Thunderbird
May 2, 08:13 PM
Haha so many mad fanboys. " APL Y U RUIN MY OSX"
.
LOL...All your apps are belong to us!
This is dumb...but then, since when is Apple about intuitiveness, consistency and ergonomic efficiency?
.
LOL...All your apps are belong to us!
This is dumb...but then, since when is Apple about intuitiveness, consistency and ergonomic efficiency?
.Andy
Aug 19, 08:58 AM
Like I said, an iPod with a touch screen and a slide out QWERTY keyboard (a la MYLO) would be better and more portable than a laptop. As clunky as the PSP's interface is, the feature of surfing the net is still very useful and popular. Imagine how much better a MYLO iPod would be. The media player market is staurated, so if Apple intend to continue to do well they need to make the new iPod much more than a media player. Incorperating WiFi into an music/video player is almost pointless, yet is many time more useful if you can check mail, IM and surf the net. It's a natural evolution of what the iPod is. And other companies are beating Apple to it: http://www.learningcenter.sony.us/assets/itpd/mylo/prod/index.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koQFjKwVFB0
I disagree with pretty much everything you said here Manic Mouse :D.
I really hope the iPod doesn't go down the line of convergence/frankenstein/jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none. It's a solid music player and it's main priority should be as such. In my experience with work colleagues and parents/in-laws the iPod is almost bordering on being too difficult as it is just with just music and video. Many never bother with video or podcasts or even firmware updates because they perceive it to be too complex. Adding slide-out keyboards, larger/deeper navigation menus, wifi connections, and email configuration would probably push it over the edge as far as being too technologically intimidating for most. Not to mention the size sacrifice.
Apple may bring something else to the market to compete if there really is a decent market for devices like the Mylo (which I'm personally not too sure there is).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koQFjKwVFB0
I disagree with pretty much everything you said here Manic Mouse :D.
I really hope the iPod doesn't go down the line of convergence/frankenstein/jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none. It's a solid music player and it's main priority should be as such. In my experience with work colleagues and parents/in-laws the iPod is almost bordering on being too difficult as it is just with just music and video. Many never bother with video or podcasts or even firmware updates because they perceive it to be too complex. Adding slide-out keyboards, larger/deeper navigation menus, wifi connections, and email configuration would probably push it over the edge as far as being too technologically intimidating for most. Not to mention the size sacrifice.
Apple may bring something else to the market to compete if there really is a decent market for devices like the Mylo (which I'm personally not too sure there is).
hexonxonx
Mar 23, 11:15 AM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
I have 12,972 songs. I am so happy that the Classic will stick around.
I have two classics, one filled with songs and music videos, the other filled with TV shows so I can take them on the road and watch them in the car on my cars Pioneer video screen. My deci works with my iPod 100%. Both classic are filled to capacity. I'll be buying a third soon.
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
I have 12,972 songs. I am so happy that the Classic will stick around.
I have two classics, one filled with songs and music videos, the other filled with TV shows so I can take them on the road and watch them in the car on my cars Pioneer video screen. My deci works with my iPod 100%. Both classic are filled to capacity. I'll be buying a third soon.
Speczorz
Sep 27, 05:25 PM
My dermashot case came in on Friday.. been using it since.
My initial thoughts - this case looks cheap and has a loose feel.
My thoughts now - the case has a nice style and even though it is not as snug as it should be, it fits fine. It has not fallen off at all and has a real nice feel too. However, the included screen protector was junk. Had way too many bubbles. Even after applying many times, that didn't help. I now like the grip of the case. I also like how the case comes up around the menu button.
Overall, I'm very satisfied with it. For $20 with free shipping, it was a decent deal. The case also comes with a little stand that holds the iPod horizontally (not vertically at all), so you can watch movies and not have to hold it. It's a nice little added feature.
Hope this helps others who are on the fence.. ;)
Bill
My initial thoughts - this case looks cheap and has a loose feel.
My thoughts now - the case has a nice style and even though it is not as snug as it should be, it fits fine. It has not fallen off at all and has a real nice feel too. However, the included screen protector was junk. Had way too many bubbles. Even after applying many times, that didn't help. I now like the grip of the case. I also like how the case comes up around the menu button.
