JoeG4
Feb 27, 02:06 AM
You can always tell the 22" because they have the power LCD below the bezel instead of on it. Three buttons too! Power, and brightness up/down. Even stranger, the buttons are mechanical clear pieces of plastic (and the power light is this big pill-shaped thing that hangs inside the power button).
It was such a neat design! And then there was the translucent black frame (The backlight sorta bleeds through em too, also cool). The DVI 22" had a GREEN (amber pulsing while sleeping) power light and had a UFO-shaped breakout box at the end of its cable for the USB/power/DVI. Very cool.
The sucky part about the 22" LCD was that it had a really high defect rate. However, it was introduced at a time when 15" LCDs were a luxury item, so it was more like the Ferrari of LCDs of its time. :D
I recall paying the same price for mine as the Mac Pro currently costs. Sheesh! Stupid me. I should've put that money into Apple stock! If I had put the $7k I blew on my Dual 800/22" into Apple shares I could afford a Ferrari right now :(
Being 14 and stupid FTW?
It was such a neat design! And then there was the translucent black frame (The backlight sorta bleeds through em too, also cool). The DVI 22" had a GREEN (amber pulsing while sleeping) power light and had a UFO-shaped breakout box at the end of its cable for the USB/power/DVI. Very cool.
The sucky part about the 22" LCD was that it had a really high defect rate. However, it was introduced at a time when 15" LCDs were a luxury item, so it was more like the Ferrari of LCDs of its time. :D
I recall paying the same price for mine as the Mac Pro currently costs. Sheesh! Stupid me. I should've put that money into Apple stock! If I had put the $7k I blew on my Dual 800/22" into Apple shares I could afford a Ferrari right now :(
Being 14 and stupid FTW?
gmcalpin
Jun 22, 05:18 PM
Touch interfaces don't NECESSARILY mean touchscreen interfaces.
The Magic Trackpad — http://www.macrumors.com/2010/06/07/apples-magic-trackpad-or-magic-slate-revealed/ — would allow for multi-touch on desktops, enabling many iOS applications to be used on a desktop computer (and obviously laptops could do the same thing with their trackpads).
There are lots of ways this could be useful. For example: touch input in a desktop environment could be useful for manipulating or selecting MULTIPLE buttons/sliders/whatever independently, and at the same time — which you can't do with a mouse.
The Magic Trackpad — http://www.macrumors.com/2010/06/07/apples-magic-trackpad-or-magic-slate-revealed/ — would allow for multi-touch on desktops, enabling many iOS applications to be used on a desktop computer (and obviously laptops could do the same thing with their trackpads).
There are lots of ways this could be useful. For example: touch input in a desktop environment could be useful for manipulating or selecting MULTIPLE buttons/sliders/whatever independently, and at the same time — which you can't do with a mouse.
McGiord
Apr 2, 07:30 PM
They always find a way to zoom in the screen and make it look nicer than what it actually is. The resolution is too grainy.
I am spoiled by the iPhone 4 display.
I am spoiled by the iPhone 4 display.
quadgirl
Sep 1, 12:54 PM
Most of the posts in this thread are about the 23" screen. Yes, I think it will happen to allow the imac to play 1080i/1080p HD.
But, how about the processors? Apple needs to have a Core 2 (Conroe not Merom) inside the imac. The imac is not a conventionally size desktop (not as much room inside as a tower) but Apple can not continue to use a laptop processor in the imac. If they do, then how will the Conroe be used in Apple's line up? In a Mac tower? I don't think so. Surely, a 23" iMac could house the Conroe suitably?
So I would say that the 23" iMac would kill 2 birds - Conroe and HD for the home user. :)
But, how about the processors? Apple needs to have a Core 2 (Conroe not Merom) inside the imac. The imac is not a conventionally size desktop (not as much room inside as a tower) but Apple can not continue to use a laptop processor in the imac. If they do, then how will the Conroe be used in Apple's line up? In a Mac tower? I don't think so. Surely, a 23" iMac could house the Conroe suitably?
So I would say that the 23" iMac would kill 2 birds - Conroe and HD for the home user. :)
iKwick7
Sep 1, 12:03 PM
If this does come out, looks like I'll be selling my Macbook. :)
Jaster
Apr 3, 09:24 AM
What does the iOS scrollbar look like on pages with a black background?
majidf
Oct 24, 06:21 AM
... not really reliable method was used ...
AidenShaw
Nov 15, 11:59 AM
well, OSX whooped xp for multicore usage then
On pyMol, yes.
If you look at the full article, XP bested OSX on several other programs.
Pretty much even, overall.
They don't report software versions or other useful details (like how many FB-DIMMs in the systems), so any of the "wins" and "losses" could easily be differences in software versions (is pyMol OSX exactly the same version, compiled with the same optimizations on the same compiler?) or other details.
For example, what if pyMol on OSx86 is optimized for Core and later chips, and the XP version is optimized for Pentium III systems (and doesn't take advantage of Pentium 4 and Core 2 improvements)? If that's that case, is not fair to say OSX is faster than XP - although it's clearly reasonable to state that OSX is a faster choice for pyMol.
