kadajawi
Aug 30, 04:06 PM
Your prices really hurt. A very basic Core Solo is around $750 here.
Anyway I need to get a new computer for my parents really soon... can't really afford to wait for an upgrade (which would be nice, although not neccessary). How likely is the upgrade? Or maybe I should build them a PC... hm. Would be cheaper, as fast as the Mac, much better equipped and not that much bigger.
What I would love to see though wouldn't be a Mac not that Mini, but something in a real case, without compromising for size. Put in the cheapest Intel CPU that is up to date, so you can toss in any faster CPU. Or better let the customer decide. Basic version would have a cheap CPU, maybe even a Celeron. Onboard graphics (but PCIx slot!). Accept ordinary disc drives, maybe even deliver without. Minimum amount of RAM... as low as 256 MB? Do anything to keep prices low, but give the machine a good case, size something around Mac Pro, maybe a bit smaller. Midi Tower size. Can be white plastic for example, should be stylish. Important are only the casing and the board, so the user can upgrade. That would really be something for switchers... they could simply plug in their old hardware (please at least driver support for all ATI and nVidia cards, the most important sound cards (Creative and VIA Envy24* I guess)). Ok, I think that will only stay a dream :(
Anyway I need to get a new computer for my parents really soon... can't really afford to wait for an upgrade (which would be nice, although not neccessary). How likely is the upgrade? Or maybe I should build them a PC... hm. Would be cheaper, as fast as the Mac, much better equipped and not that much bigger.
What I would love to see though wouldn't be a Mac not that Mini, but something in a real case, without compromising for size. Put in the cheapest Intel CPU that is up to date, so you can toss in any faster CPU. Or better let the customer decide. Basic version would have a cheap CPU, maybe even a Celeron. Onboard graphics (but PCIx slot!). Accept ordinary disc drives, maybe even deliver without. Minimum amount of RAM... as low as 256 MB? Do anything to keep prices low, but give the machine a good case, size something around Mac Pro, maybe a bit smaller. Midi Tower size. Can be white plastic for example, should be stylish. Important are only the casing and the board, so the user can upgrade. That would really be something for switchers... they could simply plug in their old hardware (please at least driver support for all ATI and nVidia cards, the most important sound cards (Creative and VIA Envy24* I guess)). Ok, I think that will only stay a dream :(
celo48
Apr 3, 07:56 AM
I like the ad. At least it does not end like this.
"If you don't have an iPad, then you don't have an iPad."
"If you don't have an iPad, then you don't have an iPad."
ImNoSuperMan
Aug 29, 09:02 AM
Mac mini not getting Meroms might also mean MB wont get Meroms any time soon too. Hopefully Apple will put Meroms in MBP only. So that I can sell my MB without much loss and buy a merom MBP:D
VyseTheLegend
Sep 11, 06:24 PM
Update: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRmI98mNZEM
Bestbuy supposedly has the new GripVue for the iPod Touch.
Any idea if they have the Grip Ergo?
Bestbuy supposedly has the new GripVue for the iPod Touch.
Any idea if they have the Grip Ergo?
Gregg2
Apr 11, 07:57 PM
A CVT is simply a transmission with no fixed gear ratios. It can have any gear ratio between a set minimum and maximum, it has no "steps" like "1st gear, 2nd gear". In other words, it's a transmission type where you could theoretically have the engine spin where it produces the most power (let's say at 5000 rpm) all the time while accelerating. In reality, car CVTs do still have gears, like the Honda Fit which is a 7 gear automatic CVT transmission.
CVT, DSG or the traditional fluid type are all automatics. They just differ in their inner workings. What you're talking about has nothing to do with the inner-working, the paddle like shifters or + - gates on the shifter is simply an interface that lets you override any of the automatic transmissions and select your own gear.
A distinction to make. You could technically have a CVT transmission that you put in "drive" and drive off and you could have a traditional automatic with paddle shifters. Both are unrelated in their function.
Interesting, even for someone not real mechanically inclined, such as myself. And yes, the CVT on my soon to be new vehicle can be placed in "regular" drive and it behaves as a normal automatic. You can also use the CVT without the paddles, using the shift lever instead. In fact, you can get one that doesn't even have paddles. The ones that do also allow you to use the shift lever to "change gears".
