cubist
Mar 23, 10:27 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Steve Jobs also said they weren't cancelling HyperCard. I wouldn't put much faith in what he says.
Steve Jobs also said they weren't cancelling HyperCard. I wouldn't put much faith in what he says.
Object-X
Nov 28, 03:25 AM
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.
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? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
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.
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?
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. 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?
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. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
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. 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? 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?
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.
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? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
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.
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?
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. 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?
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. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
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. 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? 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?
dongmin
Aug 6, 11:41 PM
Hey, since we're all posting picts, a blast from the past:
http://www.macminute.com/images/db/tiger1
http://www.macminute.com/images/db/tiger2
http://www.macminute.com/images/db/tiger1
http://www.macminute.com/images/db/tiger2
Eidorian
Aug 25, 10:26 AM
I can.Only thing holding back better GPU in mini and MacBooks is Intel. Apple needs to stick with IG for cost reasons. Just wating for Intel to start shipping better GPU so they can improve that ASAP. I'm with you guys. Waiting for that to improve as well. But may happen with this refresh. Don't know the IG roadmap so well. Read here the 965 set is delayed until early 2007.
Can anyone here confirm where we're at and going how soon on the Intel Integrated GPU front?We're still going with the GMA950 on the mobile front. The X3000 (965) has made its debut on the desktop platform with Conroe. Still, driver issues and low chipset supply keep it from the mass market. We're not going to see a MOBILE X3000 (965) until Santa Rosa next year. Hopefully Apple can make some good drivers for OS X and the X3000. I don't know anything beyond the 965 in the integrated graphics front.
Can anyone here confirm where we're at and going how soon on the Intel Integrated GPU front?We're still going with the GMA950 on the mobile front. The X3000 (965) has made its debut on the desktop platform with Conroe. Still, driver issues and low chipset supply keep it from the mass market. We're not going to see a MOBILE X3000 (965) until Santa Rosa next year. Hopefully Apple can make some good drivers for OS X and the X3000. I don't know anything beyond the 965 in the integrated graphics front.
bigdaddyp
Sep 14, 11:45 AM
They DO, I don't think you have the facts. CR held Lexus' feet to the fire to get them to act on the GX - http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2010/04/consumer-reports-2010-lexus-gx-dont-buy-safety-risk.html .
Follow up - Lexus fixed the problem and CR lifted their "DO NOT BUY" recommendation - http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2010/05/video-lexus-gx-460-passes-retest-consumer-reports-lifts-dont-buy-label.html . CR is *NOT* the problem here, it's Apple penchant for hubris/self-involvement. I love Apple and their products, but I'm not fooling myself to expect that they'll be any more consumer-friendly and honest than they need to be to turn a profit/feed Steve's ego.
The problem I sometimes have with their recommendations is that their reports are written to assume you are a total dumba$$ with no personal responsibility.
If you are driving a 2 1/2 ton suv like its a sports car then there is a good chance that you will be forcibly yanked out of the gene pool. Ten years ago many or most large suvs would have tipped over or gone out of control in that scenario. Instead of praising the advances automakers have made they instead have a hissy fit that a large, heavy automobile can get a bit loose when driven beyond its limits.
How about reminding their readers that electronic stability control can't overcome the laws of physics and extra care needs to taken when driving large, top heavy vehicles in curves.
Yes I am glad that Toyota tweaked and improved the stability control, but I think this illustrates that Cr. feels the consumer has no or little personal responsibility for their actions.
Follow up - Lexus fixed the problem and CR lifted their "DO NOT BUY" recommendation - http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2010/05/video-lexus-gx-460-passes-retest-consumer-reports-lifts-dont-buy-label.html . CR is *NOT* the problem here, it's Apple penchant for hubris/self-involvement. I love Apple and their products, but I'm not fooling myself to expect that they'll be any more consumer-friendly and honest than they need to be to turn a profit/feed Steve's ego.
The problem I sometimes have with their recommendations is that their reports are written to assume you are a total dumba$$ with no personal responsibility.
If you are driving a 2 1/2 ton suv like its a sports car then there is a good chance that you will be forcibly yanked out of the gene pool. Ten years ago many or most large suvs would have tipped over or gone out of control in that scenario. Instead of praising the advances automakers have made they instead have a hissy fit that a large, heavy automobile can get a bit loose when driven beyond its limits.
How about reminding their readers that electronic stability control can't overcome the laws of physics and extra care needs to taken when driving large, top heavy vehicles in curves.
Yes I am glad that Toyota tweaked and improved the stability control, but I think this illustrates that Cr. feels the consumer has no or little personal responsibility for their actions.
TangoCharlie
Aug 25, 06:17 AM
Um, the Mini does have four USB-ports, and a FireWire-port.
OOps, you're quite right!!
http://images.apple.com/uk/macmini/images/indexports20060229.jpg
http://images.apple.com/uk/macmini/images/indexports20060229.jpg
:o
OOps, you're quite right!!
http://images.apple.com/uk/macmini/images/indexports20060229.jpg
http://images.apple.com/uk/macmini/images/indexports20060229.jpg
:o
Reach9
Mar 22, 03:58 PM
I wish i had that many songs that i listen to :(
bwintx
Jul 20, 06:58 AM
I bet that Vista will run on several year old machines. You might not get all the bells and whistles, but I don't have all the bells and whistles of Tiger on this Mac Mini of mine either. And since just about all OEM's wil preload Vista on their machines, the sales-numbers will be HUGE. And then we have those who upgrade their existing machines.
You are correct. Existing PCs will run Vista but without the Aqua-ripoff pretty interface. For the Aqua-ripoff (I refuse to call it anything else), that's where much more RAM and newer video cards come into play by necessity. So, essentially, you get two classes of Vista users (imagine having to write the "requirements" text for Windows software in the near-future; ugh), and a giant opportunity for the memory and video card companies, which are probably buying their magazine and Web banner ad space right now -- not that anybody should alert the media for such info.
You are correct. Existing PCs will run Vista but without the Aqua-ripoff pretty interface. For the Aqua-ripoff (I refuse to call it anything else), that's where much more RAM and newer video cards come into play by necessity. So, essentially, you get two classes of Vista users (imagine having to write the "requirements" text for Windows software in the near-future; ugh), and a giant opportunity for the memory and video card companies, which are probably buying their magazine and Web banner ad space right now -- not that anybody should alert the media for such info.
roland.g
Aug 29, 11:29 AM
IF they go to a 1.66ghz Core Duo, 512mb RAM, GMA950, 80gb 5400rpm HD, SD, AE, and BT model for $599 I'll get one immediately.
You can update the Core Solo to a SD for $50. They won't give a SD to the low end stock. But $50 upgrade isn't bad.
You can update the Core Solo to a SD for $50. They won't give a SD to the low end stock. But $50 upgrade isn't bad.
caderousse
Apr 26, 02:37 PM
Wow some of you guys really ride Apple's jock huh? How the hell can you claim 'App Store' as non-generic?
MS and Amazon are clearly correct here. Apple should just pay their legal fees and move on.
MS and Amazon are clearly correct here. Apple should just pay their legal fees and move on.
baryon
Apr 26, 12:52 PM
I don't even think the word "App" is really officially a word. As for generic terms, everyone uses generic terms to describe their company's products and brand names, as that's the only way you can allow people to make a link between something they already know, and the product.
"Apple" is also generic, yet everyone agrees that it's fairly reserved for Apple inc. So are many other names that companies patent to avoid others using it.
"Apple" is also generic, yet everyone agrees that it's fairly reserved for Apple inc. So are many other names that companies patent to avoid others using it.
xUKHCx
Jan 11, 04:55 PM
Leads nicely on from "There's Something in the Air" (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=412600).
If you ask me it is not a very good name.
If you ask me it is not a very good name.
RaceTripper
Jan 10, 07:50 PM
So very sad but true. F1 fan here, and rally if I can ever find time to watch it. I might not be a F1 fan for much longer though if they keep making "the ultimate racing machine" slower and slower by limiting the technology :mad: I understand the safety reasons, but its getting to be worse than the bicycle world:eek:
I was a big F1 fan, but once the USGP got cancelled my wife and I became huge ALMS fans. Evey year we go to the 12 Hours of Sebring, Road America, and Petit Le Mans. The racing is much better than in F1, and the series is far more fan friendly. I've even started working in the hot pits doing IMSA pit notes during races, in addition to the race photography I have been doing for fun.
