Gasu E.
Nov 28, 08:26 AM
I find you the one that is incorrigible. The 23" inch price is competitive where it is as your link so eloquently points out. The Apple displays are easily worth a 15-20% mark-up. The problem is since the last time the display prices were updated 20" wide-screen panel prices have dropped nearly in half. So a year ago when Apple released this $699 price point it was a good price because competitors were selling the same panels at $599. Now they are at $399 and some times as low a $299. Apple's display is worth extra just not 75% to 100% extra.
I see a lot of scientific analysis went into your response. "Not!"
Go to many suppliers of equipment aimed at professionals, and you will often see professional-quality products priced at 3-5x that the price of consumer-quality products in the same functional category.
I am guessing from your "easily worth a 15-20% mark-up" remark that your experience is limited to high-quality consumer products. Don't confuse a consumer upgrade with a professional alternative. Danny, "you're out of your element."
I think a lot of people on this thread would like to see Apple offer some consumer-targeted alternatives to the current monitors, competitively priced. But that's not the same as buying pro equipment at a consumer price.
I see a lot of scientific analysis went into your response. "Not!"
Go to many suppliers of equipment aimed at professionals, and you will often see professional-quality products priced at 3-5x that the price of consumer-quality products in the same functional category.
I am guessing from your "easily worth a 15-20% mark-up" remark that your experience is limited to high-quality consumer products. Don't confuse a consumer upgrade with a professional alternative. Danny, "you're out of your element."
I think a lot of people on this thread would like to see Apple offer some consumer-targeted alternatives to the current monitors, competitively priced. But that's not the same as buying pro equipment at a consumer price.
twoodcc
Feb 13, 11:43 PM
Looks like there is a problem with 6.29 client (at least for mac) where if you get an a1 unit after an a3 one, something goes wrong.
dang. well all my computers are down back at my apartment, so my production will be very little. i just started folding on my mbp with an a3 unit, so we'll see how it goes
dang. well all my computers are down back at my apartment, so my production will be very little. i just started folding on my mbp with an a3 unit, so we'll see how it goes
thejadedmonkey
Mar 24, 01:32 PM
*Children Screaming in background
Im no snob against AMD GPUS...but their CPU's are nearly 2 generations behind intel. I dont think Bulldozer is going to match the 1155 SB, much less the upcoming 2011 socket chips.
What I want to see is a 27inch iMac with an HD 6970 2GB...Whoa whoa wee wow:eek:
But for something like the MBA, where your options are a C2D or iX CPU, and a GPU that's runs like it's 2+ years old, vs a new GPU and a newish CPU, I'll choose AMD over Intel any day of the week.
Im no snob against AMD GPUS...but their CPU's are nearly 2 generations behind intel. I dont think Bulldozer is going to match the 1155 SB, much less the upcoming 2011 socket chips.
What I want to see is a 27inch iMac with an HD 6970 2GB...Whoa whoa wee wow:eek:
But for something like the MBA, where your options are a C2D or iX CPU, and a GPU that's runs like it's 2+ years old, vs a new GPU and a newish CPU, I'll choose AMD over Intel any day of the week.
yac_moda
Jul 19, 07:29 PM
All this fear that iPod and MAcs are in a down turn. Apple will blow them away real soon. They don't sleep on their Laurel unless they don't have a choice.
Wonder what will happen to the stock tomorrow?
Too bad im broke and could not buy any.
My guess is it will open UP a great deal, around $4 then drop $1 or 2, 2 hours into the day and then climb to finish up 5 to 6$ :D
Seasonally and VERY consistently AAPL drops from March to the end of sept and then rises strongly from late Aug. to Christmas. Then rises more in Jan. rests in Feb. and quickly and unpredictably peaks in March or May !?!?!?!
Some years you will make %100 playing it this way, every once in a while you might loose %10, when betting makes bets that have BIG upsides and small downsides !!!
Wonder what will happen to the stock tomorrow?
Too bad im broke and could not buy any.