Overall, I'm very satisfied with it. For $20 with free shipping, it was a decent deal. The case also comes with a little stand that holds the iPod horizontally (not vertically at all), so you can watch movies and not have to hold it. It's a nice little added feature.
Hope this helps others who are on the fence.. ;)
Bill
Cliff3
Jan 5, 11:41 PM
the guy looks like he really took care of the car (based on his ad). The pictures make it seem mint, and he says all maintenance has been done regularly.
As I said before, there is no substitute for a thorough pre-purchase inspection by a competent BMW shop. These cars can be money pits.
I found the bimmerforums site a few days ago and have been searching quite a bit. Nothing I am finding seems out of the ordinary, or something I haven't seen yet.
Bimmerforums is mainly an E36 site. Bimmerfest is a better E46 resource.
As I said before, there is no substitute for a thorough pre-purchase inspection by a competent BMW shop. These cars can be money pits.
I found the bimmerforums site a few days ago and have been searching quite a bit. Nothing I am finding seems out of the ordinary, or something I haven't seen yet.
Bimmerforums is mainly an E36 site. Bimmerfest is a better E46 resource.
shawnce
Nov 18, 10:02 AM
Cheapest Two x 1GB sticks kit is $331 from Omni via this Ramseeker.com link (http://www.ramseeker.com/scripts/counter.php?http://www.omnitechnologies.biz/cgi-bin/catalog/cp-app.cgi?usr=51F714335&rnd=3227630&rrc=N&affl=B&cip=&act=&aff=&pg=prod&ref=APLMP2X1GB667O&cat=applem).
That to me spells crossover time since for only +$3 you only fill two slots instead of 4 for the same 4GB of RAM.
Cheapest Two x 2GB sticks kit is $665 at 18004memory via this Ramseeker kit (http://www.ramseeker.com/scripts/counter.php?http://www.18004memory.com/ramseeker/default.asp?itemid=502459).
I would recommend that you are 100% sure the RAM you get is thermally certified for the Mac Pro.
That to me spells crossover time since for only +$3 you only fill two slots instead of 4 for the same 4GB of RAM.
Cheapest Two x 2GB sticks kit is $665 at 18004memory via this Ramseeker kit (http://www.ramseeker.com/scripts/counter.php?http://www.18004memory.com/ramseeker/default.asp?itemid=502459).
I would recommend that you are 100% sure the RAM you get is thermally certified for the Mac Pro.
Kane08
Apr 2, 10:43 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Best post yet
Best post yet
Gurubarry
Apr 13, 02:42 AM
I second this.
Me too, I gave up FCE when my new mini mac wouldn't run it , then imovie after I spent hours trying to work with SD card captured HD footage . So ,perhaps I may be able to return to mac editing without firing up my hacked imovie HD suite . I hope so , but another $300 each time the OSX is changed is not encouraging me at the moment .
Me too, I gave up FCE when my new mini mac wouldn't run it , then imovie after I spent hours trying to work with SD card captured HD footage . So ,perhaps I may be able to return to mac editing without firing up my hacked imovie HD suite . I hope so , but another $300 each time the OSX is changed is not encouraging me at the moment .
Earendil
Nov 28, 10:32 AM
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs?
*snip*
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20".
*snip*
But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
And that percentage shoots up when you take into account only the Pro style Towers. And it's a shame your Cinema display is showing age sooner than I would think it should. Still, in my own experience with color reproduction and accuracy in Photography, the cinema displays I have used have exceeded my Dell 2005. In regular computer use I wouldn't be able to tell them apart (aside from the back light bleed on the Dell).
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Do you see any fan boys making posts here? I see some people here that are ignorant of the way monitors work and yet are trying to pass opinions on Apple/Dell/LCD market as gold though.
That's the issue though, currently Apple doesn't sell a consumer computer that either doesn't already come with a monitor, or where you aren't supposed to already have a monitor.
the MacBook and iMac both have screens built in, the MacMini, if you saw any of it's advertisements or presentation, is meant as a direct replacement for a PC box. i.e. bring your own mouse, keyboard and monitor. I as well as another guy have already said this though.