CVT, DSG or the traditional fluid type are all automatics. They just differ in their inner workings. What you're talking about has nothing to do with the inner-working, the paddle like shifters or + - gates on the shifter is simply an interface that lets you override any of the automatic transmissions and select your own gear.
A distinction to make. You could technically have a CVT transmission that you put in "drive" and drive off and you could have a traditional automatic with paddle shifters. Both are unrelated in their function.
Interesting, even for someone not real mechanically inclined, such as myself. And yes, the CVT on my soon to be new vehicle can be placed in "regular" drive and it behaves as a normal automatic. You can also use the CVT without the paddles, using the shift lever instead. In fact, you can get one that doesn't even have paddles. The ones that do also allow you to use the shift lever to "change gears".
neko girl
Mar 19, 11:28 PM
I used it. It didn't work for me ):
AvSRoCkCO1067
Aug 24, 05:43 PM
I hope it happens soon......that new iMac is sounding nice!!! I think it is obviously coming "VERY SOON." What happened to September 5th? Is that the tuesday after labor day, I think it is....
This article refers to the Mac Mini, not the iMac...
This article refers to the Mac Mini, not the iMac...
applefan289
Mar 24, 01:41 PM
anyone want to guess what we will see in the new imac?
gpus i mean
I would guess there's going to be:
1.) A processor upgrade
2.) Same RAM
3.) Better graphics
4.) Thunderbolt
And to make it an epic upgrade, 5.) would be an all-new design.
gpus i mean
I would guess there's going to be:
1.) A processor upgrade
2.) Same RAM
3.) Better graphics
4.) Thunderbolt
And to make it an epic upgrade, 5.) would be an all-new design.
thejadedmonkey
Nov 28, 07:46 AM
Congratulations, you just lost any arguments you wish to make. If Apple monitors are vastly overpriced for what you get, if you don't have any need for something that is superior to a regular consumer model, then why in the hell did you buy one?
Maybe he got an apple one first and didn't like it (but who's going to trash it), or one was a gift, or perhaps he wanted to go with the whole apple-theme.. Maybe he has TWO computers.
Why are you looking for a fight? I happen to have two different lava lamps. why? Because I can. thank you, don't bite my head off because I have two.
Maybe he got an apple one first and didn't like it (but who's going to trash it), or one was a gift, or perhaps he wanted to go with the whole apple-theme.. Maybe he has TWO computers.
Why are you looking for a fight? I happen to have two different lava lamps. why? Because I can. thank you, don't bite my head off because I have two.
kalisphoenix
Jan 2, 09:47 PM
I certainly hope not. Sun may not produce the glamourous stuff, but it is exceedingly great at inventing and innovating on the back-end and they're open with it. Apple buying Sun wouldn't make them any more innovative, but I can see Apple's culture of secrecy and proprietary control killing much of what Sun does.
Apple's proprietary attitude may or may not help it on the consumer desktop, but it wouldn't be successful everywhere.
Not to mention the NeXTSTEP vs. Apple, Cocoa vs. Carbon schism. Those two philosophies have not learned to work together as well as I would have hoped. Introducing a third, profoundly different culture could be disastrous.
Apple: Computers for home users and schools.
NeXT: Computers for developers and researchers.
Sun: Computers for government and corporations.
I can't even imagine what Sun's influence on the hardware and software would be. It'd be positive, I'm sure -- a lot of geniuses at Sun -- but all of the other factors inside the companies and cultures could never be predicted.
Apple's proprietary attitude may or may not help it on the consumer desktop, but it wouldn't be successful everywhere.
Not to mention the NeXTSTEP vs. Apple, Cocoa vs. Carbon schism. Those two philosophies have not learned to work together as well as I would have hoped. Introducing a third, profoundly different culture could be disastrous.
Apple: Computers for home users and schools.
NeXT: Computers for developers and researchers.
Sun: Computers for government and corporations.