On pyMol, yes.
If you look at the full article, XP bested OSX on several other programs.
Pretty much even, overall.
They don't report software versions or other useful details (like how many FB-DIMMs in the systems), so any of the "wins" and "losses" could easily be differences in software versions (is pyMol OSX exactly the same version, compiled with the same optimizations on the same compiler?) or other details.
For example, what if pyMol on OSx86 is optimized for Core and later chips, and the XP version is optimized for Pentium III systems (and doesn't take advantage of Pentium 4 and Core 2 improvements)? If that's that case, is not fair to say OSX is faster than XP - although it's clearly reasonable to state that OSX is a faster choice for pyMol.
robbieduncan
Apr 9, 04:39 PM
Maybe they are rare where you live. In the UK and the rest of Europe they are more common that automatics.
Multimedia
Jan 2, 01:27 PM
Spoke with an expert video editor last night and he thinks it's worth waiting for Stoakley-Seaburg (http://techreport.com/etc/2006q4/clovertown/index.x?pg=1) in the 8 core Mac Pro which he thinks is more likely to happen around May-June with a pre-announcement at NAB perhaps. So while I hope the 8 core gets announced, I am probably not going to be the earliest of adopters after all.
Want to give my son a true widescreen video iPod for this past Christmas so will be looking for that as well.
iTV will be interesting but I'm not sure how it will fit in with my mix yet as I don't fully understand its advantages to date.
Will be more interested in visiting the Canon booth and taking a closer look at the HV10 (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=14059&WT.mc_id=C123719aven.com/) as my first HDV camera.
Want to give my son a true widescreen video iPod for this past Christmas so will be looking for that as well.
iTV will be interesting but I'm not sure how it will fit in with my mix yet as I don't fully understand its advantages to date.
Will be more interested in visiting the Canon booth and taking a closer look at the HV10 (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=14059&WT.mc_id=C123719aven.com/) as my first HDV camera.
lifeinhd
Feb 21, 05:17 AM
Lol I again drank it 2 days ago by buying a Intel MacBook. Sorry G4's, looks like retirement is looming again. ;)
Not concerned with the impending refresh? Or do you plan to return and rebuy post-refresh?
Not concerned with the impending refresh? Or do you plan to return and rebuy post-refresh?
takao
Feb 26, 05:53 AM
i just checked the austrian chevrolet cruze site and interestingly the 2.0 diesel engine there doesn't match the power output of the engine mentioned here as it's a 163 hp, 360 nm engine opposed to the 150hp 320nm
the power output would fit the r 425 on the VM motori site but then the displacement doesn't match (2 liters vs. 2.5)
edit: nevermind ... the 163hp diesel is the new 2011 replacement engine for the 150 hp engine in the euro market, so i suspect the old production line of the 150hp version can no produce the engine for the US market ;)
the power output would fit the r 425 on the VM motori site but then the displacement doesn't match (2 liters vs. 2.5)
edit: nevermind ... the 163hp diesel is the new 2011 replacement engine for the 150 hp engine in the euro market, so i suspect the old production line of the 150hp version can no produce the engine for the US market ;)
whooleytoo
Jul 20, 05:47 AM
And since just about all OEM's wil preload Vista on their machines, the sales-numbers will be HUGE.
I think this is the key - once Vista comes out what OEM will be able to continue selling PCs with XP installed? Even if Vista's hardware requirements were a Core 2 Duo with 2GB RAM, they'd build every PC with a minimum of a Core 2 Duo with 2GB RAM, because they can't afford not to be on the Vista bandwagon.
I think this is the key - once Vista comes out what OEM will be able to continue selling PCs with XP installed? Even if Vista's hardware requirements were a Core 2 Duo with 2GB RAM, they'd build every PC with a minimum of a Core 2 Duo with 2GB RAM, because they can't afford not to be on the Vista bandwagon.
jephrey
Jul 14, 10:53 AM
I thought that there were other benefits to BD, therefore I've been backing their effort. I read that the scratch resistance of a BD is amazing. I know that there's a size issue at this point, but 25G on one layer is nicer than 30 on 2. Yes, you're going to pay for it, but there's much more "potential" with BD. We justified the expense of our macs using a similar argument. Finally, I think that in the future, we'll be needing that extra space on the 2-6 layers of a BD for uncompressed or losslessly compressed Hi-Fi audio/video. And is BD limited to MEPG-2, or can't it do MPEG-4 h.264 ? But all this may be bunk. I'm waiting for the first HVD to come out, then I can just stour a few TB on each disc. I'll just burn a main and a backup and keep all my digital data on them.
Jephrey
Jephrey
iphone3gs16gb
Jan 23, 02:34 PM
deff early 90's/late 80's... I'm going to go with accord?
yup 89 accord with 42,000 miles in it, 5 speed manual :D
yup 89 accord with 42,000 miles in it, 5 speed manual :D
Earendil
Nov 27, 03:16 PM
I find you the one that is incorrigible. The 23" inch price is competitive where it is as your link so eloquently points out. The Apple displays are easily worth a 15-20% mark-up. The problem is since the last time the display prices were updated 20" wide-screen panel prices have dropped nearly in half. So a year ago when Apple released this $699 price point it was a good price because competitors were selling the same panels at $599. Now they are at $399 and some times as low a $299. Apple's display is worth extra just not 75% to 100% extra.