It's a problem, still, I want too want Apple to sell a consumer level monitor. But Apple certainly doesn't have to enter that market if they don't want to. Besides, the market for a cheap 17" monitor is TINY. You're talking Mini owners (who don't already have a monitor) maybe a few laptop owners, and...? G5 owners? If you're plugin a $150 LCD up to a G5 you should be shot :P Unless you are running three at once or something.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
Many professionals run Duel 20" screens. In fact I see this setup far more often that a 30" screen.
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one.
wow wow wow. You just me on that logic jump. Apple sells some high end systems to Professions in industry that demand at least a certain standard. Apple also sells other computers. Apple Sells monitors that are aiming at (hitting is another matter) those professionals that demand a certain standard. Apple doesn't currently sell any other monitors. How is that proof that Apple is trying to personally screw you out of your cash?
Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
Yeah, there is a gap, and I do see it as a problem. No one in the entire thread is disagreeing with that. You ideas on why there is a gap is viewed a little bit more negative than I would, but whatever.
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper.
Another huge jump in logic based on no facts and stretched assumptions. Do you know what Apple takes home at the end of the day from each monitor sale, each iMac sale, and each Mini sale? Can you provide that data to back up any of your conclusions? It sure would go a long way in getting anyone to side with you on that point. However, until you do, I'm going to say this one more time:
Cinema Display = Pro quality Display (I don't give a hoot if your eyes can't see it, the components alone show it, and that is what cost money to make not your eye sight)
Pro Quality = not cheap, don't go looking for a $200 monitor for pro work.
And for the last time, I'm still waiting for someone to show me a display that matches the Cinemas tech specs and qualifications and also cost downwards in the $400 range that people keep speaking about. Because until someone does, I'm inclined to believe, based on my own looking, that Apple is right with the industry on this one (or close) and all our whining on cost means jack.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it.
In light of that little sarcastc jab, the irony is that you are one of, if not the only user, to have admitted to owning a 20" Cinema display in this thread so far :rolleyes:
[quote]I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right?
I'll just quote myself on this one...
[QUOTE=Earendil]You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in back lighting and change in color based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benefits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level monitor for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
But if you had been following the thread you'd know that about me already...
But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
No, you are asking for two very different things here.
1. You are asking Apple to produce a consumer level monitor that you can afford and falls in line with the market. I think everyone agrees with this idea, whether there is a large enough market for Apple to justify it (only Aple costumers would consider them) is up for debate.
and...
2. You are asking Apple to drop the price on their Pro displays without giving a reason (all your reasons apply to a consumer LCD), nor have you provided a similarly speced display to show that Apple is out of line with it's pricing.
There are large difference between a Mini and a G5. Just because most people wouldn't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. Just relax and trust me that in two properly functioning displays, Apple's monitors are very good, and imho should never be compared to Apple's displays unless you are trying to convince a consumer (who can't tell the difference) not to buy it and buy an alternative display. I have done this before. Just like you'd never compare a Mini and a G5 unless grandma was thinking about buying a G5 to surf the web with...
~Tyler
*snip*
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20".
*snip*
But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
And that percentage shoots up when you take into account only the Pro style Towers. And it's a shame your Cinema display is showing age sooner than I would think it should. Still, in my own experience with color reproduction and accuracy in Photography, the cinema displays I have used have exceeded my Dell 2005. In regular computer use I wouldn't be able to tell them apart (aside from the back light bleed on the Dell).
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Do you see any fan boys making posts here? I see some people here that are ignorant of the way monitors work and yet are trying to pass opinions on Apple/Dell/LCD market as gold though.
That's the issue though, currently Apple doesn't sell a consumer computer that either doesn't already come with a monitor, or where you aren't supposed to already have a monitor.
the MacBook and iMac both have screens built in, the MacMini, if you saw any of it's advertisements or presentation, is meant as a direct replacement for a PC box. i.e. bring your own mouse, keyboard and monitor. I as well as another guy have already said this though.
It's a problem, still, I want too want Apple to sell a consumer level monitor. But Apple certainly doesn't have to enter that market if they don't want to. Besides, the market for a cheap 17" monitor is TINY. You're talking Mini owners (who don't already have a monitor) maybe a few laptop owners, and...? G5 owners? If you're plugin a $150 LCD up to a G5 you should be shot :P Unless you are running three at once or something.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
Many professionals run Duel 20" screens. In fact I see this setup far more often that a 30" screen.
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one.
wow wow wow. You just me on that logic jump. Apple sells some high end systems to Professions in industry that demand at least a certain standard. Apple also sells other computers. Apple Sells monitors that are aiming at (hitting is another matter) those professionals that demand a certain standard. Apple doesn't currently sell any other monitors. How is that proof that Apple is trying to personally screw you out of your cash?
Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
Yeah, there is a gap, and I do see it as a problem. No one in the entire thread is disagreeing with that. You ideas on why there is a gap is viewed a little bit more negative than I would, but whatever.
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper.
Another huge jump in logic based on no facts and stretched assumptions. Do you know what Apple takes home at the end of the day from each monitor sale, each iMac sale, and each Mini sale? Can you provide that data to back up any of your conclusions? It sure would go a long way in getting anyone to side with you on that point. However, until you do, I'm going to say this one more time:
Cinema Display = Pro quality Display (I don't give a hoot if your eyes can't see it, the components alone show it, and that is what cost money to make not your eye sight)
Pro Quality = not cheap, don't go looking for a $200 monitor for pro work.
And for the last time, I'm still waiting for someone to show me a display that matches the Cinemas tech specs and qualifications and also cost downwards in the $400 range that people keep speaking about. Because until someone does, I'm inclined to believe, based on my own looking, that Apple is right with the industry on this one (or close) and all our whining on cost means jack.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it.
In light of that little sarcastc jab, the irony is that you are one of, if not the only user, to have admitted to owning a 20" Cinema display in this thread so far :rolleyes:
[quote]I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right?
I'll just quote myself on this one...
[QUOTE=Earendil]You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in back lighting and change in color based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benefits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level monitor for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
But if you had been following the thread you'd know that about me already...
But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
No, you are asking for two very different things here.
1. You are asking Apple to produce a consumer level monitor that you can afford and falls in line with the market. I think everyone agrees with this idea, whether there is a large enough market for Apple to justify it (only Aple costumers would consider them) is up for debate.
and...
2. You are asking Apple to drop the price on their Pro displays without giving a reason (all your reasons apply to a consumer LCD), nor have you provided a similarly speced display to show that Apple is out of line with it's pricing.
There are large difference between a Mini and a G5. Just because most people wouldn't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. Just relax and trust me that in two properly functioning displays, Apple's monitors are very good, and imho should never be compared to Apple's displays unless you are trying to convince a consumer (who can't tell the difference) not to buy it and buy an alternative display. I have done this before. Just like you'd never compare a Mini and a G5 unless grandma was thinking about buying a G5 to surf the web with...
~Tyler
MrFirework
Nov 15, 10:25 AM
How long before it ends up in the MacBook Pro?
(joking)
Thank GOD that "joking" is in there.
::to myself:: calm... calm... 1-2-3-4-5-4-3-2-1.... calm...
(joking)
Thank GOD that "joking" is in there.
::to myself:: calm... calm... 1-2-3-4-5-4-3-2-1.... calm...
Popeye206
May 2, 05:37 PM
So you're saying we should go back to Mac OS Classic cooperative multi-tasking ?
Hello ?
The 80s called, they want their computing paradigms back. Cooperative multi-tasking makes sense on ressource limited architectures. Even the iPhone/iPad like devices are far from "ressource limited". We had pre-emptive multi-tasking on much less capable devices (think 386s with 8 MB of RAM).
LOL! Yeah... and I remember crashing faster than you click your mouse on those systems. Windows 3.0 and 3.1 were a mess. But of course... most things were back then. how far we've come.
Hello ?
The 80s called, they want their computing paradigms back. Cooperative multi-tasking makes sense on ressource limited architectures. Even the iPhone/iPad like devices are far from "ressource limited". We had pre-emptive multi-tasking on much less capable devices (think 386s with 8 MB of RAM).
LOL! Yeah... and I remember crashing faster than you click your mouse on those systems. Windows 3.0 and 3.1 were a mess. But of course... most things were back then. how far we've come.
QuarterSwede
Apr 10, 05:52 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.
On straight roads, manual is again better. For passing, a quick throttle blip/downshift gives you better boost than waiting for an automatic to kick in as you stomp the pedal.
Valid points however, anyone driving in stop and go traffic will tell you automatics are a lot easier on the knees. Also, after a tiring day at work the last thing I wanted to do was drive a stick in that mess.
Also, you can downshift in an automatic as well. Most people don't do that though.
Any driving enthousiast doesn't mind a clutch and a stick, no matter the situation.
I think you mean most driving enthusiasts in most situations.
On straight roads, manual is again better. For passing, a quick throttle blip/downshift gives you better boost than waiting for an automatic to kick in as you stomp the pedal.
Valid points however, anyone driving in stop and go traffic will tell you automatics are a lot easier on the knees. Also, after a tiring day at work the last thing I wanted to do was drive a stick in that mess.
Also, you can downshift in an automatic as well. Most people don't do that though.
Any driving enthousiast doesn't mind a clutch and a stick, no matter the situation.
I think you mean most driving enthusiasts in most situations.
cozmot
Apr 24, 01:07 PM
When senators weigh in on privacy issues like this, they betray their foolishness. A litlle study by their aides would reveal what a non-issue this is. Sen. Franken would do better by investigating our own government's spying on its own citizens under the cover of the Patriot Act.
twoodcc
Apr 16, 09:07 PM
congrats to SciFrog for 6 million points! (with MR team)
islanders
Dec 29, 08:21 AM
It looks like it�s going to play YouTube on your TV and be a HDMI/DVI/USB switch board.
A video processor or scaler would be nice.
If it doesn�t have HD there wont be much demand for iTunes download.
I wish they would team up with a high speed satellite internet provider and provide an iDish, but it looks like Apple is thinking small potatoes and thinks it�s going go luck out with another simple iPod device.
It is a good price point and a lot of people will want to watch YouTube on their tv, and a HDMI/DVI switch is about a $100 bucks.
A video processor or scaler would be nice.
If it doesn�t have HD there wont be much demand for iTunes download.
I wish they would team up with a high speed satellite internet provider and provide an iDish, but it looks like Apple is thinking small potatoes and thinks it�s going go luck out with another simple iPod device.
It is a good price point and a lot of people will want to watch YouTube on their tv, and a HDMI/DVI switch is about a $100 bucks.
nez
Jan 11, 07:45 AM
Hopefully it's not too big an image... e90 m3. i love this this thing to bits.
mrgreen4242
Aug 30, 08:09 PM
SAVE page prices don''t go down when new models appear. They are already reduced from original prices. For example, PowerBook G4's are still at the same price they were last year as are the Quad G5 since February.
I don't think that is always the case. In this case, specifically, we are likely looking at the high end mini bumping down to the low end price range, and the high end being a new machine. That would meant that the high end mini is basically getting a price drop, which would push the refurb price down: the refurb Core Duo mini is currently MORE than a new Core Solo. I'd definitely expect to see Duos get a price drop in the refurb store if the new mini line up is 1.66 duo and 1.83 duo.
I don't think that is always the case. In this case, specifically, we are likely looking at the high end mini bumping down to the low end price range, and the high end being a new machine. That would meant that the high end mini is basically getting a price drop, which would push the refurb price down: the refurb Core Duo mini is currently MORE than a new Core Solo. I'd definitely expect to see Duos get a price drop in the refurb store if the new mini line up is 1.66 duo and 1.83 duo.
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 02:41 PM
I;m going to go out on a limb and preemptively complain my MacPro 1.1 isn't supported :( and is only as configurable as an iMac...the irony...
You can upgrade to the latest 5870 card if you wanted to right now. It might not be 'officially' supported but you can still do it.
Please don't put an AMD 5XXX series into the new iMacs! :(
If they do it will for sure be only in the low-end 21.5" iMac (5670).
You can upgrade to the latest 5870 card if you wanted to right now. It might not be 'officially' supported but you can still do it.
Please don't put an AMD 5XXX series into the new iMacs! :(
If they do it will for sure be only in the low-end 21.5" iMac (5670).
brianus
Sep 1, 02:59 PM
This basically confirms that Apple will release the "Mac".