My guess is it will open UP a great deal, around $4 then drop $1 or 2, 2 hours into the day and then climb to finish up 5 to 6$ :D
Seasonally and VERY consistently AAPL drops from March to the end of sept and then rises strongly from late Aug. to Christmas. Then rises more in Jan. rests in Feb. and quickly and unpredictably peaks in March or May !?!?!?!
Some years you will make %100 playing it this way, every once in a while you might loose %10, when betting makes bets that have BIG upsides and small downsides !!!
Evangelion
Jul 20, 05:00 AM
Gah. The Linux community doesn't want to unify. In fact, not unifying is the core of their philosophy.
You do realize that you are full of crap? There is acautlly quite a bit work being done in order to unify various areas of Linux.
It's why there are 415 distributions (none of which are compatible with each other)
Again: you do realize that you are full of crap? There are handful of distributions that matter, rest are more or lesss niche. The ones that matter are (IMO): Fedora/Red Hat, SUSE, Ubuntu, Debian and Gentoo. Of those, Ubuntu and Debian are quite compatible with each other.
9,843 window managers (none of which have remotely similar configuration options), and 3.43x10^15 terminal emulators (none of which actually emulate terminals any better or worse than any other one).
Maybe they realized that "one size does NOT fit all"? Why should there be just WM, just one editor, just one browser, just one email-client etc. etc.?
Yes, Linux has several options to choose from. And is that a bad thing? Is it a good thing to cram some specific thing down users throatts without gicing them the option to choose? It has two primary GUI's (with several smaller ones floating around as well): GNOME and KDE. And while they are both GUI's, they are both sufficiently different that they do not overlap as much. They have different architecture behind them, different design-goals, different ideology... And they cater to different types of users. I have used both, and I can appreciate the strengths of either of them.
You do realize that you are full of crap? There is acautlly quite a bit work being done in order to unify various areas of Linux.
It's why there are 415 distributions (none of which are compatible with each other)
Again: you do realize that you are full of crap? There are handful of distributions that matter, rest are more or lesss niche. The ones that matter are (IMO): Fedora/Red Hat, SUSE, Ubuntu, Debian and Gentoo. Of those, Ubuntu and Debian are quite compatible with each other.
9,843 window managers (none of which have remotely similar configuration options), and 3.43x10^15 terminal emulators (none of which actually emulate terminals any better or worse than any other one).
Maybe they realized that "one size does NOT fit all"? Why should there be just WM, just one editor, just one browser, just one email-client etc. etc.?
Yes, Linux has several options to choose from. And is that a bad thing? Is it a good thing to cram some specific thing down users throatts without gicing them the option to choose? It has two primary GUI's (with several smaller ones floating around as well): GNOME and KDE. And while they are both GUI's, they are both sufficiently different that they do not overlap as much. They have different architecture behind them, different design-goals, different ideology... And they cater to different types of users. I have used both, and I can appreciate the strengths of either of them.
mahonmeister
Nov 27, 01:15 PM
Apple is making good strides in filling the holes in their line-up. Still a ways to go if they want their market share to keep climbing.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 7, 06:20 PM
Because there is not enough of it, and it will increase our need of foreign oil not lessen it.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
heehee
Nov 24, 03:11 PM
It's not really a purchase, but I'll be flying in a Falcon 7x to HK. That's how I roll. :p
Eidorian
Aug 25, 12:09 PM
CPU temp is a result of how efficient the heat dissipation is relative to the heat generated by the CPU... so without knowing how the heat dissipation capabilities varied between the two systems you cannot make much of a judgement on the CPU itself.
The first generation iMac G5 had worse heat dissipating capabilities then later revisions of the iMac G5.Oh I can be sure that a Conroe placed in an iMac will run into the volume constraints and effective heat dissipation of the heat sink when compared to a full blown BTX tower.
The original G5 and the Rev. B (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/IMacG5guts.png) stuck with the wonderful heat channel. The 17" models ran a lot hotter then the 20" due to the internal design and volume.
The Rev. C (http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/systems/imac_isight_internals/imac_g5_isight_inside.html) and Intel use similar internal layouts with the CPU and power supply toward the top of the machine.
Here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/inju/88928219/) is a good comparison.