I find what you say quite plausible. However a quick search finds all monitors in that price point to be of the S-PVA panel type, and not SWOP certified (or at least advertised as such). Perhaps a more in depth search would reveal the monitors you are talking about, or perhaps since you are making the claim, you are aware of some?
I fully suspect Apple has a markup on their pro-sumor monitors. However I'm tired of people using Dell monitors as an example for outrageous pricing. No one here, or in any argument I've seen recently, has offered a different comparison. My knowledge of monitors may not be up to date, but when I bought my monitor, Apple's prices were in line.
My apologies if I'm not easily swayed from what my own research has shown to be true, until someone can come up with something besides "you're wrong" :(
I mean absolutely no disrespect in any of my arguments...
I find what you say quite plausible. However a quick search finds all monitors in that price point to be of the S-PVA panel type, and not SWOP certified (or at least advertised as such). Perhaps a more in depth search would reveal the monitors you are talking about, or perhaps since you are making the claim, you are aware of some?
I fully suspect Apple has a markup on their pro-sumor monitors. However I'm tired of people using Dell monitors as an example for outrageous pricing. No one here, or in any argument I've seen recently, has offered a different comparison. My knowledge of monitors may not be up to date, but when I bought my monitor, Apple's prices were in line.
My apologies if I'm not easily swayed from what my own research has shown to be true, until someone can come up with something besides "you're wrong" :(
I mean absolutely no disrespect in any of my arguments...
alfagta
Apr 1, 04:50 PM
Basically. Now they just need to polish what they gave us. It's honestly a lot though. I wouldn't feel ripped off for them charging money for it.
Almost all of the Applications have been enhanced, autosave, Launchpad, Mission Control, Versions, resume, Multitouch gestures, full screen apps and the Mac App Store.
You feel like it�s a new experience? So much better?
Almost all of the Applications have been enhanced, autosave, Launchpad, Mission Control, Versions, resume, Multitouch gestures, full screen apps and the Mac App Store.
You feel like it�s a new experience? So much better?
quagmire
Jan 3, 02:10 PM
Still have the 2007 Saturn Aura XR. I think it will be the only car I will ever drive because after 4 years, it only has 20,000 miles on it. :p
http://gallery.me.com/quagmire2/100348/DSC_0502/web.jpg?ver=12940848050001
http://gallery.me.com/quagmire2/100348/DSC_0503/web.jpg?ver=12940848080001
http://gallery.me.com/quagmire2/100348/DSC_0507/web.jpg?ver=12940848100001
http://gallery.me.com/quagmire2/100348/DSC_0505/web.jpg?ver=12797434700001
http://gallery.me.com/quagmire2/100348/DSC_0502/web.jpg?ver=12940848050001
http://gallery.me.com/quagmire2/100348/DSC_0503/web.jpg?ver=12940848080001
http://gallery.me.com/quagmire2/100348/DSC_0507/web.jpg?ver=12940848100001
http://gallery.me.com/quagmire2/100348/DSC_0505/web.jpg?ver=12797434700001
Earendil
Nov 27, 09:49 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.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
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.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
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,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
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.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
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.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
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.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
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.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
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.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
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,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
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.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
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.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
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.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
PodPacker
Oct 23, 11:50 AM
Updates are expected very soon boys and ghouls! My dealer at a Mac Online Store just sent me an e-mail announcing a $100+ price drop on MacBook Pro laptops.
PBF
Apr 3, 07:57 PM
How is this logical? Just because I am in FS doesn't mean I don't want the ability to easily change what I am looking at.
I'm sorry, but either you shouldn't be in FS mode in the first place or you must be absurd to think it's not easy to have to move your mouse all the way to the top in order to reveal the address bar.
I'm sorry, but either you shouldn't be in FS mode in the first place or you must be absurd to think it's not easy to have to move your mouse all the way to the top in order to reveal the address bar.
Alpinism
Nov 16, 10:54 AM
either way, its both a win-win situation
a) you dont need 8 cores?? see the 4 cores Mac pro goes down in retail price
b) you want 8 cores? Great !! here it is
case close.
a) you dont need 8 cores?? see the 4 cores Mac pro goes down in retail price
b) you want 8 cores? Great !! here it is
case close.
richardsim7
Mar 22, 04:40 PM
Yeah but are they going to improve the quality? The DAC on the iPod Classic is bloody terrible! It makes me sad :(
kelving525
Sep 20, 11:13 PM
ah, thanks clarifying that. it was kind of hard to tell from some of the pictures. their website said something about "direct access". is it hard to get to the buttons? especially the sleep button?
They can be a little difficult if you're using it with your left hand seeing that Apple has tucked the volume rocker a bit back compared to last generation. The sleep button is perfectly fine, though. :)
They can be a little difficult if you're using it with your left hand seeing that Apple has tucked the volume rocker a bit back compared to last generation. The sleep button is perfectly fine, though. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment