dreamsburnred
Mar 24, 11:04 PM
A refresh is expected soon...
AFPoster
Mar 22, 01:43 PM
Under god was added to the pledge in the 50s because we were scared of the Russians. Nevermind the fact that the Pledge was written in 1892, long after the Founding Fathers died.
What else you got?
You're right, I apologize for being incorrect on the pledge.
I have some shoe strings, a piece of gum and a ball of lint.
Maybe we're just confused how someone who claims to be a director of IT (and presumably takes some college to become) can fail so hard at basic history.[/QUOTE]
I'm not here to remember everything I learned, especially in a class I could have cared less about. If you asked me about "pythagorean theorem" I couldn't even answer that. Just because you are wrong on a piece of history doesn't mean your wrong on all other subjects (aside from math which I have stated that).
What else you got?
You're right, I apologize for being incorrect on the pledge.
I have some shoe strings, a piece of gum and a ball of lint.
Maybe we're just confused how someone who claims to be a director of IT (and presumably takes some college to become) can fail so hard at basic history.[/QUOTE]
I'm not here to remember everything I learned, especially in a class I could have cared less about. If you asked me about "pythagorean theorem" I couldn't even answer that. Just because you are wrong on a piece of history doesn't mean your wrong on all other subjects (aside from math which I have stated that).
milo
Sep 6, 05:06 PM
ironically, this is why Apple stock does not plummet like other computer vendors. giving buyers few options to upgrade forces people to keep upgrading the system. you know that Apple Mac users upgrade their computer more often than PC users.
Or it encourages them to look at PC alternatives. Do you have a source on mac users upgrading more often? Among the people I know it's the other way around.
Or it encourages them to look at PC alternatives. Do you have a source on mac users upgrading more often? Among the people I know it's the other way around.
Ravich
Mar 20, 04:31 PM
Enough with the false comparisons. Homeopathy doesnt actively harm people that buy into it. "ex-gay" therapy is harmful.
Do you think that anyone would stand for a KKK app under the reasoning of "free speech"?
Do you think that anyone would stand for a KKK app under the reasoning of "free speech"?
The.316
Nov 27, 12:27 PM
Black Friday Goodies :D
Samsung LCD TV 40"
Black Wii
WD MyBook Elite 1.5 TB
Ikea Mount
Samsung = best TVs IMO. Was there that much difference between the Series 5 and 6? I have a 40" LED TV, and aside from the LED, I think the difference in MHz is important.
Samsung LCD TV 40"
Black Wii
WD MyBook Elite 1.5 TB
Ikea Mount
Samsung = best TVs IMO. Was there that much difference between the Series 5 and 6? I have a 40" LED TV, and aside from the LED, I think the difference in MHz is important.
tablo13
Oct 2, 11:58 PM
Wow. Everyone at macrumors must love switcheasy. Are they that good? I wish the Colors case was TPU, because it looks very good. :( I don't like the look of RebelTouch.
wizard
Mar 24, 02:17 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
That is exactly what I'm thinking! Seriously there is no need for that many GPUs in the Pro and IMac requires a custom card. So where would all of these cards go - XMac is my guess.
Or it could simply be a sign of a unified driver from AMD. That would make sense as it is a smarter approach than the highly targeted drivers of the past.I don't see why Apple would want to start supporting older 5000 cards for said machine? *shrug*
How is it silly ? We're talking about a GPU. Even at 1280x800, the Intel GPU sucks, why would it be silly to want to run games on high settings
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/8
It outperforms the 320M under OS X. It certainly doesn't "suck" as much as you make it out to be.
Don't fall for anandtechs crap. Those tests where designed to make Intels GPU look good. The minute you do anything demanding the GPU falls flat on it's face. By this I mean turn on all the latest features to get the best on screen results.
For many other reasons I don't consider anandtech to be a credible web site. It has become an extension of Intels marketing team. A lot of people don't want to hear that but there is a trend in the articles that indicate that they have become a fan site and have lost the ability to report objectively.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
That is exactly what I'm thinking! Seriously there is no need for that many GPUs in the Pro and IMac requires a custom card. So where would all of these cards go - XMac is my guess.