I can't even imagine what Sun's influence on the hardware and software would be. It'd be positive, I'm sure -- a lot of geniuses at Sun -- but all of the other factors inside the companies and cultures could never be predicted.
islanders
Dec 27, 09:35 PM
I�m waiting on buying a HD DVD or BlueRay until the price comes down, so I could see iTV offering a HD alternative, and filling that niche.
Two premium channels cost $20 a month so iTV would sell you the device to steam movies, some broadcast, download like Tivo, so you wouldn�t need a Blueray or HD DVD.
What else could be practical? Of course it will have a hard drive� a cable box DVR has a hard drive.
If it also has the ability to surf the web and run a word processor, handle video from DVR and digital camera, I�ll get one�
That is if the price is about $500.
Some unanswered questions are where are they going to get the bandwidth to do all this? You will have to have a cable subscription, perhaps just a basic subscription, but even then bandwidth is limited.
They will need their own satellite, if they really want to compete. But that would make them iDish? hmmm
This could be very interesting. I have often wondered why all the cable companies and satellite companies are within $5 pricing difference of each other? Is this the rock bottom competitive price so they can break even or are these prices fixed?
I would love to get rid of so many commercials. I�m paying $78 a month for basic digital subscription and have to use a DVR to record programs so I can zap though the commercials.
Obviously I don�t know what the limitiatoins are here for an iCast or iDish, and anticipate something like a TiVo that can surf the web, upload video, and download HD.
Two premium channels cost $20 a month so iTV would sell you the device to steam movies, some broadcast, download like Tivo, so you wouldn�t need a Blueray or HD DVD.
What else could be practical? Of course it will have a hard drive� a cable box DVR has a hard drive.
If it also has the ability to surf the web and run a word processor, handle video from DVR and digital camera, I�ll get one�
That is if the price is about $500.
Some unanswered questions are where are they going to get the bandwidth to do all this? You will have to have a cable subscription, perhaps just a basic subscription, but even then bandwidth is limited.
They will need their own satellite, if they really want to compete. But that would make them iDish? hmmm
This could be very interesting. I have often wondered why all the cable companies and satellite companies are within $5 pricing difference of each other? Is this the rock bottom competitive price so they can break even or are these prices fixed?
I would love to get rid of so many commercials. I�m paying $78 a month for basic digital subscription and have to use a DVR to record programs so I can zap though the commercials.
Obviously I don�t know what the limitiatoins are here for an iCast or iDish, and anticipate something like a TiVo that can surf the web, upload video, and download HD.
Charlie Sheen
Mar 24, 01:04 PM
next step amd cpus
mrapplegate
Apr 3, 01:52 PM
I am still really surprised that it seems as if nobody else has had the greyed-out toolbar in fullscreen Safari bug that I've got. Has anyone heard or read something that I haven't? I am much more looking forward to the next preview/beta build now, it suffices to say. ;)
Mine auto-hides as normal. I would file a bug report.
Mine auto-hides as normal. I would file a bug report.
LagunaSol
Apr 2, 09:56 PM
I'll "believe" when they fix the currently unresolved and widespread quality control issues...light bleed on virtually every unit
Apparently "virtually every" doesn't mean what you think it means.
Apparently "virtually every" doesn't mean what you think it means.
aquajet
Sep 6, 09:54 AM
Is it just me, or does the $599 mini *not* let you configure it with a DVD burner?
You're right and that sucks. :(
You're right and that sucks. :(
viggin
Apr 12, 11:43 PM
Here's the deal...(and I just realized that the way this is written might make it look like I have earlier posts in this thread. I don't. I'm jumping in right here.)
The reason that I think pros fear "dumbed down" isn't so much because they want something that is difficult to use, but rather because sometimes making difficult things easy makes things that were previously easy difficult, or impossible.
So just this week I had to help somebody with an iMovie problem. There was a part where they had 3 overlapping audio tracks. Movie audio, voiceover, and music. Try as they might, and try as I might, we could not get the movie audio to actually go away -- even though we had set it's volume level to "0%."
Oh...and did I mention that they're on a white iBook? Fine machine, but a little slow. So I copy their iMovie stuff onto an external drive so we can look at it on my Core i7 iMac instead.
