zerolight
Jul 18, 05:28 AM
Thing is Steve Jobs is going to pull the usual trick (stupid contracts) and only release this to the American public. Rubbish if you ask me, we live in a world of more than one country. Which is why this sounds like another stupid pipe dream that the rest of the world will never get to enjoy *points at TV shows*.
Iggy :rolleyes:
Surely the TV Shows issue is because the US shows are sold on to European TV Stations, usually after the show has aired in the states. These TV Stations aren't going to be too pleased if they've shelled out a bucketload of money for the UK premier of 24 for example, only to have it show up on iTunes before they've even aired it.
The only way it can work is if iTunes waits until after all the channels have aired it first. In the UK you'd find 24 showing up on something like E4, then Channel 4, then some of the scrubbers like Channel 5 or Bravo would likely have a deal, then it could show up on iTunes. By then the show is so old that there's no point. Hence, I imagine, why we don't get iTunes TV Shows here.
Iggy :rolleyes:
Surely the TV Shows issue is because the US shows are sold on to European TV Stations, usually after the show has aired in the states. These TV Stations aren't going to be too pleased if they've shelled out a bucketload of money for the UK premier of 24 for example, only to have it show up on iTunes before they've even aired it.
The only way it can work is if iTunes waits until after all the channels have aired it first. In the UK you'd find 24 showing up on something like E4, then Channel 4, then some of the scrubbers like Channel 5 or Bravo would likely have a deal, then it could show up on iTunes. By then the show is so old that there's no point. Hence, I imagine, why we don't get iTunes TV Shows here.
GW3
Aug 4, 09:11 PM
If Im not mistaken every KeyNote from Steve Jobs, whether at WWDC, MacWorld or any other event from Apple has been on tuesdays. Why is this one DIFFERENT. Could we see a Movie Store on Tuesday ???????
Zadillo
Oct 23, 01:16 PM
I'm hoping for a MPB with: Core 2 Duo up to 2.33 Ghz - Flash boot (NAND memory) - better GPU, ATI launched her x1800 mobile GPU march 2006 - 802.11n - more ram capacity - firewire 800 and faster super drive.
But Im afread I have to wait untill january for this master piece of mobile technology. :(
The X1800 is a monster though...... I think the only thing you can even find it in is some of those high-end 17" gaming behemoth laptops. I can't see any possible way they'd fit it into the 15 or 17" MBP.
But Im afread I have to wait untill january for this master piece of mobile technology. :(
The X1800 is a monster though...... I think the only thing you can even find it in is some of those high-end 17" gaming behemoth laptops. I can't see any possible way they'd fit it into the 15 or 17" MBP.
Eidorian
Aug 25, 12:03 PM
Not if you're going for an embedded system that doesn't need a heavy duty CPU and graphics. I built a fanless home server/internet filter/firewall box for less than $200 (and this is in the mini form factor - mini-ITX). A mini would be overkill for that and almost all of the other above listed embedded applications. Get the right tool for the right job is all I'm saying. I would never use a VIA system for a desktop, but for almost every embedded application they're fantastic.With the G4 Mini's hitting $300-400 I see a better buy there. Then again I do love Mini-ITX and playing with Linux. (Free OS and good support for mini server applications.) There's an application for both. I just see the Mac mini being a"mini mac" for only a little bit more.
Folks need to be careful when making G5 to Conroe/etc. comparisons....
The PPC 970FX (single core G5 which was in the iMac G5) has a TDP below that of a Conroe.
The Conroe and Woodcrest have a TDP well below the PPC 970MP (dual core G5) which was used in the later generation PowerMac G5 systems.For some odd reason even though the 970FX has a lower TDP the Conroe systems are surprisingly cool. I've seen 50� C from Conroe under full load. That's a lot lower then the 75� C on my iMac G5.
Folks need to be careful when making G5 to Conroe/etc. comparisons....
The PPC 970FX (single core G5 which was in the iMac G5) has a TDP below that of a Conroe.
The Conroe and Woodcrest have a TDP well below the PPC 970MP (dual core G5) which was used in the later generation PowerMac G5 systems.For some odd reason even though the 970FX has a lower TDP the Conroe systems are surprisingly cool. I've seen 50� C from Conroe under full load. That's a lot lower then the 75� C on my iMac G5.
Glideslope
Sep 15, 09:45 AM
When will it stop??
Jan 2011. :apple:
Jan 2011. :apple:
diamond.g
Mar 24, 02:07 PM
The GPU can do that, no need for CPU. The CPU is just there to tell the GPU what to crunch assuming no FLAGS were thrown regarding a particular DRM-protected data.
Thunderbolt is just the transmission protocol, there is no actual decode or encode besides what is hard wired at the ports.
Hmm, maybe we are thinking of two different things. How is this going to maintain a protected path? How would Apple keep us from grabbing the stream as it is being sent to the GPU (to be shown on the screen)? That is the part I am thinking of, that is what HDCP/DPCP is supposed to prevent. If we are sending data down the PCIe side then how is it being protected from snooping?
