, the update certainly wasn't jaw-dropping, it was just a normal product cycle update. So in comparison to the new CPU's in the iMac, oh, and the whole 24" screen business, the mini update kind of pales in comparison.
That said, I did buy one today from CompUSA! :D I was very surprised that they had them in already, they even got some of the new low end iMacs yesterday, no 24 inchers yet.
So now my office will be pleasantly furnished with a new Mac mini, wireless keyboard and Mighty Mouse. Everyone else in the building runs Windows (although a few have ACD's), but it shouldn't be too difficult to convert them once they see my little powerhouse of a mini. My boss was already blown away when I showed it to him, he called in three other people to look at it.
Fish in a barrel, my friends. ;)
FearNo1
Apr 23, 01:39 AM
Using your example, couldn't they do that with the GPS tech in most fones today simply by saving your location info in a server side database? I wouldn't put anything pass these companies and govt today.
If LTD wants an example other wise you can see companies start using these feature on the phones to track employees at all time and what they do. Or in court cases them being pulled it to use against one spouse in a mess divorce.
Spying on ones spouse is another example.
If LTD wants an example other wise you can see companies start using these feature on the phones to track employees at all time and what they do. Or in court cases them being pulled it to use against one spouse in a mess divorce.
Spying on ones spouse is another example.
alust2013
Apr 10, 05:40 PM
Actually, you're wrong on both premise. On crowded roads, manuals are better. No need to constantly hit the brakes, you can better control a car's speed with a manual with compression and clutch manipulation. In traffic, I hardly ever touch the brakes.
While this is true, stop and go traffic is rough on the left leg/knee. I drove through an hour's worth of a heavy traffic jam, and I would have been perfectly ok with using the brakes instead.
While this is true, stop and go traffic is rough on the left leg/knee. I drove through an hour's worth of a heavy traffic jam, and I would have been perfectly ok with using the brakes instead.
guez
Aug 29, 11:04 AM
This is exactly what I predicted would happen when Apple went Intel. Now that Macs can be compared component for component with Wintel machines and new hardware is coming out every month, everyone is worked up about keeping up with latest thing at the best possible price and getting increasingly frustrated with Apple's unwillingness to create a product line with 10000 different machines that each compete with dollar for dollar and component for component with every other machine on the market. Meanwhile, we have people talking about $299 machines with DVD burners (AND Windows? I'd like to see THAT!).
If you're so concerned about keeping up with the Jones, just buy a Dell, already.
If you're so concerned about keeping up with the Jones, just buy a Dell, already.
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 03:07 PM
I'm not talking about using a discrete GPU, but about what you can do with just the CPU (or should I call it "APU"?).
Once again, Sandy Bridge will smoke the Llano CPU. The amount of applications that currently support OpenCL are slim to none. You can keep using your theoretical AMD video to somehow prove something but the fact remains: Sandy Bridge's CPU will outperform AMD's Llano in EVERY application that isn't supported for OpenCL, and it will outperform it in EVERY application that does have OpenCL support if you have a discrete GPU. End of story. Saying that Sandy Bridge is a 'bad purchase' is laughable at best when we haven't even seen any hard benchmarks for Llano, all we've seen a video from AMD's own YouTube channel. What the hell do you expect them to upload? Them getting destroyed by Intel like they do in every other test that has been done since 2006?
Once again, Sandy Bridge will smoke the Llano CPU. The amount of applications that currently support OpenCL are slim to none. You can keep using your theoretical AMD video to somehow prove something but the fact remains: Sandy Bridge's CPU will outperform AMD's Llano in EVERY application that isn't supported for OpenCL, and it will outperform it in EVERY application that does have OpenCL support if you have a discrete GPU. End of story. Saying that Sandy Bridge is a 'bad purchase' is laughable at best when we haven't even seen any hard benchmarks for Llano, all we've seen a video from AMD's own YouTube channel. What the hell do you expect them to upload? Them getting destroyed by Intel like they do in every other test that has been done since 2006?
DMann
Jan 13, 01:56 PM
I could go a MacBook Xenon (quad core) ;)
hot, Hot, HOT!!!!
hot, Hot, HOT!!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment