liketom
Jul 19, 04:20 PM
Which is exactly why the past few weeks have been a great time to load up on Apple stock. Apple has been increasing computer sales with transitional computers. The "real" machines aren't out yet.
In other words, Apple growth won't be slowing down any time soon. In fact, it should probably accelerate over the next 12 months.
with a little help from us Mac users out here who end up buying 2 Macs or more a year ;)
i tell you this year is getting real expensive for me , Mac Mini Intel then the Black Book and later this year the new Mac Pro and just don't even talk about iPods yet :D Apple is skinting me worse then a divorce
In other words, Apple growth won't be slowing down any time soon. In fact, it should probably accelerate over the next 12 months.
with a little help from us Mac users out here who end up buying 2 Macs or more a year ;)
i tell you this year is getting real expensive for me , Mac Mini Intel then the Black Book and later this year the new Mac Pro and just don't even talk about iPods yet :D Apple is skinting me worse then a divorce
cult hero
Mar 22, 06:14 PM
The question is WHY? You can keep your nano/touch...
Yeah, I don't understand when people want to kill products they don't use. Like I care if the Classic keeps on going. I know at least three people that still prefer it.
Personally, I'm at the point where I'd almost trash my personal collection in favor of Pandora, but that doesn't mean OTHER people don't want to carry a ton of music with them.
Yeah, I don't understand when people want to kill products they don't use. Like I care if the Classic keeps on going. I know at least three people that still prefer it.
Personally, I'm at the point where I'd almost trash my personal collection in favor of Pandora, but that doesn't mean OTHER people don't want to carry a ton of music with them.
Paul Graham
Feb 6, 04:38 PM
As a person who owns 2 MK4 VWs and who's 4 closest friends drive MK4 Jettas, I'd never want to be associated with that.
This is how you make a MK4 look nice:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4119/4794436687_2a531d48e5_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4143/4794433771_2a2014c124_b.jpg
Just have to wait for the snow to go away to mount my r32 sideskirts and get my spacers on the wheels.
It was an example dude and... Each to their own eh?
Anyway, Mine would be done differently as me and my bro are somewhat perfectionists!
But That's the style I like - aka Euro/German Style.
Smaller rims on stretched low profile rubber, Debadged, Smoothed, De-seamed, Dropped/Slammed/Lowered ( w/e you wanna go with lol )
NO spoiler, A nice paint job and smokey tinted windows ( NOT fully tinted lol )
And personally, I'm going to install a more Audiophile based stereo rather than a full on ice install.
I'ld rather have a lovely crisp, Natural sounding system that provides just enough bass to compliment what's coming through the component speakers.
That Bora looks lovely by the way, Looks like its in mint condition from here.
This is how you make a MK4 look nice:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4119/4794436687_2a531d48e5_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4143/4794433771_2a2014c124_b.jpg
Just have to wait for the snow to go away to mount my r32 sideskirts and get my spacers on the wheels.
It was an example dude and... Each to their own eh?
Anyway, Mine would be done differently as me and my bro are somewhat perfectionists!
But That's the style I like - aka Euro/German Style.
Smaller rims on stretched low profile rubber, Debadged, Smoothed, De-seamed, Dropped/Slammed/Lowered ( w/e you wanna go with lol )
NO spoiler, A nice paint job and smokey tinted windows ( NOT fully tinted lol )
And personally, I'm going to install a more Audiophile based stereo rather than a full on ice install.
I'ld rather have a lovely crisp, Natural sounding system that provides just enough bass to compliment what's coming through the component speakers.
That Bora looks lovely by the way, Looks like its in mint condition from here.
jgould
Feb 22, 07:36 PM
My current setup, along with a bunch of stuff from work on my desk...
KnightWRX
Apr 26, 01:57 PM
Add
Windows,
Words
besides others !!
Guys, every trademark is made up of generic words. That's not what people mean when they say App Store is generic. What they actually mean is it is descriptive.
Let's say I open a shoe store. 2 Trademarks :
1- Shoe Box
Both very generic words, same as everyone who argues "Windows! Amazon! Word! it's all generic!" say. However, I'm not trademarking an actual box that contains shoes. I'm trademarking a name for a store. The shoes don't even have to come in boxes.
2- Shoe Store
This one is descriptive. I'm opening a shoe store, I'm deciding to call it Shoe Store. So now, Yellow can't say "Yellow, the best shoe store around!" because that infringes on my mark. That's what people take exception with here. The mark seems descriptive and thus shouldn't be trademarkable. Apple themselves often refer to it in this descriptive nature in their financials and keynotes.
Windows,
Words
besides others !!
Guys, every trademark is made up of generic words. That's not what people mean when they say App Store is generic. What they actually mean is it is descriptive.
Let's say I open a shoe store. 2 Trademarks :
1- Shoe Box
Both very generic words, same as everyone who argues "Windows! Amazon! Word! it's all generic!" say. However, I'm not trademarking an actual box that contains shoes. I'm trademarking a name for a store. The shoes don't even have to come in boxes.
2- Shoe Store
This one is descriptive. I'm opening a shoe store, I'm deciding to call it Shoe Store. So now, Yellow can't say "Yellow, the best shoe store around!" because that infringes on my mark. That's what people take exception with here. The mark seems descriptive and thus shouldn't be trademarkable. Apple themselves often refer to it in this descriptive nature in their financials and keynotes.
mrgreen4242
Jul 18, 08:21 AM
Well, I'll chime in to agree with a lot of you...
1) it HAS TO BE 480p widescreen or better. 480p would be acceptable - it's better than DVD (roughly the same overall image info, but it's a progressive source material, so no pulldown being done in the player, meaning just a tad nicer images AND it's not NTSC color, so you get an improvement there).
2) it needs to be on my TV, and that doesn't mean buy a $400 iPod to do it, either.
3) it needs to be cheap. I get all the movies I want from Netflix for under $20 a month. The only reason I would use this service is to get something right now on an impulse. which brings us to...
4) downloads can't be overnight. Should be able to start watching within half an hour, otherwise I'll go to video store and rent it for $2.50 on DVD.
Now, the only thing that could excuse any of these requirements would be...
5) release movies that are just out of theatres, but not yet on DVD. There's a market for that with people who don't like going to the theatre (expensive, noisy, etc) but don't like to wait for DVD.
#5 would excuse #3 and 4, but #1 and 2 are pretty non-negotiable for me.
I know, I'm asking for fast, cheap, and high-quality, where it's normally pick two, but there are already many options out there that make you pick two... Apple needs to provide all 3 if they want to sand out in the crowd.
1) it HAS TO BE 480p widescreen or better. 480p would be acceptable - it's better than DVD (roughly the same overall image info, but it's a progressive source material, so no pulldown being done in the player, meaning just a tad nicer images AND it's not NTSC color, so you get an improvement there).
2) it needs to be on my TV, and that doesn't mean buy a $400 iPod to do it, either.
3) it needs to be cheap. I get all the movies I want from Netflix for under $20 a month. The only reason I would use this service is to get something right now on an impulse. which brings us to...
4) downloads can't be overnight. Should be able to start watching within half an hour, otherwise I'll go to video store and rent it for $2.50 on DVD.
Now, the only thing that could excuse any of these requirements would be...
5) release movies that are just out of theatres, but not yet on DVD. There's a market for that with people who don't like going to the theatre (expensive, noisy, etc) but don't like to wait for DVD.
#5 would excuse #3 and 4, but #1 and 2 are pretty non-negotiable for me.
I know, I'm asking for fast, cheap, and high-quality, where it's normally pick two, but there are already many options out there that make you pick two... Apple needs to provide all 3 if they want to sand out in the crowd.
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...
Macky-Mac
Mar 28, 01:12 PM
....Next you'll be saying that the US won WW1 and WW2.
so now you're going to say the US lost WW1 and WW2? :p
so now you're going to say the US lost WW1 and WW2? :p
bmw3wags
Oct 1, 07:26 AM
Its been almost a month now how come their aren't more cases now now?
AdeFowler
Apr 2, 08:35 PM
Nice ad. Really like it.
All the Nokia/Samsung ads that I've seen recently look like they were made during a task in The Apprentice.
All the Nokia/Samsung ads that I've seen recently look like they were made during a task in The Apprentice.
karsten
Mar 24, 01:18 PM
pleasegodpleasegodpleasegod
nagromme
Aug 6, 11:26 PM
Whatever is or is not shown about Leopard/Macs, be sure to enjoy the spectacular howling from those who assume that nothing ELSE will ever emerge about Leopard/Macs. From those who assume that if it's not mentioned on THIS particular date, Apple is doomed and it's too late :D You heard it here first: any Macs that don't appear tomorrow will NEVER appear, and Leopard will have NOTHING except what is shown tomorrow ;) It's life or death... if any rumors turn out to be only rumors, the platform is dead :)
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 29, 10:59 AM
Maybe FrontRow 2 (I believe/assume comes with Leopard) is where this will play in. Maybe instead of making a single device and labeling it a media center Apple will allow for any Mac (any new Mac...) to be used as a media center via FrontRow 2.
I really hope you are correct about FR2 in Leopard. However...
I do think you need a TV-card in the computer too. Given Apples philosophy about simplicity, I doubt they will have a stand alone TV-reciever. Furthermore, I just can't see Apple selling MP with a TV-card. So my guess is that they will make a dedicated computer. Still I am most likely wrong... as always...:p
I really hope you are correct about FR2 in Leopard. However...