Uh, no, it doesn't. If anything it does the exact opposite. Focus on the fact that they're upping the display size to just-below-pro territory and not that they're keeping a laptop processor and you'll see.
Apple has intentionally left this gap in its line.
...yes, for many, many years now. It has intentionally not filled the gap. All signs point to it continuing to intentionally not fill the gap.
It all seems pretty obvious.
...that it's what you want, not what Apple will do.
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.
Exactly. It's not like they can go get a more configurable Mac from another company, either. Plus, remember that Apple had all those overlapping products in the bad old days before you-know-who, Mr. consumer/pro/desktop/notebook grid came back on board.
Uh, no, it doesn't. If anything it does the exact opposite. Focus on the fact that they're upping the display size to just-below-pro territory and not that they're keeping a laptop processor and you'll see.
Apple has intentionally left this gap in its line.
...yes, for many, many years now. It has intentionally not filled the gap. All signs point to it continuing to intentionally not fill the gap.
It all seems pretty obvious.
...that it's what you want, not what Apple will do.
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.
Exactly. It's not like they can go get a more configurable Mac from another company, either. Plus, remember that Apple had all those overlapping products in the bad old days before you-know-who, Mr. consumer/pro/desktop/notebook grid came back on board.
Ktulu
Aug 7, 07:52 AM
Here we go again...
Timeline of my usual events for an Apple conference, all times are in AEST:
10pm: Some sort of massive leak comes out and we all post madly about it.
11pm: Someone figures out the leak must be fake and we all post madly about it.
12am: The hour of silence as all the Americans try to grab a few hours sleep.
1am: The east-coast of the US starts to wake up and post madly about the leak - the Europeans post endless "It's a fake, here's the link." posts, the Aussies who are awake begin to get incoherent in their posts (who me?).
2am: The forums are brought to a halt by an influx of newbies asking what the chinese writing on this picture of a "Video I-Pod" means.
3am: Kick-off, macrumourslive starts running their text updates, I fall asleep at least three times during the conference and wake up each time hoping I haven't missed anything cool.
4am: Conference is either still going or winding down, if it's still going, I fall asleep yet again, if it's winding down I get a tab going and reloading apple.com/au till all the information comes online.
5am: Conference is definitely over, forum may be flakey but online - hundreds are disappointed and vow to "wait for rev B" whilst hundreds more are refuting their claims of disappointment with long posts about money. I don't care because I'm asleep.
11am: Wha? Who? Where? Oh yeah? Time to get up. Pack up laptop and hop down to the net caf� to watch the Quicktime movies that have appeared on the Apple site at proper speed (not dial-up).
1pm: Lunch somewhere.
2pm: Net caf� again for uninterrupted stream of keynote.
3pm - 4pm: Reading forums for interesting tid-bits I'd missed, start thinking about a beer.
5pm: Pub, pretending not to be a Mac nerd who has just stayed up most the night looking at websites.
8pm: Home, dinner, hopefully not making the long distance call to Bourke on the porcelain telephone.
Thus endeth Apple Conference Day. For MWSF add 2 hours to the time.
Absolutely hysterical....but most likley very much on the mark. :cool:
Timeline of my usual events for an Apple conference, all times are in AEST:
10pm: Some sort of massive leak comes out and we all post madly about it.
11pm: Someone figures out the leak must be fake and we all post madly about it.
12am: The hour of silence as all the Americans try to grab a few hours sleep.
1am: The east-coast of the US starts to wake up and post madly about the leak - the Europeans post endless "It's a fake, here's the link." posts, the Aussies who are awake begin to get incoherent in their posts (who me?).
2am: The forums are brought to a halt by an influx of newbies asking what the chinese writing on this picture of a "Video I-Pod" means.
3am: Kick-off, macrumourslive starts running their text updates, I fall asleep at least three times during the conference and wake up each time hoping I haven't missed anything cool.
4am: Conference is either still going or winding down, if it's still going, I fall asleep yet again, if it's winding down I get a tab going and reloading apple.com/au till all the information comes online.
