Unspeaked
Sep 1, 02:05 PM
How big and small an iMac would consumers actually want? 50"? 10"?
Will we eventually see an ad with Verne Troyer and Yao Ming working side-by-side on their big and small desktop Macintoshes?
I'd take a 72" iMac.
Like some said earlier, anything above 23"s would be prfect as a TV replacement.
You have the remote, the wi-fi, the DVD (possibly Blu Ray) player - who wouldn't want a 72" LCD TV that does all THAT and can also be used as a computer??
Will we eventually see an ad with Verne Troyer and Yao Ming working side-by-side on their big and small desktop Macintoshes?
I'd take a 72" iMac.
Like some said earlier, anything above 23"s would be prfect as a TV replacement.
You have the remote, the wi-fi, the DVD (possibly Blu Ray) player - who wouldn't want a 72" LCD TV that does all THAT and can also be used as a computer??
zeroh3ro
Feb 28, 12:27 AM
Finishing my graphic design degree this May. The large intuos might get replaced by a cintiq very soon.
What bag is that your using?
What bag is that your using?
aquajet
Sep 6, 09:17 AM
These new Mac Mini's don't seem like a great deal anymore. I think it was done on purpose to get people to upscale to a higher model.
I think the $599 model, now with the core duo of course, is a good deal. I can't really say the same thing about the $799 model.
Although, a refurb core solo can now be had for $479. :)
I think the $599 model, now with the core duo of course, is a good deal. I can't really say the same thing about the $799 model.
Although, a refurb core solo can now be had for $479. :)
stoid
Mar 18, 09:37 AM
People have been hollering for a cheaper Mac every since there has been Macintosh. You must realize that Apple, unlike most computer companies, is in the business of creating quality products. Were Apple to release a cheap Mac it would shatter Apple's reputation of making slick quality products that are a joy to own. If you want a cheap pile of crap computer that you'll have to throw away in a year, go buy Dell of whatever. That's not Apple's target market.
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.
MacBoobsPro
Aug 7, 04:41 AM
Keynote is 6pm for us in the UK.
Since I started reading this thread, it's gone from 5 pages to 7! :eek: :eek: :eek:
I can't WAIT!!!! How long does it take Apple to get the videos up on their homepage, and what kind of videos are they? My broadband aint too quick, so it often stutters when playing back larger videos...
Its usually streamed at about 640x480 a few hours after. Im on 4mb line and it still stutters occasionally. Apple..com and store usually is updated by about 11pm. Get your credit cards ready!
Since I started reading this thread, it's gone from 5 pages to 7! :eek: :eek: :eek:
I can't WAIT!!!! How long does it take Apple to get the videos up on their homepage, and what kind of videos are they? My broadband aint too quick, so it often stutters when playing back larger videos...
Its usually streamed at about 640x480 a few hours after. Im on 4mb line and it still stutters occasionally. Apple..com and store usually is updated by about 11pm. Get your credit cards ready!
ngenerator
Sep 14, 08:57 AM
This story gets buried in the blog and a story of ninja stars makes page one? No Apple bias here. :rolleyes:
I lol'ed, how is this not a larger story? Wth is going on today?!?
I lol'ed, how is this not a larger story? Wth is going on today?!?
iJohnHenry
Mar 19, 05:23 PM
No, and I just googled it and it appears to be just a product review site?
To what are you referring?
Sorry, failed to include a :rolleyes: , and just happened to hit on something that actually exists.
I could have easily used LoseFaceBook, but I thought the other rolled off the tongue better. :o
To what are you referring?
Sorry, failed to include a :rolleyes: , and just happened to hit on something that actually exists.
I could have easily used LoseFaceBook, but I thought the other rolled off the tongue better. :o
andrewbecks
Apr 19, 11:38 PM
While technically correct, you should provide context.
While SSDs DO have a finite number of write available, an SSD that's 256 GB (a modest drive size) with 10,000 writes = 2,560,000 GB of writing capacity (or 2.56 * 10^6 ;))
That means you could write 100 GB of data PER DAY for slightly over 70 YEARS!