One point to consider about F1 rules changes. Slowing the cars down could improve the on track action. Right now they are so fast they get too spread out and it becomes a parade of cars with the action being how the gaps change. When you slow the cars down they start to bunch together again and force some wheel to wheel battles. The turbo 4-bangers coming in a few years could prove to add some excitement back to F1, even if it does cost us the terrific sound of high revving V8 engines. The rule changes aren't so much about safety as they are about trying to get a race to ensue.
I was a big F1 fan, but once the USGP got cancelled my wife and I became huge ALMS fans. Evey year we go to the 12 Hours of Sebring, Road America, and Petit Le Mans. The racing is much better than in F1, and the series is far more fan friendly. I've even started working in the hot pits doing IMSA pit notes during races, in addition to the race photography I have been doing for fun.
One point to consider about F1 rules changes. Slowing the cars down could improve the on track action. Right now they are so fast they get too spread out and it becomes a parade of cars with the action being how the gaps change. When you slow the cars down they start to bunch together again and force some wheel to wheel battles. The turbo 4-bangers coming in a few years could prove to add some excitement back to F1, even if it does cost us the terrific sound of high revving V8 engines. The rule changes aren't so much about safety as they are about trying to get a race to ensue.
Evangelion
Jul 14, 12:22 PM
From what I recall, Philips began working on the compact disk project and Sony later on joined them in that venture.
It was originally made by Philips, but the CD we know today is a Philips/Sony Co-Op.
And, regarding the BetaMax... It was actually quite succesfull. Yes, it failed in consumer-space, but it's still being used in television-productions.
Just keep in mind Sony's hit/miss ratio for standardization.;)
Is it REALLY that bad? BetaMax wasn 't really a failure, since it's widely used even today. It's just not used by consumers. Sony was very important in creating the CD. They do have to misses that can't be denied: Memory Stick and MiniDisk.
Other companies might have less misses in these things, but we must acknowledge that none of them has been as active in coming up with alternatives. I haven't really seen Matsushita (for example) try to come up with new stuff. Sony has tried to come up with new stuff. Some of the succeeded, some of them failed.
It was originally made by Philips, but the CD we know today is a Philips/Sony Co-Op.
And, regarding the BetaMax... It was actually quite succesfull. Yes, it failed in consumer-space, but it's still being used in television-productions.
Just keep in mind Sony's hit/miss ratio for standardization.;)
Is it REALLY that bad? BetaMax wasn 't really a failure, since it's widely used even today. It's just not used by consumers. Sony was very important in creating the CD. They do have to misses that can't be denied: Memory Stick and MiniDisk.
Other companies might have less misses in these things, but we must acknowledge that none of them has been as active in coming up with alternatives. I haven't really seen Matsushita (for example) try to come up with new stuff. Sony has tried to come up with new stuff. Some of the succeeded, some of them failed.
mrsir2009
Apr 12, 01:26 PM
Maybe they are rare where you live. In the UK and the rest of Europe they are more common that automatics.
Wow, here in New Zealand you never see new manual cars (unless they're some sort of heavy duty utility vehicle or a utility van). Regular road cars are all automatic now...
Wow, here in New Zealand you never see new manual cars (unless they're some sort of heavy duty utility vehicle or a utility van). Regular road cars are all automatic now...
TalonFlyer
Sep 14, 10:48 AM
Does the iPhone have an inherent design issue with regards to antenna performance. The answer is, absolutely YES. Does the bumper mitigate this issue, in my experience it does, however only a marginal amount.
I have dropped calls every day, in places where I would have near full signal if I was not holding the phone. I have 3G data issues, especially in the fringe areas where I did not have an issue with my 3Gs.
The iPhone is a great device and I agree that consumer reports is splitting hairs with the antenna issue.
Apple agree's there is a problem or they would not have given away bumpers to everyone.
Fortunately, I use my iPhone as a phone only about 20% of the time, so 80% of my use is great. The other 20% is only a problem about 1 in 7 calls.
So, while it is a little inconvenient when a call drops when I hold the phone in that way, or short data interruptions on 3G from time-to-time, overall I get a lot done with the iPhone.
I do look forward to changing my iPhone to a newer device at the first reasonable opportunity, primarily because of the antenna issue.
I have dropped calls every day, in places where I would have near full signal if I was not holding the phone. I have 3G data issues, especially in the fringe areas where I did not have an issue with my 3Gs.
The iPhone is a great device and I agree that consumer reports is splitting hairs with the antenna issue.
Apple agree's there is a problem or they would not have given away bumpers to everyone.
Fortunately, I use my iPhone as a phone only about 20% of the time, so 80% of my use is great. The other 20% is only a problem about 1 in 7 calls.
So, while it is a little inconvenient when a call drops when I hold the phone in that way, or short data interruptions on 3G from time-to-time, overall I get a lot done with the iPhone.
I do look forward to changing my iPhone to a newer device at the first reasonable opportunity, primarily because of the antenna issue.
dawnraid
Mar 22, 11:28 PM
Bought a black one last week (my old 4th gen died R.I.P). It just made sense, as I have 145gb of tunes that all get regularly rinsed! Works pretty well with my senheisser hd-25'1-I's
I dont know why I would spend more on a touch and get half the space.
EZ you lot :D
I dont know why I would spend more on a touch and get half the space.
EZ you lot :D
HarryKeogh
Apr 19, 10:57 AM
I heard a rumor that these will not have a retina display or BluRay. No, seriously. They won't. My source is never wrong.
zoozx
Sep 6, 10:29 AM
Please explain to me who would buy a mini and why?
I just don't get it when a imac is close in price with a monitor.
What am I missing?
I just don't get it when a imac is close in price with a monitor.
What am I missing?
Seryph
Mar 31, 09:44 AM
Talking about new "features": have you noticed the Fuji wallpaper is different?
The new one has clouds at the base...
I'd like to see this too! The old one was pretty bland at the bottom so if this is true I'm glad they changed it.
The new one has clouds at the base...
I'd like to see this too! The old one was pretty bland at the bottom so if this is true I'm glad they changed it.
thederby
Mar 22, 05:26 PM
Just put it in a YoTank case like I did. You can drive your car over it without damaging the iPod.
http://www.substrata.ca/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/CJE3140.jpg
More pics here (http://www.substrata.ca/blog/uncategorized/portable-music-rig/).
that's hot.
http://www.substrata.ca/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/CJE3140.jpg
More pics here (http://www.substrata.ca/blog/uncategorized/portable-music-rig/).
that's hot.
28monkeys
Mar 22, 08:44 PM
Never abandon your classic. That is company's identity
Peterkro
Mar 19, 04:37 PM
Nice edit. CNN was first. :p
The edit wasn't supposed to suggest the Beeb got it first it's just where I saw it. There really isn't a "we got if first" thing in news reporting, stuff tends to come first on the wire services and video comes from essentially auction centres (I know of two one in Atlanta and one in London ) which within seconds sells "exclusive" images on the open market.Al Jaz gets something and it's on Beeb/Cnn etc within minutes for example.
The edit wasn't supposed to suggest the Beeb got it first it's just where I saw it. There really isn't a "we got if first" thing in news reporting, stuff tends to come first on the wire services and video comes from essentially auction centres (I know of two one in Atlanta and one in London ) which within seconds sells "exclusive" images on the open market.Al Jaz gets something and it's on Beeb/Cnn etc within minutes for example.
Lurchdubious
Nov 25, 09:49 AM
Ordered a 26" white Vizio LED LCD for the wifey from Target. $209 shipped!
http://www.buypricelist.com/images_products/Vizio_M260VA_W_VIZIO_M260VA_W_26_Inch_LED_LCD_HDTV_Razor_LED_Backlighting_White.jpg
http://www.buypricelist.com/images_products/Vizio_M260VA_W_VIZIO_M260VA_W_26_Inch_LED_LCD_HDTV_Razor_LED_Backlighting_White.jpg