Or it could simply be a sign of a unified driver from AMD. That would make sense as it is a smarter approach than the highly targeted drivers of the past.I don't see why Apple would want to start supporting older 5000 cards for said machine? *shrug*
How is it silly ? We're talking about a GPU. Even at 1280x800, the Intel GPU sucks, why would it be silly to want to run games on high settings
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/8
It outperforms the 320M under OS X. It certainly doesn't "suck" as much as you make it out to be.
Don't fall for anandtechs crap. Those tests where designed to make Intels GPU look good. The minute you do anything demanding the GPU falls flat on it's face. By this I mean turn on all the latest features to get the best on screen results.
For many other reasons I don't consider anandtech to be a credible web site. It has become an extension of Intels marketing team. A lot of people don't want to hear that but there is a trend in the articles that indicate that they have become a fan site and have lost the ability to report objectively.
hyperpasta
Sep 1, 03:02 PM
Apple used to have all-in-ones, consumer towers, pro towers, etc. Remember the PowerMac 6400? Too many products is too confusing for the consumer. If that means that a couple of people can't get the exact configuration they want, so be it.
Not more products... more BTO options. Here's my ideal line.
Mac Cube - $499
Low-end Conroe
512MB RAM
80GB HD (full-size)
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
Mac Cube - $699
Mid-end Conroe
1GB RAM
120GB HD
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
All BTO... up to mid-end Conroe, 4GB of RAM, real video card, and even a 500GB HD!
iMac
As it is now, but modernized specs and low to mid-Conroe. BTO DOWNgradable to the current "education" model.
Mac Pro
Also as it is now.
MacBook White - $999
Low-End Merom
1GB RAM
60GB HD
Combo Drive
Intel Graphics
13" Matte Display
MacBook White - $1299
Mid-End Merom
1GB RAM
80GB HD
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
13" Matte Display
BOTH models are equally upgradable... to 2GB RAM, 100GB HD, Low-End Graphics Card.
MacBook Pro 15" - $1799
High-End Merom
1GB RAM
80GB HD
Superdrive
128MB Graphics
15" Matte Display
MacBook Pro 17" - $1999
Same as 15" with 17" screen.
See? FEWER models, more BTO. Much easier to find a Mac you agree with.
Not more products... more BTO options. Here's my ideal line.
Mac Cube - $499
Low-end Conroe
512MB RAM
80GB HD (full-size)
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
Mac Cube - $699
Mid-end Conroe
1GB RAM
120GB HD
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
All BTO... up to mid-end Conroe, 4GB of RAM, real video card, and even a 500GB HD!
iMac
As it is now, but modernized specs and low to mid-Conroe. BTO DOWNgradable to the current "education" model.
Mac Pro
Also as it is now.
MacBook White - $999
Low-End Merom
1GB RAM
60GB HD
Combo Drive
Intel Graphics
13" Matte Display
MacBook White - $1299
Mid-End Merom
1GB RAM
80GB HD
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
13" Matte Display
BOTH models are equally upgradable... to 2GB RAM, 100GB HD, Low-End Graphics Card.
MacBook Pro 15" - $1799
High-End Merom
1GB RAM
80GB HD
Superdrive
128MB Graphics
15" Matte Display
MacBook Pro 17" - $1999
Same as 15" with 17" screen.
See? FEWER models, more BTO. Much easier to find a Mac you agree with.
Daveismoney
Feb 6, 10:07 AM
just picked her up about a month ago, a little Christmas present to myself.. loving it
twoodcc
Apr 13, 06:15 PM
congrats to whiterabbit for 13 million points!
BlizzardBomb
Aug 29, 09:45 AM
Merom doesn't cost the same as Yonah! Merom costs the same now as Yonah did WHEN IT WAS RELEASED. Since then the cost has gone down and is supposed to dip lower in the coming weeks. Apple could use Yonah in the Mini and lower the price to where it used to stand.
Nonono, Merom costs the same as Yonah's June price points which are still here even with Merom out in the wild.
Nonono, Merom costs the same as Yonah's June price points which are still here even with Merom out in the wild.
Dunepilot
Sep 6, 10:16 AM
The Superdrive option in the base model has gone.
Earth to Apple: a Combo drive in 2002 was state of the art. A Combo drive in 2004 was a reasonably priced alternative to a DVD burner. A Combo drive in 2005 was an acceptable means of marketing differentiation. A Combo drive in 2006 (particularly with no option to buy a DVD burner) is an embarrassment...
There's some truth in this. Apple's approach to optical drives has been haphazard for some time now.
Earth to Apple: a Combo drive in 2002 was state of the art. A Combo drive in 2004 was a reasonably priced alternative to a DVD burner. A Combo drive in 2005 was an acceptable means of marketing differentiation. A Combo drive in 2006 (particularly with no option to buy a DVD burner) is an embarrassment...
There's some truth in this. Apple's approach to optical drives has been haphazard for some time now.
sigamy
Jul 18, 11:30 AM
My theory is this: We are going to get first run movies in the iTMS.
This is why it is rental only. The movie companies are worried about releasing DVDs at the same time as a film hits the theater. (Not sure why.) Jobs finally got to them--he tricked them by fighting for the sale/rental but he didn't even care about that. He wanted the first run movies and I think he got them. Now you'll be able to rent a brand new film the day it is released in theaters. This is the only real selling point for movie downloads. Why download a limited copy of a movie when I can get if from numerous other sources?
This will be Jobs' 3rd home run in iTunes. First was music, the no brainer. Second was TV. Nobody was thinking about downloading existing TV shows before Apple did it. Everyone thought they were working on movie downloads. TV was brilliant. There is an immediate need--if you missed Lost and forgot to tape it, you need to get it soon because you can't miss what happened, etc.
Movies don't work that way. You can wait a while to see a movie. Also, movies have been available on other media for 30 years so there were other places to go for the content. TV shows just started appearing on DVD recently.
Would I ever download 1979's Superman The Movie? Nope, never. have it on DVD. Would I download 2006's Superman Returns? Yep, definetly.
This is why it is rental only. The movie companies are worried about releasing DVDs at the same time as a film hits the theater. (Not sure why.) Jobs finally got to them--he tricked them by fighting for the sale/rental but he didn't even care about that. He wanted the first run movies and I think he got them. Now you'll be able to rent a brand new film the day it is released in theaters. This is the only real selling point for movie downloads. Why download a limited copy of a movie when I can get if from numerous other sources?
This will be Jobs' 3rd home run in iTunes. First was music, the no brainer. Second was TV. Nobody was thinking about downloading existing TV shows before Apple did it. Everyone thought they were working on movie downloads. TV was brilliant. There is an immediate need--if you missed Lost and forgot to tape it, you need to get it soon because you can't miss what happened, etc.
Movies don't work that way. You can wait a while to see a movie. Also, movies have been available on other media for 30 years so there were other places to go for the content. TV shows just started appearing on DVD recently.
Would I ever download 1979's Superman The Movie? Nope, never. have it on DVD. Would I download 2006's Superman Returns? Yep, definetly.
Keebler
Jul 18, 08:30 AM
i forgot to mention the use of bit torrent technology.
i wonder, and hope, that apple will use this somehow. i'm too techie, but remember a few months back, apple bought a data storage warehouse. what if they designed some sort of torrent system where your dload would come from multiple sources? that would surely make it faster?
now, i'm not saying this is the be all and end all, but it's intriguing to see if it would work.
it would be one of the only ways to make high quality stuff dloadable in a timely fashion. is it possible for them to also have some sort of a 'restart' or 'pickup' dload service so if something happens with your connection during dload, that is picks up where it stopped??
i wonder.... :)
i wonder, and hope, that apple will use this somehow. i'm too techie, but remember a few months back, apple bought a data storage warehouse. what if they designed some sort of torrent system where your dload would come from multiple sources? that would surely make it faster?
now, i'm not saying this is the be all and end all, but it's intriguing to see if it would work.
it would be one of the only ways to make high quality stuff dloadable in a timely fashion. is it possible for them to also have some sort of a 'restart' or 'pickup' dload service so if something happens with your connection during dload, that is picks up where it stopped??