The first generation iMac G5 had worse heat dissipating capabilities then later revisions of the iMac G5.Oh I can be sure that a Conroe placed in an iMac will run into the volume constraints and effective heat dissipation of the heat sink when compared to a full blown BTX tower.
The original G5 and the Rev. B (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/IMacG5guts.png) stuck with the wonderful heat channel. The 17" models ran a lot hotter then the 20" due to the internal design and volume.
The Rev. C (http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/systems/imac_isight_internals/imac_g5_isight_inside.html) and Intel use similar internal layouts with the CPU and power supply toward the top of the machine.
Here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/inju/88928219/) is a good comparison.
twoodcc
May 4, 09:32 PM
Building your own is fun but can be a real pain sometimes, especially if you use Linux :eek:
tell me about it. especially using linux inside windows! :eek:
tell me about it. especially using linux inside windows! :eek:
Goldfinger
Aug 31, 02:56 PM
Let's hope that those specs aren't the final ones. That they're just to clear inventory.
I'm hoping for Merom based mac minis.. Merom costs the same so why not ?
I'm hoping for Merom based mac minis.. Merom costs the same so why not ?
T'hain Esh Kelch
Oct 23, 01:57 PM
When does anyone think Apple will throw in the rumored Flash mem?
When they get Intels Santa Rosa chipset, since it is going to implement it.
When they get Intels Santa Rosa chipset, since it is going to implement it.
wordoflife
Feb 19, 09:44 PM
crapy iphone pics
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo-1.jpg
Beautiful view!
Holy crap! That is a nice view!
I'm jealous!
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo-1.jpg
Beautiful view!
Holy crap! That is a nice view!
I'm jealous!
Eraserhead
Nov 28, 11:23 AM
I remember playing on an XBox soon after it came out, it had Halo and a Hard drive, which made it better hardware-wise than the PS2 and it had a really good exclusive game (though GTA which is on the PS2 is better). So I don't think the XBox was too bad really. I don't think comparisons can be made with the Zune this time.
MrFirework
Jan 2, 10:51 AM
not only that, but none of the rumors really pointed to MWSF for a compact Macbook.
arn
True enough... but have any of the new product rumors really pointed to MWSF for anything?
arn
True enough... but have any of the new product rumors really pointed to MWSF for anything?
twoodcc
Feb 8, 09:54 PM
Thanx!
Never thought I'd ever get to this point when I started folding (almost) 4 years ago
;)
yeah i never thought i'd even get to 1 million. much less 5. keep it up!
On a side note, I have reached #977 overall with 6.4 mio units! I didn't think it was possible before the bigadv units...
mio?
Never thought I'd ever get to this point when I started folding (almost) 4 years ago
;)
yeah i never thought i'd even get to 1 million. much less 5. keep it up!
On a side note, I have reached #977 overall with 6.4 mio units! I didn't think it was possible before the bigadv units...
mio?
Irishman
Apr 22, 09:32 AM
SNIP
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.5 GHz i3 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
SNIP
That is the one I'll be getting. Why an i3 SB and not an i7 SB? I don't see Apple using an i3 in anything
Fixed!
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.5 GHz i3 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
SNIP
That is the one I'll be getting. Why an i3 SB and not an i7 SB? I don't see Apple using an i3 in anything
Fixed!
CorvusCamenarum
Mar 19, 01:23 PM
Doesn't seem to stop Obama from going on TV to claim credit though.
Maybe he thinks if he does enough of nothing, he'll get himself another Nobel Prize.
Still, it's good to see other governments taking the point on this. We've got enough on our plate as it is.
Maybe he thinks if he does enough of nothing, he'll get himself another Nobel Prize.
Still, it's good to see other governments taking the point on this. We've got enough on our plate as it is.
CyberBob859
Jun 22, 12:58 PM
Then what was the point in the iPad?
I think the question should be - what would be the point of the iOS layer?
It's not like OS/X has no program support. Which would people rather run - the full OS/X iWork programs or the limited iOS versions on their desktop? And as others pointed out - some iOS programs require hardware support (GPS, accelerometers, etc) that an iMac wouldn't have or need.
iOS as a replacement for Dashboard? Maybe. I can see some apps replacing Dashboard programs and being more useful.
iOS could be used as a "front-end" for touch and gesture support, much the same way as HP has their touch-designed programs on top of Windows 7 for their all-in-one Touchsmart PC's.