Feel free to be amazed. :D
That is amazing. Thanks for putting that whole issue into context. I imagine that, all things considered, some SSDs might even last longer than traditional hard drives. How if we can just bring the price down! :-)
While SSDs DO have a finite number of write available, an SSD that's 256 GB (a modest drive size) with 10,000 writes = 2,560,000 GB of writing capacity (or 2.56 * 10^6 ;))
That means you could write 100 GB of data PER DAY for slightly over 70 YEARS!
Feel free to be amazed. :D
That is amazing. Thanks for putting that whole issue into context. I imagine that, all things considered, some SSDs might even last longer than traditional hard drives. How if we can just bring the price down! :-)
spyd4r
Oct 23, 09:19 PM
I have been patiently waiting for the new macbook pro just as long as the rest of you, but i have had it, they are like 1.5 - 2 months behind their competitors now.. I am just about ready to drop the money and upgrade my PC desktop instead...they betttter hurrry! ;)
prady16
Oct 23, 08:12 AM
I hope to have it order Tuesday and delivered by the end of the week?
Any chance?
I highly doubt it!
Any chance?
I highly doubt it!
JackSYi
Jul 13, 11:03 PM
I bet it will be BTO when it is introduced at WWDC.
Yakuza
Nov 26, 04:50 AM
Hei
Capuccino from the auto vending machine from work. 0.19$cents
Capuccino from the auto vending machine from work. 0.19$cents
turbineseaplane
Jun 22, 02:55 PM
My goodness...
I'm just hoping Apple continues to make a few machines that can do actual design and coding work.
A touchscreen iPad, iPhone or touchscreen "anything" really doesn't work for that.
Some of us love Apple gear but actually want to get some efficient and creative work done.
Note to Apple: Not every device has to be a whiz-bang, wow 'em at Best Buy, touchscreen device with more reflection than a mirror and finger smudges all over it.
Speaking of which...The Mac Pro ever getting updated again Apple?
I'm just hoping Apple continues to make a few machines that can do actual design and coding work.
A touchscreen iPad, iPhone or touchscreen "anything" really doesn't work for that.
Some of us love Apple gear but actually want to get some efficient and creative work done.
Note to Apple: Not every device has to be a whiz-bang, wow 'em at Best Buy, touchscreen device with more reflection than a mirror and finger smudges all over it.
Speaking of which...The Mac Pro ever getting updated again Apple?
Erwin-Br
Mar 24, 03:07 PM
Can anyone explain the nVidia hate?
I, for one, miss my old GeForce 8800.
I have a Radeon HD 5770 now, and there are these little annoyances. For instance, when I run my bootcamp partition inside VMWare, the AMD driver software starts complaining. The GeForce didn't give a damn. Speaking of which, I had to install the .Net framework to install the AMD drivers. Kinda cheap. And every now and then I get a slight flicker in the screen. To be honest, I'm not sure if that's the Radeon, but I've never had it before.
Don't get me wrong, the card is performing superbly overall. But the driver side still needs some polish. (And that's a complaint I've been hearing for ages!)
I, for one, miss my old GeForce 8800.
I have a Radeon HD 5770 now, and there are these little annoyances. For instance, when I run my bootcamp partition inside VMWare, the AMD driver software starts complaining. The GeForce didn't give a damn. Speaking of which, I had to install the .Net framework to install the AMD drivers. Kinda cheap. And every now and then I get a slight flicker in the screen. To be honest, I'm not sure if that's the Radeon, but I've never had it before.
Don't get me wrong, the card is performing superbly overall. But the driver side still needs some polish. (And that's a complaint I've been hearing for ages!)
gnasher729
Nov 18, 10:09 AM
It depends on what the program does. Some programs don't lend themselves to multi-threading at all and others practically require it. It can be quite a chore to go back and multi-thread an existing program.
Also, some uses of a program make it easy to use multithreading, and others don't. As an example, if you use Handbrake to do H.264 encoding, it is work for the developers to use multiple cores (it has been posted here that it uses three cores) for encoding a single movie, but it would be absolutely easy to use four times as many cores to encode four movies simultaneously.
Something like that would be perfect if you want to encode four half hour movies, but awful if you want to encode a single two hour movie.
Also, some uses of a program make it easy to use multithreading, and others don't. As an example, if you use Handbrake to do H.264 encoding, it is work for the developers to use multiple cores (it has been posted here that it uses three cores) for encoding a single movie, but it would be absolutely easy to use four times as many cores to encode four movies simultaneously.