I do think you need a TV-card in the computer too. Given Apples philosophy about simplicity, I doubt they will have a stand alone TV-reciever. Furthermore, I just can't see Apple selling MP with a TV-card. So my guess is that they will make a dedicated computer. Still I am most likely wrong... as always...:p
triceretops
Apr 12, 10:20 PM
pfffft! You think you've got it bad? I've only got 1500kbps here :D
Right now I am only getting about 10kbps. Hotel internet.:mad:
Right now I am only getting about 10kbps. Hotel internet.:mad:
HDnut
Jul 18, 09:19 AM
:eek: I guess we will all become big fat jelly fish at this rate, I like getting in my car and interacting with other people:D . Pay per pay is BS, look at XM and Sirus radio, a joke. Oh we won't have commercials, and now most of the channels do, and I can see this happening on downloads, you get the download and the first 10min is Ads. Plus I have better things to do than sit in front of my computer all day long, do that enough at work and when I am taking a break like now :rolleyes: What the Movie industry needs and music industry needs is a huge shot of quality not quantity, I can't think of too many movies and or music CDs that I would want to buy right now, or even rent.
mattcube64
Feb 7, 06:03 PM
For something creeping up on 15 years old, that thing is in fantastic shape. Mustangs are an odd car for me. I never seem to like them each time a new one is released, but then the older they get, the more I start to like them. A buddy of mine has a '93 Cobra with just a couple thousand miles on it, and I absolutely love it.
I read a story a while back about people and their music tastes. Many people never really get out of their 20's with their favorite bands. The stuff you like around that age is what sticks with you forever as your favorite. I think it might be something similar with cars. I see cars from back in the early-mid 90s, when I was in high school and then into college, and I get all nostalgic and stuff. Fox body 5L Mustangs, FC RX7s, C4 Corvettes, Syclone/Typhoon, etc. The older I get, and the older those cars get, the more I love them. New cars are nice, but some things just stick with you. And those cars are permanently stuck with me.
Treat that Stang nice Puma, because it is certainly a keeper.
I completely agree with the whole "liking what you enjoyed as a youngster forever" theory.
Back when I was six or seven, my dad bought a brand new red '95 Camaro Z28. Quite a few mods were added to it, including a 150hp shot of nitrous and more. I was too young to realize why everyone thought the car was "cool." After some family car purchases, my dad eventually traded the Z28 in for a 2002 SS, again, right off the lot. After all the mods, that car pushed out almost 600HP. He's since moved onto cars much nicer than a Camaro; but for as long as I live, the Camaro will probably be my favorite car on the road. I hope to get a new '11 SS here in the next six months or so.
I read a story a while back about people and their music tastes. Many people never really get out of their 20's with their favorite bands. The stuff you like around that age is what sticks with you forever as your favorite. I think it might be something similar with cars. I see cars from back in the early-mid 90s, when I was in high school and then into college, and I get all nostalgic and stuff. Fox body 5L Mustangs, FC RX7s, C4 Corvettes, Syclone/Typhoon, etc. The older I get, and the older those cars get, the more I love them. New cars are nice, but some things just stick with you. And those cars are permanently stuck with me.
Treat that Stang nice Puma, because it is certainly a keeper.
I completely agree with the whole "liking what you enjoyed as a youngster forever" theory.
Back when I was six or seven, my dad bought a brand new red '95 Camaro Z28. Quite a few mods were added to it, including a 150hp shot of nitrous and more. I was too young to realize why everyone thought the car was "cool." After some family car purchases, my dad eventually traded the Z28 in for a 2002 SS, again, right off the lot. After all the mods, that car pushed out almost 600HP. He's since moved onto cars much nicer than a Camaro; but for as long as I live, the Camaro will probably be my favorite car on the road. I hope to get a new '11 SS here in the next six months or so.
paradox00
May 3, 01:29 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.
There is a better way. Good programs include a shortcut to the applications folder in the disk image. Some even have arrows directing you to drag the application to the shortcut within the same window. How on earth is an installer better than that?
Apple's uninstall process also works really well. If you want to delete the program but retain the settings, drag the program to the trash, if you want to delete the settings, drag the settings folder from the library to the trash as well or use a third party app like app zapper (as you mentioned). How is the Windows uninstall process better than the one step process of dragging into the trash or dragging into app zapper?
People coming from Windows often criticize macs because they get the job done too efficiently, and they find it hard to believe that things can work so smoothly yet still be effective. They come with the expectation of expecting complexity, and when it isn't there, they find the lack of complexity to be a fault. It's a ridiculous phenomenon, but it's quite real. I should know, I also switched.
There is a better way. Good programs include a shortcut to the applications folder in the disk image. Some even have arrows directing you to drag the application to the shortcut within the same window. How on earth is an installer better than that?
