Consultant
Mar 25, 03:59 PM
Great news. And so thin!
iPad 1 does not support HDMI out, so I'm assuming no, it doesn't work.
Exactly.
iPad 1 does not support HDMI out, so I'm assuming no, it doesn't work.
Exactly.
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.
Sydde
Mar 1, 08:54 PM
Wikipedia states the Toyota Prius 3rd Gen gets a combined AFE of 50 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Prius#Third_generation_.28XW30.3B_2009.E2.80.93present.29) mpg (4.7L US gallons) if the diesel Cruze gets 37/48, that would give it a median AFE of 42.5 — 85% of what the Prius gets.
OTOH, they say "Drive a Toyota, you'll never stop!" and, "Toyota, the last car you'll ever drive."
OTOOH, Chevy? Yeesh. You might as well have XP on an Acer.
OTOH, they say "Drive a Toyota, you'll never stop!" and, "Toyota, the last car you'll ever drive."
OTOOH, Chevy? Yeesh. You might as well have XP on an Acer.
Multimedia
Nov 23, 10:32 AM
Happy Thanksgiving everyone! I thought the Mac mini would be Core 2 Duo by now for sure. I guess they still have quite a backlog of Core Duo units not yet sold. Maybe they're getting killer discounts from Intel on those old slow Core Duo processors.
Seems like the supply of the faster Clovertowns is probably weak enough for Apple to wait until January at least. My own thought now is that if we have to wait for January, might as well wait a little longer for the Stoakley-Seaburg (SS) chips (http://techreport.com/etc/2006q4/clovertown/index.x?pg=1) to ship so the first 8-core Mac Pro can be a really killer machine. Then there's also the issue of Leopard shipping about the same time the full on 8-core with SS setup will be really ready in quantity so Apple can keep up with demand.
So I've set my brain on March '07 now so I won't have another prematurely earger anticipation attack before then. That way if it happens sooner I'll be pleasantly surprised but still may wait for it to ship with Leopard. I will also feel a lot better spending $4k+ on an 8-core with SS inside as well. I'm thinking that may be Apple's plan too. Seems like they would not want to release their first 8-core MP crippled with bottlenecks they know will be opened up in only a few more months. It's also gonna be the most expensive Mac ever sold and I'm sure they want to give their customers their money's worth while at the same time giving their competition headaches. ;) The fact that it is in HD? I suppose so. The concert itself groundbreaking? Well, hopefully that's not what you meant or else you've obviously never seen a show across the pond... :p ;) :cool:Yeah I was referring to the fact that it's in HD and some of the best music concert editing I have ever seen. Just amazing Emmy Award worthy editing.
The last concert I saw across the pond was a YES concert in Genoa Italy in summer of 1972. :D
Seems like the supply of the faster Clovertowns is probably weak enough for Apple to wait until January at least. My own thought now is that if we have to wait for January, might as well wait a little longer for the Stoakley-Seaburg (SS) chips (http://techreport.com/etc/2006q4/clovertown/index.x?pg=1) to ship so the first 8-core Mac Pro can be a really killer machine. Then there's also the issue of Leopard shipping about the same time the full on 8-core with SS setup will be really ready in quantity so Apple can keep up with demand.
So I've set my brain on March '07 now so I won't have another prematurely earger anticipation attack before then. That way if it happens sooner I'll be pleasantly surprised but still may wait for it to ship with Leopard. I will also feel a lot better spending $4k+ on an 8-core with SS inside as well. I'm thinking that may be Apple's plan too. Seems like they would not want to release their first 8-core MP crippled with bottlenecks they know will be opened up in only a few more months. It's also gonna be the most expensive Mac ever sold and I'm sure they want to give their customers their money's worth while at the same time giving their competition headaches. ;) The fact that it is in HD? I suppose so. The concert itself groundbreaking? Well, hopefully that's not what you meant or else you've obviously never seen a show across the pond... :p ;) :cool:Yeah I was referring to the fact that it's in HD and some of the best music concert editing I have ever seen. Just amazing Emmy Award worthy editing.
The last concert I saw across the pond was a YES concert in Genoa Italy in summer of 1972. :D
JRM PowerPod
Aug 6, 11:13 PM
I think we can draw some more info from those covered banners, it looks like they might announce something at wwdc. More so, its possible that those announcements are represented in pictorial form on those covered banners.
PLEASE DON'T FLAME ME, I'M JUST JOKING
Just an idea?
PLEASE DON'T FLAME ME, I'M JUST JOKING
Just an idea?
toddybody
Mar 24, 09:52 PM
So has anyone stuck a 6970 in a mac pro yet?
PS for the people who don't know apple does not support Crossfire or SLI in mac os x so the 6990 which is a dual GPU on a single card solution will not and can not be supported until they change how osx works.