Except iMovie on my iMac won't recognize the project on an external drive. I know that supposedly iMovie is supposed to...but it won't work. So I have to copy the files onto my iMac, and then iMovie magically sees them...because they're in the spot that iMovie wants files to be in.
Well the only way to get the clips to work right that I could come up with, was to actually run all their clips through Quicktime 7 and just delete the audio track off them. Voila! No audio track for iMovie to play, when it's not supposed to.
My point is that I spent 30 minutes dinking around with the "Easy" iMovie to do what would have taken me 10 seconds to do in Final Cut. (Select audio. Delete.)
And that's pretty much my experience every time I get lulled into trying to run a quick project through iMovie. Everything seems to be going well, I'm even sort of enjoying myself (Don't tell anyone), then I hit a snag or a wall...bump up into some limitation of iMovie that there isn't a very good work-around to...and wish that I'd just used Final Cut to begin with.
So while I agree that there are those who want pro tools to be difficult simply for the sake of having a high barrier of entry...
...I also think there are a ton of us that are just afraid that the cost of these new and handy features will be that some of the things we rely on doing, especially things that are a little "hackish," will become difficult/impossible. In the name of simplicity.
It's like my iPhone. I love it to pieces, and I don't plan to have any other type of phone any time soon, but sometimes I wish for a few more advanced features...features that are available (Usually through third-party tools) on Android. Instead I'm stuck hoping and wishing and praying that Apple will implement them.
The reason that I think pros fear "dumbed down" isn't so much because they want something that is difficult to use, but rather because sometimes making difficult things easy makes things that were previously easy difficult, or impossible.
So just this week I had to help somebody with an iMovie problem. There was a part where they had 3 overlapping audio tracks. Movie audio, voiceover, and music. Try as they might, and try as I might, we could not get the movie audio to actually go away -- even though we had set it's volume level to "0%."
Oh...and did I mention that they're on a white iBook? Fine machine, but a little slow. So I copy their iMovie stuff onto an external drive so we can look at it on my Core i7 iMac instead.
Except iMovie on my iMac won't recognize the project on an external drive. I know that supposedly iMovie is supposed to...but it won't work. So I have to copy the files onto my iMac, and then iMovie magically sees them...because they're in the spot that iMovie wants files to be in.
Well the only way to get the clips to work right that I could come up with, was to actually run all their clips through Quicktime 7 and just delete the audio track off them. Voila! No audio track for iMovie to play, when it's not supposed to.
My point is that I spent 30 minutes dinking around with the "Easy" iMovie to do what would have taken me 10 seconds to do in Final Cut. (Select audio. Delete.)
And that's pretty much my experience every time I get lulled into trying to run a quick project through iMovie. Everything seems to be going well, I'm even sort of enjoying myself (Don't tell anyone), then I hit a snag or a wall...bump up into some limitation of iMovie that there isn't a very good work-around to...and wish that I'd just used Final Cut to begin with.
So while I agree that there are those who want pro tools to be difficult simply for the sake of having a high barrier of entry...
...I also think there are a ton of us that are just afraid that the cost of these new and handy features will be that some of the things we rely on doing, especially things that are a little "hackish," will become difficult/impossible. In the name of simplicity.
It's like my iPhone. I love it to pieces, and I don't plan to have any other type of phone any time soon, but sometimes I wish for a few more advanced features...features that are available (Usually through third-party tools) on Android. Instead I'm stuck hoping and wishing and praying that Apple will implement them.
jettredmont
Aug 16, 09:15 PM
Here is a map of the Sirius satellite orbits. You can get a signal pretty far south, at least as far as southern Mexico. But to conserve power, Sirius shuts the power down once the bird goes "below" the equator. XM does have a owership in WorldSpace which does broadcast around the globe through a network of various satellites.
http://www.mts.net/~jwt/sirius-xmorbitanim.gif
Very interesting. Wonder why they did a "wobbly" geo-synch, and how their receivers cope with it. I'd guess it's a cost-related thing, but maybe there's an engineering reason for it (certainly does keep at least one bird near-vertical within the US at all times ...) Note that XM is depicted there as a "true" stationary orbit above the equator.