Something like that would be perfect if you want to encode four half hour movies, but awful if you want to encode a single two hour movie.
ergle2
Aug 27, 07:55 PM
I was under the impression when the Core 2 Duos were released, but I hope very soon because they are a measurable improvement over the GMA950 which isn't as bad as everyone make it out to be.
The benchmarks I've seen suggest that it's in fact slower.
Take a look at http://www.pconline.com.cn/market/sh/shoppingguide/changshang/0608/844892.html
The Inquirer - I know, that bastion of rumor-mongering and unfounded allegation - has been reporting that OEMs are saying "it sucks".
Maybe this will be sorted out in later steppings, but these were awfully recent revsions...
The benchmarks I've seen suggest that it's in fact slower.
Take a look at http://www.pconline.com.cn/market/sh/shoppingguide/changshang/0608/844892.html
The Inquirer - I know, that bastion of rumor-mongering and unfounded allegation - has been reporting that OEMs are saying "it sucks".
Maybe this will be sorted out in later steppings, but these were awfully recent revsions...
Sport73
Sep 6, 06:36 PM
The most important insight from all of these 'rumors' is that Apple MUST have something more to discuss on Tuesday than simply the release of the Movie Store. With Amazon trumping Apple on content and major questions outstanding about quality and DRM, it would be a big mistake to hold a major press event just for that.
Clearly, the new iPod AND a media streaming/center device is on tap, otherwise this event will go on record as the biggest flop in Apple SE history.
Clearly, the new iPod AND a media streaming/center device is on tap, otherwise this event will go on record as the biggest flop in Apple SE history.
iJohnHenry
Apr 10, 07:10 PM
Miata's are actually very good driving cars.
Yes, and excellent value for your dollar.
If I could afford a second car, just for sport, I would try to wedge myself into one.
But I really want an S-2000. :(
Yes, and excellent value for your dollar.
If I could afford a second car, just for sport, I would try to wedge myself into one.
But I really want an S-2000. :(
Weaselboy
Mar 31, 10:18 AM
Can someone post screenshots of iCal. Thanks.
There is one in post #33 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12297742&postcount=33) of this thread.
There is one in post #33 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12297742&postcount=33) of this thread.
MacRumors
Mar 24, 01:00 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/24/mac-os-x-10-6-7-adds-support-for-new-amd-graphics-cards/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/24/135905-amd_logo.jpg
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/24/135905-amd_logo.jpg
kelving525
Sep 23, 02:46 PM
Do you feel the same about the Night Sky color, or is it more the Aquamarine and Fuscia and neon blinding green? The Night Sky one looks pretty cool. I have no problem with purple colors as long as they are dark, which the Night Sky seems to be from pictures.
Yes, it is definitely dark purple-- not those neon purple.:cool:
Yes, it is definitely dark purple-- not those neon purple.:cool:
Small White Car
Apr 12, 09:49 PM
No, but having features like face detection does suggest that it's a 'consumer' orientated product.
Personally, I don't mind. As long as all the old multitrack features are still available (and the price significantly drops, to say, $50-$300,) then I intend to buy it.
Eh. People bitched about Aperture getting these features too, but so far Aperture's never grabbed me by the neck and forced me to use them. I assume Final Cut will be the same.
Personally, I don't mind. As long as all the old multitrack features are still available (and the price significantly drops, to say, $50-$300,) then I intend to buy it.
Eh. People bitched about Aperture getting these features too, but so far Aperture's never grabbed me by the neck and forced me to use them. I assume Final Cut will be the same.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 6, 12:08 PM
regarding cars as very international affairs: the history is plastered with failed attempts at "world cars" .. even more so when a car makers call one of their cars a 'world car' in their PR before the release
That's true, though there have been a few successes, like the Ford Focus.
For the record, I walk to work unless the temperatures is around 10F or below. I intentionally located myself near my job, and made some sacrifices in order to do so.
That's true, though there have been a few successes, like the Ford Focus.
For the record, I walk to work unless the temperatures is around 10F or below. I intentionally located myself near my job, and made some sacrifices in order to do so.