5am: Conference is definitely over, forum may be flakey but online - hundreds are disappointed and vow to "wait for rev B" whilst hundreds more are refuting their claims of disappointment with long posts about money. I don't care because I'm asleep.
11am: Wha? Who? Where? Oh yeah? Time to get up. Pack up laptop and hop down to the net caf� to watch the Quicktime movies that have appeared on the Apple site at proper speed (not dial-up).
1pm: Lunch somewhere.
2pm: Net caf� again for uninterrupted stream of keynote.
3pm - 4pm: Reading forums for interesting tid-bits I'd missed, start thinking about a beer.
5pm: Pub, pretending not to be a Mac nerd who has just stayed up most the night looking at websites.
8pm: Home, dinner, hopefully not making the long distance call to Bourke on the porcelain telephone.
Thus endeth Apple Conference Day. For MWSF add 2 hours to the time.
Absolutely hysterical....but most likley very much on the mark. :cool:
dukebound85
Apr 12, 06:11 PM
I don't think people are pumping it up at all. I personally think that people who can't drive a standard transmission, are just lazy (and that goes for my mother, and her habit of doing her makeup while driving). People only get autos, because they don't want to have to "inconvenience" themselves with pushing down on the clutch and throwing the car into the next gear; because doing so requires them to stop shoving food down their face, or to get of the damn phone. I also hate to hear people moan about how inconvenient a standard transmission is during stop and go traffic; I mean it's not that bad, and I recently took my standard transmission accord to chicago and drove in stop and go traffic for over two hours, and it was not as annoying as some would make it out to be. People are just too willing to sacrifice the fun of driving for convenience.
-Don
having driven a manual for over 10 years, it gets annoying quite often...
-Don
having driven a manual for over 10 years, it gets annoying quite often...
Earendil
Nov 27, 02:58 PM
But in reality, I don't think a 17" is Apple's answer. Lowering the prices of the current model lineup is indeed the way to go. I've been one of the biggest bitchers about Apple's price point on LCD's for years now. That 20" LCD should not be anymore than $299. Plain and simple...simple and plain!
You people are incorrigible. I do hope people start reading the thread or doing some research before anyone else makes a fool of themselves.
Apple LCDs are not worth the extra price tag as long as you do your home work before purchasing an LCD monitor from a different company.
A little homework, Aye? (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327).
That's funny, I was thinking the same thing...
Why do I find so much joy in pointing out other peoples ignorance and feeding them their own lines... I should be a college professor :rolleyes:
You people are incorrigible. I do hope people start reading the thread or doing some research before anyone else makes a fool of themselves.
Apple LCDs are not worth the extra price tag as long as you do your home work before purchasing an LCD monitor from a different company.
A little homework, Aye? (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327).
That's funny, I was thinking the same thing...
Why do I find so much joy in pointing out other peoples ignorance and feeding them their own lines... I should be a college professor :rolleyes:
roland.g
Sep 1, 02:33 PM
The only thing better than G5 Powerbooks, is not having G5 Powerbooks! :D
Bengt77
Sep 1, 01:32 PM
**THIS IS NOT A RUMOR** There will be a new iMac with Merom and probably 23". Sounds like it will be a 2.33 ghz but not sure.
Aw, man! I was sooooo ready to shell out for a new 23" iMac, might it come out. But now it's on the verge of actually doing so, I'm starting to get greatly mostly underwhelmed by the rumours. Merom? What? I want a Conroe, at least in the 23" top model. And 2,33GHz? The Conroe goes way up to 2,93GHz. I'm sure the Merom line goes higher than 2,33GHz...
Bleh... maybe I should wait for the rumoured headless iMac. Maybe that machine actually will come with a Conroe.
Aw, man! I was sooooo ready to shell out for a new 23" iMac, might it come out. But now it's on the verge of actually doing so, I'm starting to get greatly mostly underwhelmed by the rumours. Merom? What? I want a Conroe, at least in the 23" top model. And 2,33GHz? The Conroe goes way up to 2,93GHz. I'm sure the Merom line goes higher than 2,33GHz...
Bleh... maybe I should wait for the rumoured headless iMac. Maybe that machine actually will come with a Conroe.
No comments:
Post a Comment