In any case, still, you're not going to see those satellites from Bombay, no matter how long and hard you look, without a really big mirror ...
http://www.mts.net/~jwt/sirius-xmorbitanim.gif
Very interesting. Wonder why they did a "wobbly" geo-synch, and how their receivers cope with it. I'd guess it's a cost-related thing, but maybe there's an engineering reason for it (certainly does keep at least one bird near-vertical within the US at all times ...) Note that XM is depicted there as a "true" stationary orbit above the equator.
In any case, still, you're not going to see those satellites from Bombay, no matter how long and hard you look, without a really big mirror ...
bigandy
Jul 14, 03:10 AM
a BTO option would be great.
i'd pop one in if i could afford it- it would be damn useful considering the amount of data i need to archive making films... :rolleyes:
i'd pop one in if i could afford it- it would be damn useful considering the amount of data i need to archive making films... :rolleyes:
Built
Apr 3, 01:05 AM
You did a poll asking hundreds of people if they are waiting for this very reason? Dude you're way wrong. The "many" people you are referring to are probably a very select number of....MacRumors members. Hardly indicative of the general population. I don't know if you heard- but people are going mad trying to get their hands on one. Your "theory" or whatever it is about people waiting to make sure the kinks are worked out is, well....stupid. I've read this whole thread and you seem to be on a kick about the light-bleeding issue. Yet you dont own one? Interesting.
Perhaps if you spent more time educating yourself and less time convincing yourself that a flawed product is acceptable, you would learn something. Try googling the issue.
Based on the way you write, however, I am going to guess that you won't take the time to do so.
Some people are just not interested in facing the truth.
Perhaps if you spent more time educating yourself and less time convincing yourself that a flawed product is acceptable, you would learn something. Try googling the issue.
Based on the way you write, however, I am going to guess that you won't take the time to do so.
Some people are just not interested in facing the truth.
amacgenius
Jan 1, 05:15 PM
The only two I'm betting on are iLife '07 and iTV, because those seem most feasible at this point.
A new Mac Pro and another more in depth Leopard preview would be nice, but I don't think that's in the Pipeline (kudos to those who get the joke).
A new Mac Pro and another more in depth Leopard preview would be nice, but I don't think that's in the Pipeline (kudos to those who get the joke).
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. :)
Random Passerby
Oct 24, 01:19 AM
I should be posting to the 'update before the holiday season' string to help it get to 4000 posts - but I was wondering at what time of day would an update happen, were it to happen?
quadgirl
Sep 1, 02:15 PM
At WWDC, Apple mentioned one of Leopard's features - 64 bit application support. Let's fast forward to Leopard's release day and look at Apple's line. I'm guessing that all all their machines will have 64-bit processors, but surely the difference in processors used in the Macbook, Macbook Pro, the iMac, and the mini, surely can't be just speed, and all using the Merom? The iMac will have Conroe, maybe an E6600.
gugy
Nov 29, 11:09 PM
Reading through all the expectations in this thread has me thinking that there are going to be some veeeery disappointed people on the day this is announced.
I'm guessing it'll be something like Airport Express, but for video. With a Front Row interface and a remote. Watch videos from you iTunes library, browse the iTunes store, subscribe to video podcasts, watch streaming movie trailers. Maybe a built-in web browser. If we're lucky, it will be able to browse and play video from YouTube or other video sites. That's all I'm expecting, anyway.
you are right for version 1.0.
iTV will evolve into other many things as the time goes by. Just like iTunes 1.0 and look what iTunes is today.
I agree with you that iTV will be very straight forward when it comes out, but the potential is there.
I'm guessing it'll be something like Airport Express, but for video. With a Front Row interface and a remote. Watch videos from you iTunes library, browse the iTunes store, subscribe to video podcasts, watch streaming movie trailers. Maybe a built-in web browser. If we're lucky, it will be able to browse and play video from YouTube or other video sites. That's all I'm expecting, anyway.
you are right for version 1.0.
iTV will evolve into other many things as the time goes by. Just like iTunes 1.0 and look what iTunes is today.
I agree with you that iTV will be very straight forward when it comes out, but the potential is there.
No comments:
Post a Comment