Well then, Apple is gonna confuse alot of people with the 5770 crossfire MP upgrade. Look it up folks, crossfire is supported
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/mac_pro?mco=MTg5MTY5NDQ
PS for the people who don't know apple does not support Crossfire or SLI in mac os x so the 6990 which is a dual GPU on a single card solution will not and can not be supported until they change how osx works.
Well then, Apple is gonna confuse alot of people with the 5770 crossfire MP upgrade. Look it up folks, crossfire is supported
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/mac_pro?mco=MTg5MTY5NDQ
iDAG
Jan 11, 05:19 PM
I would love a Mac like that if it was the same price as the current MacBooks.
GeekOFComedy
Nov 24, 09:54 AM
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41C0o2GAJGL._SS500_.jpg
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
skunk
Mar 28, 02:49 AM
So now that I pwned you you still try to twist words to get weasle your way out.That'll be the day.
MacBoobsPro
Aug 7, 05:50 AM
An iPhone, not as a cell phone, but as a landline skype style wifi cordless phone to go with iChat. Wouldn't that make sense for Apple to make? Ties in with their computers & iLife, would work in all countries, and would be easy, and possibly cheap for them to make.
Steve Jobs, would probably want want to make a phone that transitions seamlessly between indoor wifi and the cell networks.
I was thinking that. Maybe thats why the iPhone pix look more like a house phone instead of cell phone?
Hmmmm... ?
Steve Jobs, would probably want want to make a phone that transitions seamlessly between indoor wifi and the cell networks.
I was thinking that. Maybe thats why the iPhone pix look more like a house phone instead of cell phone?
Hmmmm... ?
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
mac-er
Jul 20, 08:19 AM
"We're not sitting around doing nothing," Apple said about the prospect that mobile phones may soon emerge as very capable digital music players and challenge the iPod.
This was a pretty interesting quote AppleInsider had from the presentation.
This was a pretty interesting quote AppleInsider had from the presentation.
HecubusPro
Aug 31, 02:49 PM
Really?! This is very interesting. Are they already shipping then?
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2010
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2010
Bacong
Oct 2, 09:48 PM
I have the griffin gloss case but I'm waiting for whatever switcheasy comes out with
MisterK
May 2, 07:46 PM
I'm glad Apple is thinking for themselves and leaving the purists behind as they adopt newer, better ways of doing things. The idea of installing from a disc image is ridiculous. Anyone I've explained it to can understand it, but always mention there must be a better way. "Install" is much better than launching a disc image, opening an applications window, and then dragging the icon over to the other window. Also, dragging a file to the trash doesn't delete all the pieces it came with. An uninstall was needed. I have been using AppZapper, but this will now be built into the OS.
AidenShaw
Aug 28, 03:17 PM
...an "official media breakout box" or Asteroid 2.0. A box about the size of the mini itself...
This came up earlier, and I said "That would be too *ugly* for Apple to even consider..." (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2759645&postcount=138)
This came up earlier, and I said "That would be too *ugly* for Apple to even consider..." (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2759645&postcount=138)
brianus
Sep 1, 01:22 PM
these prices seem a lot more like what I was thinking. Wishful? maybe, but this would be aggressive pricing, not keeping the current 17" and 20" where they are and throwing the 23" way over their marks.
Yeah, this is what I was thinking too. It's not so much that they're growing the iMac line and reaching towards the Mac Pro; rather, 23" is the new 20" and 20" is the new 17". Just the natural progression of things. And 17" definitely needs to be relegated to Education Only (I could see them being sold to some businesses too, perhaps), lest it either cannibalize the Mac mini at its too-reduced price, or seem like way too little for the money.
Yeah, this is what I was thinking too. It's not so much that they're growing the iMac line and reaching towards the Mac Pro; rather, 23" is the new 20" and 20" is the new 17". Just the natural progression of things. And 17" definitely needs to be relegated to Education Only (I could see them being sold to some businesses too, perhaps), lest it either cannibalize the Mac mini at its too-reduced price, or seem like way too little for the money.
Reverend Wally
Jan 2, 10:23 PM
:( How long ago were the MBPs updated? Because I'm looking to buy Jan/Feb and I'm not confident that the current spec is competitive. It at least needs a HD screen.