i wonder.... :)
kingtj
Sep 7, 02:24 PM
I thought this was a great idea too, except when I mull it over - I'm not so sure Apple will really go there. With the larger variety of Intel iMacs available now, it looks like Apple's really trying to build one for every possible home-user or small office user's need. I agree that it'd be nice to have an expandable, upgradable Mac with no display built-in that doesn't carry the price tag of the Mac Pro line -- but think about users like us who say that. We're in the minority of "power users" or "more advanced users". Apple has made it pretty clear that if you're in that category, they want you to invest in one of their "Pro" systems. Otherwise, they cater to folks who see their computer as an appliance or tool and just want something they can pretty much plug in and use. These customers are not interested or comfortable doing things like opening up a system and upgrading video cards.
The Mini is Apple's answer to any remaining "casual users" who throw a fit because they just want a new computer to plug into their existing keyboard, mouse, monitor, and maybe USB hub they bought before.....
The "void" you talk about in Apple's product line is one I *think* Apple leaves there willfully.
cmon apple. get a clue.
these little mini's are nice but not great. there is a real void in your product lineup.
we need something with like a intel conroe chip, larger case, the ability to put in a better graphics card, and the basics like more ram, bigger hard drive and stuff.
give us a bigger mid sized tower type computer.
we all don't want to buy something with a screen. nor do we want some tiny puny non-upgradeable thing like the mac mini.
give us better options.
The Mini is Apple's answer to any remaining "casual users" who throw a fit because they just want a new computer to plug into their existing keyboard, mouse, monitor, and maybe USB hub they bought before.....
The "void" you talk about in Apple's product line is one I *think* Apple leaves there willfully.
cmon apple. get a clue.
these little mini's are nice but not great. there is a real void in your product lineup.
we need something with like a intel conroe chip, larger case, the ability to put in a better graphics card, and the basics like more ram, bigger hard drive and stuff.
give us a bigger mid sized tower type computer.
we all don't want to buy something with a screen. nor do we want some tiny puny non-upgradeable thing like the mac mini.
give us better options.
Eraserhead
Mar 20, 05:55 PM
Homeopathy does at least have the placebo effect.
EagerDragon
Jul 19, 08:47 PM
Source? :rolleyes:
Little birdy. running the code.
Little birdy. running the code.
spencers
Feb 23, 02:41 PM
Fantastic setup, would love to get those speakers, I'm in the UK also, what make/model of speakers ?
Elegant setup. What speaker is that?
Stop being lazy and click the Flickr link he posted and you'll find out. :p
Elegant setup. What speaker is that?
Stop being lazy and click the Flickr link he posted and you'll find out. :p
JFreak
Jul 14, 07:43 AM
As to just web-surfing.... In the time of few years my internet-connection has moved from 512KB to 8MB. I could go to 12 or 24MB right now. The speed-increase has been FAST.
I bet your uplink is still 512k and you could perhaps upgrade to 1M, but that's it. Not very fast compared to B-spec ;) I would value a symmetric 2M/2M line more than asymmetric 12M/1M, but maybe that's just me.
I bet your uplink is still 512k and you could perhaps upgrade to 1M, but that's it. Not very fast compared to B-spec ;) I would value a symmetric 2M/2M line more than asymmetric 12M/1M, but maybe that's just me.
ghostshadow
Oct 27, 11:37 PM
Speck just released a bunch of cases last month. Roughly 3 weeks ago. So they are pretty new.
twoodcc
Dec 12, 07:58 PM
yeah we all have to keep it going! things should get better when smp2 and gpu3 get here also
cube
Mar 24, 04:24 PM
Which is not even out yet. Brazos/Zacate and Ontario are the ones I'm referring. Let me edit that out.
Yes. And there are conflicting reports about whether Llano will be released in Q2 or Q3. Not such a long wait for a consumer which is not in a hurry.
In general, Zacate wins over Atom.
Yes. And there are conflicting reports about whether Llano will be released in Q2 or Q3. Not such a long wait for a consumer which is not in a hurry.
In general, Zacate wins over Atom.
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.
Jdkeith
Apr 12, 08:50 PM
Any live feeds?
