evilgEEk
Sep 6, 07:44 PM
$19.99 for a downloaded movie, that's absolutely ridiculous. There is no way I would ever pay that much when I can go buy a new release DVD for $12-14.99. Amazon's service will fail, especially if Apple does indeed release a Movie Store.
I'm not a fan of $14.99 either, but it's a little more reasonable.
Of course all of this depends on the quality and if you can burn it.
Six more days. :)
I'm not a fan of $14.99 either, but it's a little more reasonable.
Of course all of this depends on the quality and if you can burn it.
Six more days. :)
takao
Jan 12, 02:33 PM
thinking back how many people called the iPod, mac mini and macbook name stupid it's very likely already confirmed
on the other side it would be much more logical to refer to wimax or other such features
on the other side it would be much more logical to refer to wimax or other such features
Evangelion
Aug 26, 10:09 AM
Folks need to be careful when making G5 to Conroe/etc. comparisons....
The PPC 970FX (single core G5 which was in the iMac G5) has a TDP below that of a Conroe.
FX was used in the xServe, and they couldn't get dual-core CPU in there. As soon as they moved to woodcrest, they could replace that 2x G5 with 2x dual-core Woodcrests. Says quite a bit about how hot they run....
The PPC 970FX (single core G5 which was in the iMac G5) has a TDP below that of a Conroe.
FX was used in the xServe, and they couldn't get dual-core CPU in there. As soon as they moved to woodcrest, they could replace that 2x G5 with 2x dual-core Woodcrests. Says quite a bit about how hot they run....
Peace
Jul 19, 04:57 PM
Apple pretty much confirmed an iPhone in this call..
He said that cell phones dont play music very well.iPods do and they were doing something about that.
He said that cell phones dont play music very well.iPods do and they were doing something about that.
speakerwizard
Nov 15, 08:11 AM
well, OSX whooped xp for multicore usage then
Micjose
Mar 22, 04:52 PM
This is great for large quantities of uncompressed music. Totally would get one if it did have that much more space.
v66jack
Mar 1, 06:04 PM
Yep all of them are hard drives, i have 2TB in each one and then a RAID-0 with 2x2TB. I keep most for back ups of Photos, Music and Movies and OS clones (i'm fairly meticulous with back ups and having them on more than just one drive..but most duplicated clones are taken offline and stored after back up).
One is used as my external iTunes library as there isnt enough space on the SSD and the others are free space, diagnostic drives, work drives used to do audio/video or photo storage/editing
I must say, your array of hard drives / back up system is mightily impressive
One is used as my external iTunes library as there isnt enough space on the SSD and the others are free space, diagnostic drives, work drives used to do audio/video or photo storage/editing
I must say, your array of hard drives / back up system is mightily impressive
stcanard
Nov 28, 03:57 PM
Originally Posted by stcanard
Beta
MiniDisc
Memory Stick
ATRAC
PSone & PS2?
HandyCam?
I think you're missing my point, but maybe I didn't explain it well enough.
Yes, the PSone, PS2, and HandyCam are succesful items that probably make money as one of the many entries in the field. As are Sony TV's, speakers, etc.
But they fail at the one thing Sony has been repeatedly trying to do, what Microsoft always tries to do, and what Microsoft is trying to do with the XBox and the Zune -- become the one runaway standard that everybody uses and becomed synonymous with the market.
Think Walkman and iPod. Think IE (until recently, when firefox has finally started to come back) -- Beta, MiniDisk, Memory Sticks, ATRAC were all attempts to repeat this, and have failed miserably. Blu-Ray is an attempt as well, and I'm not holding my breath.
Sony is showing that they are now completely incapable of creating that single iconic product ever again, and have been for some time. The post I was responding to was comparing Microsoft to Sony's marketing, which I don't think is positive, from that point of view.
Beta
MiniDisc
Memory Stick
ATRAC
PSone & PS2?
HandyCam?
I think you're missing my point, but maybe I didn't explain it well enough.
Yes, the PSone, PS2, and HandyCam are succesful items that probably make money as one of the many entries in the field. As are Sony TV's, speakers, etc.
But they fail at the one thing Sony has been repeatedly trying to do, what Microsoft always tries to do, and what Microsoft is trying to do with the XBox and the Zune -- become the one runaway standard that everybody uses and becomed synonymous with the market.
Think Walkman and iPod. Think IE (until recently, when firefox has finally started to come back) -- Beta, MiniDisk, Memory Sticks, ATRAC were all attempts to repeat this, and have failed miserably. Blu-Ray is an attempt as well, and I'm not holding my breath.
Sony is showing that they are now completely incapable of creating that single iconic product ever again, and have been for some time. The post I was responding to was comparing Microsoft to Sony's marketing, which I don't think is positive, from that point of view.
japanime
Apr 3, 04:26 AM
good point, he doesn't have an ipad he is just trolling.
people don't understand that if 1,000 ipads have a problem with backlight bleeding, thats still only .01% of ipad 2s Sold.
And apple will replace any ipad with backlight bleeding
I have an original iPad. It has had backlight bleeding since the day I received it. Several months ago I brought it to an Apple Store Genius Bar and they told me it was normal and not something for which they would issue a replacement. Guess they lied to me. Oh well...
people don't understand that if 1,000 ipads have a problem with backlight bleeding, thats still only .01% of ipad 2s Sold.
And apple will replace any ipad with backlight bleeding
I have an original iPad. It has had backlight bleeding since the day I received it. Several months ago I brought it to an Apple Store Genius Bar and they told me it was normal and not something for which they would issue a replacement. Guess they lied to me. Oh well...
Luph67
Apr 2, 07:36 PM
My god that was so much better than the ridiculous iPhone ads.
firestarter
Apr 12, 10:01 PM
Don't know what the price will be but I'm nearly positive there will be no 'upgrade' price.