Instead of touching the screen, the rumored Magic Pad, along with the current Magic Mouse brings full gesture support to iMac via the iOS layer. So, you would have a Magic Pad, a small wireless keyboard, and the Magic Mouse in front of you, and navigate that way.
But - will iAds come to the desktop now?
I think the question should be - what would be the point of the iOS layer?
It's not like OS/X has no program support. Which would people rather run - the full OS/X iWork programs or the limited iOS versions on their desktop? And as others pointed out - some iOS programs require hardware support (GPS, accelerometers, etc) that an iMac wouldn't have or need.
iOS as a replacement for Dashboard? Maybe. I can see some apps replacing Dashboard programs and being more useful.
iOS could be used as a "front-end" for touch and gesture support, much the same way as HP has their touch-designed programs on top of Windows 7 for their all-in-one Touchsmart PC's.
Instead of touching the screen, the rumored Magic Pad, along with the current Magic Mouse brings full gesture support to iMac via the iOS layer. So, you would have a Magic Pad, a small wireless keyboard, and the Magic Mouse in front of you, and navigate that way.
But - will iAds come to the desktop now?
steadysignal
May 3, 01:15 PM
It's a dialogue box for christ sake. :rolleyes:
+1 (but it doesnt matter to the hater).
+1 (but it doesnt matter to the hater).
sord
Aug 6, 11:55 PM
Ok - I've been into Macs for a couple years now, so I don't have the history with the company of many of you do.
That said, it seems to me that with these ads or banners for Leopard, that it is closer to being released than we all might think. Has Apple promoted a product this way -- bashing M$ -- with out releasing the product soon after?
To me it just seems like real strong words to use if Leopard wont be out for a while, esp. if it will only be released around the time Vista will be next year.
Anyone know what I mean, or feel the same way?
Last WWDC Stevie said that Leopard would be announced at this WWDC - or at least demonstrated. My guess - late this year or early next it will be in stores.
Oh - and Powerbook G5s (dual core) tomorrow!!
That said, it seems to me that with these ads or banners for Leopard, that it is closer to being released than we all might think. Has Apple promoted a product this way -- bashing M$ -- with out releasing the product soon after?
To me it just seems like real strong words to use if Leopard wont be out for a while, esp. if it will only be released around the time Vista will be next year.
Anyone know what I mean, or feel the same way?
Last WWDC Stevie said that Leopard would be announced at this WWDC - or at least demonstrated. My guess - late this year or early next it will be in stores.
Oh - and Powerbook G5s (dual core) tomorrow!!
dr Dunkel
Apr 20, 02:54 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; sv-se) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
2. HDMI out
Why would be ever see this on an iMac? Mac mini, yes (it was overdue). iMac, never.
HDMI-in would be nice :-)
2. HDMI out
Why would be ever see this on an iMac? Mac mini, yes (it was overdue). iMac, never.
HDMI-in would be nice :-)
Lestdog
Apr 26, 01:59 PM
...Apple is turning into a company of douche bags.
MagicBoy
Feb 24, 07:46 PM
Mmmm, Golf TDI. Cracking cars. I went for the bargain option - Golf GT TDI mechanicals in the slightly smaller Skoda Fabia. Some american friends who run older Merc diesels we had over were very surprised by the refinement and power of it.
Wikipedia (yeah I know!) have some more information on the RA420 -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Cruze#Powertrains. Appears to be quite popular unit with the Far Eastern manufacturers. A little surprised Chevy/Daewoo/GM went to VM when they've got their own joint manufacturing operation with FIAT as used in the Opel/Vauxhall ranges.
Wikipedia (yeah I know!) have some more information on the RA420 -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Cruze#Powertrains. Appears to be quite popular unit with the Far Eastern manufacturers. A little surprised Chevy/Daewoo/GM went to VM when they've got their own joint manufacturing operation with FIAT as used in the Opel/Vauxhall ranges.
No comments:
Post a Comment