Apple's uninstall process also works really well. If you want to delete the program but retain the settings, drag the program to the trash, if you want to delete the settings, drag the settings folder from the library to the trash as well or use a third party app like app zapper (as you mentioned). How is the Windows uninstall process better than the one step process of dragging into the trash or dragging into app zapper?
People coming from Windows often criticize macs because they get the job done too efficiently, and they find it hard to believe that things can work so smoothly yet still be effective. They come with the expectation of expecting complexity, and when it isn't there, they find the lack of complexity to be a fault. It's a ridiculous phenomenon, but it's quite real. I should know, I also switched.
UnreaL
Sep 7, 06:44 AM
Well I ordered the new lower model Mac Mini, this will be my first Mac (and its not even for me! For sister..)
1) CPU being Core Duo not really a problem, sims & firefox etc are not going to strain it!
2) 512mb memory is a let down, but im not waiting or paying the amount extra for 1GB as again she wont use it.
3) No superdrive is a let down, I would have spent the amount extra to upgrade if it was there, but I'm not buying the model with better GPU and slightly bigger harddrive and anyway she doesnt use DVD's.
Basically Bootcamp caused me to convert, without it I would have kept her on PC
Well we'll have to see.
Got it for �360 from the Apple higher education store, cant wait :D
1) CPU being Core Duo not really a problem, sims & firefox etc are not going to strain it!
2) 512mb memory is a let down, but im not waiting or paying the amount extra for 1GB as again she wont use it.
3) No superdrive is a let down, I would have spent the amount extra to upgrade if it was there, but I'm not buying the model with better GPU and slightly bigger harddrive and anyway she doesnt use DVD's.
Basically Bootcamp caused me to convert, without it I would have kept her on PC
Well we'll have to see.
Got it for �360 from the Apple higher education store, cant wait :D
Edge100
Sep 1, 12:47 PM
Hmm... the problem with that line-up is that when consumers see the shiny new advert saying "Meet the new iMacs" they'll look at the clock speeds and say "What new iMacs?". I think it would be reasonable for Apple to offer...
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,699 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,199 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
No way would I pay an extra $500 for an 8% faster machine and a slighly larger display, when for that money I can go with the 20" and buy a second widescreen 20" display and have a HUGE viewable area.
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,699 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,199 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
No way would I pay an extra $500 for an 8% faster machine and a slighly larger display, when for that money I can go with the 20" and buy a second widescreen 20" display and have a HUGE viewable area.
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
zap2
Apr 8, 07:42 PM
So why not Mexico? Mexico is experiencing way more violence than most of these Middle East countries yet their request for U.N. aid in 2009 was denied. They are on our doorstep and we are ignoring it for the most part even though we are partly to blame for the violence. The U.N. actually told Mexico just the other day to withdraw their own Military forces from the fight against the cartels.
Well we are working with Mexico in a diplomatic sense....but you know, it's not a war zone, so bombing them isn't going to be effective.
And putting troops on the ground in Mexico was never requested and would likely result in more fighting. The solution to Mexico's troubles are social, not through weapons.
Well we are working with Mexico in a diplomatic sense....but you know, it's not a war zone, so bombing them isn't going to be effective.
And putting troops on the ground in Mexico was never requested and would likely result in more fighting. The solution to Mexico's troubles are social, not through weapons.
KnightWRX
Apr 10, 06:52 PM
And two-seaters?? :eek: Well, let's not go there.
Hey, my Street Bob is a 2 seater. :mad:
Hey, my Street Bob is a 2 seater. :mad:
kepner
Mar 31, 02:13 AM
Launchpad is now an app in the Applications folder, and can be removed from the Dock.
Is frontrow back?
No, and they removed the mention of it from the Sound prefpane. ("Play Front Row sound effects")
Is frontrow back?
No, and they removed the mention of it from the Sound prefpane. ("Play Front Row sound effects")
ErikGrim
Mar 30, 08:54 PM
Is there a DMG or is the App Store / Redemption Code the only way to update? What about offline computers?
JackAxe
Mar 25, 06:44 PM
This is LAME and I'm say that in the nicest most passive agressive way. ;)
I'm coming from the standpoint of someone that owns a G25 racing wheel, a Track IR 5 head tracker, and racing games and sims all of which support my toys. Games that run dead-locked at 60 fps -- as I enable what's called VSYNC --- at a substantially higher detail level than any low-powered GPU/CPU can currently muster.
I'm coming from the standpoint of someone that owns a G25 racing wheel, a Track IR 5 head tracker, and racing games and sims all of which support my toys. Games that run dead-locked at 60 fps -- as I enable what's called VSYNC --- at a substantially higher detail level than any low-powered GPU/CPU can currently muster.
No comments:
Post a Comment