Apple seems to be moving to the app-store model where you pay less at first but then you pay the same for every upgrade.
iLife has done this for years and now Aperture is doing the same thing. Frankly, I prefer it to the old way.
I don't know... Licensing terms seem more reasonable on the app store.
I guess we'll just have to see (I'm hoping for upgrade price though, since I have FCP!)
Apple seems to be moving to the app-store model where you pay less at first but then you pay the same for every upgrade.
iLife has done this for years and now Aperture is doing the same thing. Frankly, I prefer it to the old way.
I don't know... Licensing terms seem more reasonable on the app store.
I guess we'll just have to see (I'm hoping for upgrade price though, since I have FCP!)
guzhogi
Nov 15, 01:03 PM
You are not a developer, I take it?
Are you seriously suggesting that a developer should ship a product with features that are not only untested, but haven't even been tried out?
What do you prefer: Unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, 50 percent CPU usage, or unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, kaboom!
I don't think that's what he meant. I think he means instead of hard coding a program to use 8 (or however many cores), have the program dynamically use however many cores are in your computer. So if he wrote it on a 2 core machine, the program would use 2 cores. When he puts it on an 8 core computer, it'll automatically use all 8 w/o having to reprogram. The programmer should still test it and make corrections as necessary.
Are you seriously suggesting that a developer should ship a product with features that are not only untested, but haven't even been tried out?
What do you prefer: Unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, 50 percent CPU usage, or unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, kaboom!
I don't think that's what he meant. I think he means instead of hard coding a program to use 8 (or however many cores), have the program dynamically use however many cores are in your computer. So if he wrote it on a 2 core machine, the program would use 2 cores. When he puts it on an 8 core computer, it'll automatically use all 8 w/o having to reprogram. The programmer should still test it and make corrections as necessary.
obey908
Feb 19, 08:40 PM
crapy iphone pics
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo-1.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo-1.jpg
Stella
Nov 27, 01:53 PM
Why do you continue to link to DigiTimes? Its not worth the time and effort, they are highly inaccurate - 100% wrong.
hatehereyes
Nov 25, 04:41 AM
Picked this up earlier today. PSN username is Albrecht_FTW if you want to race.
http://i55.tinypic.com/a15nx4.jpg
http://i55.tinypic.com/a15nx4.jpg
windows311
Sep 15, 02:28 AM
CR hasn't been relevant in at least 5 years. Another mag that made a terrible transition to the web. Welcome to the interweb CR, now will you please hire a web designer? Your site is embarrassing.
gkarris
Nov 27, 09:04 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.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
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.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
ingenious
Apr 7, 09:19 AM
really, this is what Ive been taking about...I think that most Mac users don't want to hear it
maybe thats because its not true and most mac articles are written by very wintel biased writers.
maybe thats because its not true and most mac articles are written by very wintel biased writers.
strabes
May 2, 04:37 PM
I like it, but right now there's 3 ways to install apps: App Store, download from internet and drag to applications folder, installer wizard (like MS Office). Also, the difference between the applications folder and LaunchPad will be confusing for most users. This whole thing needs to be unified. Either get rid of the Applications folder or get rid of LaunchPad.
steve2112
Feb 22, 09:46 PM
That has changed. The Cummins, Powerstroke, and Duramax now have to meet the stringent emissions regulations. Why do you think they cost $8K now compared to the $3-4K before the new emission laws?
I thought anything with a GVWR of over 10k lbs was exempt from those standards. I know they are exempt from CAFE fuel economy standards.
I thought anything with a GVWR of over 10k lbs was exempt from those standards. I know they are exempt from CAFE fuel economy standards.
yac_moda
Jul 20, 02:00 PM
I hope not, since that could put them in jail. All publically traded companies have a blackout period before announcements where no employees are allowed to buy or sell.
That's funny that is not what they told us when I worked for Aldus, although there was one time that we could not trade.
I think the blackout period is only for execs and VPs, most of the time.
Although that could be because we were in San Diego and not Seatle, companies with lots of remote offices would probably be the same.
That's funny that is not what they told us when I worked for Aldus, although there was one time that we could not trade.
I think the blackout period is only for execs and VPs, most of the time.
Although that could be because we were in San Diego and not Seatle, companies with lots of remote offices would probably be the same.
Deej
Oct 23, 06:44 AM
Could it *really* be true....??? :D
balamw
Sep 7, 12:01 AM
It seems to me that the distribution of 480i content is pretty much settled. Netflix and Blockbuster do this well and at very competitive prices. I can't see that Apple would benefit much from trying to compete there.
I agree with you, except for the fact that Netflix already carries both BluRay and
HD-DVD formats, so Apple would be directly competing with them in HD videos.
My 2 720p HDTVs are salivating at the possibilities...
B
I agree with you, except for the fact that Netflix already carries both BluRay and
HD-DVD formats, so Apple would be directly competing with them in HD videos.
My 2 720p HDTVs are salivating at the possibilities...
B
yac_moda
Jul 20, 02:00 PM
I hope not, since that could put them in jail. All publically traded companies have a blackout period before announcements where no employees are allowed to buy or sell.
That's funny that is not what they told us when I worked for Aldus, although there was one time that we could not trade.
I think the blackout period is only for execs and VPs, most of the time.
Although that could be because we were in San Diego and not Seatle, companies with lots of remote offices would probably be the same.
That's funny that is not what they told us when I worked for Aldus, although there was one time that we could not trade.
I think the blackout period is only for execs and VPs, most of the time.
Although that could be because we were in San Diego and not Seatle, companies with lots of remote offices would probably be the same.
No comments:
Post a Comment