The C2D upgrade happened in November. The 17s actually shipped toward the last part of November. I can't understand why anyone would think that an improvement is needed in the displays on the MBP line. Some of you must have extaordinary vision if you could expect the video to be crisper or any more HD than it is. When I am viewing HD TV on this MBP, it actually blows the picture that we get on our HDTV set. And movies are really realistic looking on this screen. I perceive that anyone wanting a major upgrade to what I am seeing right here is going after "bragging rights" .... But that is just MHO
I also own a bad A$$ custom built notebook with a kick butt video card and super duper display and I actually like this Mac better. Again ... MHO
:cool:
The C2D upgrade happened in November. The 17s actually shipped toward the last part of November. I can't understand why anyone would think that an improvement is needed in the displays on the MBP line. Some of you must have extaordinary vision if you could expect the video to be crisper or any more HD than it is. When I am viewing HD TV on this MBP, it actually blows the picture that we get on our HDTV set. And movies are really realistic looking on this screen. I perceive that anyone wanting a major upgrade to what I am seeing right here is going after "bragging rights" .... But that is just MHO
I also own a bad A$$ custom built notebook with a kick butt video card and super duper display and I actually like this Mac better. Again ... MHO
:cool:
nuclearwinter
Apr 6, 10:31 PM
not gonna do it...
jrbdmb
Apr 19, 03:33 PM
I read through a bunch of these posts and I agree with some of you who think the iPod Classic is the best one, based on capacity alone. But the screen is too small now. I too also like to travel with my entire music library and videos - I never know what I'll be in the mood to listen to or watch. That said, if I could offer advice to Apple, I'd say give us the 160GB or 220GB capacity with an iPod Touch interface. Make it as thick as the current iPod Classic if you have to, but give me a larger screen and the same icon-driven interface of the iPhone and iPod Touch. Keep the price at $249 or $299 even, and I'll wait in line for it.
I'd buy that. Touch style interface is much faster (for me) when managing large libraries of music. Give me an iPod Touch with the newest high capacity hard drive.
I'd buy that. Touch style interface is much faster (for me) when managing large libraries of music. Give me an iPod Touch with the newest high capacity hard drive.
whooleytoo
Jul 19, 09:20 AM
I've watched every movie I own at least 15x, and most of them many more than that. I for one won't rent from itunes, I'd rather not is all. If they make money off of it, more power to them
Likewise. Ideally I'd like a movie purchase option, and/or a flat rate subscription service. I'd have absolutely no interest in the rental system as reported. I guess it just proves it's different strokes for different folks.
Hence I think, unlike the music service, the video delivery system will probably have to offer several options. The music service had to be nice and simple, out of necessity, as existing services were too complex and not taking off. Now that people have become accustomed to iTMS, I think there's plenty scope for Apple to offer more than one delivery type.
Likewise. Ideally I'd like a movie purchase option, and/or a flat rate subscription service. I'd have absolutely no interest in the rental system as reported. I guess it just proves it's different strokes for different folks.
Hence I think, unlike the music service, the video delivery system will probably have to offer several options. The music service had to be nice and simple, out of necessity, as existing services were too complex and not taking off. Now that people have become accustomed to iTMS, I think there's plenty scope for Apple to offer more than one delivery type.
Hollis
Jul 13, 11:23 PM
I'd think the option would come a bit later. I mean, who wants an optical drive that can currently play nothing and burn to nothing which will cost them $500-$1000 on a machine that is already very pricey.
Theres movies on Blu-Ray already.. and you can buy discs to burn too already... I think a BTO option is perfectly reasonable.
Theres movies on Blu-Ray already.. and you can buy discs to burn too already... I think a BTO option is perfectly reasonable.
mrgreen4242
Aug 29, 12:21 PM
I know this is off topic. But you guys and gals have got to go download the new Bob Dylan Blues Music Video Ad for iTunes pre-selling his new album "Modern Times" (http://www.apple.com/ipod/ads/dylan/). It is incredible! :eek: :cool:
Ya, that is off topic. WAY off topic. Why would you post that here? There's already threads started about this. Bah.
Ya, that is off topic. WAY off topic. Why would you post that here? There's already threads started about this. Bah.
gmcalpin
Jun 23, 08:29 AM
One thing I'd like to see is a stylus that can be used with this & an iPad. Before I get flamed, hear me out. It wouldn't be just stylus only. It'll work just the way it is with your fingers, but also use a stylus for fine work like a painting/drawing program. Some people have bulky fingers that are too imprecise for drawing.
I agree, but I don't think the current screens in iPhones or iPads can register something as small as a real stylus point.
Maybe not, but all third-party styluses for iPhones and iPads so far have been the size of a pencil eraser (or a sausage � literally), and I can't imagine that's what they started with.
Sooner or later, I expect Apple to put some amount of pressure-sensitivity into future iPads or iPhones, one way or another, though, and their utility as drawing devices will increase dramatically.
I agree, but I don't think the current screens in iPhones or iPads can register something as small as a real stylus point.
Maybe not, but all third-party styluses for iPhones and iPads so far have been the size of a pencil eraser (or a sausage � literally), and I can't imagine that's what they started with.
Sooner or later, I expect Apple to put some amount of pressure-sensitivity into future iPads or iPhones, one way or another, though, and their utility as drawing devices will increase dramatically.
No comments:
Post a Comment