Thunderbolt is just the transmission protocol, there is no actual decode or encode besides what is hard wired at the ports.
Hmm, maybe we are thinking of two different things. How is this going to maintain a protected path? How would Apple keep us from grabbing the stream as it is being sent to the GPU (to be shown on the screen)? That is the part I am thinking of, that is what HDCP/DPCP is supposed to prevent. If we are sending data down the PCIe side then how is it being protected from snooping?
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
BlizzardBomb
Aug 29, 09:24 AM
Since we don't know the prices yet, my suggestion is that we don't touch the "jump to conclusions mat" just yet.
My take on this is that it's a great update! The performance of the base-model is more than doubled when you really think about it! Bring on the updates!
Most benchmarks show the difference between the 1.5 Ghz Solo and 1.66 Ghz Duo to be about 15% for single-core apps (games) and about 30% for dual-core aware apps. So not really more than 100% more performance.
My take on this is that it's a great update! The performance of the base-model is more than doubled when you really think about it! Bring on the updates!
Most benchmarks show the difference between the 1.5 Ghz Solo and 1.66 Ghz Duo to be about 15% for single-core apps (games) and about 30% for dual-core aware apps. So not really more than 100% more performance.
Porchland
Sep 8, 03:30 PM
We'll I guess you guys are right about getting a new streaming airport... looks like the wait time is back up from 24hours to 1-3 WEEKS WEEEEHOOOOOO!!!!!
Airport Express still shows available within 24 hours, so looks like Extreme is getting updated but Express is not.
Airport Express still shows available within 24 hours, so looks like Extreme is getting updated but Express is not.
LightSpeed1
Apr 2, 10:54 PM
Simply elegant.
adrianblaine
Oct 24, 06:13 AM
APPLE STORE IS DOWN,
no joke
at least in Germany
Thumbs up :)
The only stores I found still up were the US and Canada
no joke
at least in Germany
Thumbs up :)
The only stores I found still up were the US and Canada
Rocketman
Nov 29, 08:14 PM
amps would lead to another possible product
I know this is quite a lot to ask for a first foray into this market for Apple but I think they could do alot with AV hardware, with a little help from established high end companies this could be awesome.
Apple has/had an agreement with Mc Intosh, the audiophile company not to do that. I wonder if they have resolved that by buying the company or a fee?
This is a possible limitation.
Rocketman
I know this is quite a lot to ask for a first foray into this market for Apple but I think they could do alot with AV hardware, with a little help from established high end companies this could be awesome.
Apple has/had an agreement with Mc Intosh, the audiophile company not to do that. I wonder if they have resolved that by buying the company or a fee?
This is a possible limitation.
Rocketman
Killyp
Aug 24, 06:44 PM
...I will admit that stranger things have happened.
Like this?
http://static.flickr.com/20/73218496_12cd47ab24.jpg
gawd i hope i don't get banned for that!
Like this?
http://static.flickr.com/20/73218496_12cd47ab24.jpg
gawd i hope i don't get banned for that!
gugy
Sep 1, 12:47 PM
23" Imac is a great size. Add HD resolution then that's great.
I would love to see dual display support. But I highly doubt they will allow it. Apple wants to make sure there is a distinction between their consumer and pro line. It would be cool to have the Imac 23" with a 23" Cinema display next to it.
I would love to see dual display support. But I highly doubt they will allow it. Apple wants to make sure there is a distinction between their consumer and pro line. It would be cool to have the Imac 23" with a 23" Cinema display next to it.
wovel
Apr 3, 12:18 AM
Which part, the stock information, typing an email, or working on a spreadsheet? ;)
It was the brain scans..
Great ad. When they can't compete on specs Apple should try to use fuzzy math (sorry, logic) to convince people that there is more to their products. That's the only way for Apple to keep the profit margin.
Like when your competitors can't compete on usability and applications, they talk about meaningless "features" no one actually cares about.
It was the brain scans..
Great ad. When they can't compete on specs Apple should try to use fuzzy math (sorry, logic) to convince people that there is more to their products. That's the only way for Apple to keep the profit margin.
Like when your competitors can't compete on usability and applications, they talk about meaningless "features" no one actually cares about.
Tailpike1153
Mar 22, 03:50 PM
The chance that the iPod Classic is updated to 220GB is zero. Apple has no plans to ever update a hard drive based non-touch portable device (they would not waste their time), and they've shown even less interest in increasing the capacity of any device beyond even 64GB flash.
Tony
Is Apple's 64GB falsh memory ceiling a reflection of the market place or that Apple is now run by profit hungry cheapskates?
Tony
Is Apple's 64GB falsh memory ceiling a reflection of the market place or that Apple is now run by profit hungry cheapskates?
solvs
Jan 2, 03:00 AM
I'm hoping they release a mini laptop. That's the only thing I really care about. Which means they probably won't.
I try not to expect too much so I'm not disappointed.
I try not to expect too much so I'm not disappointed.
AvSRoCkCO1067
Jul 13, 11:42 PM
Meh, Apple came out with that Express Card slot for the MacBook Pro kind of early as well...but I'm with most people in arguing that a blue-ray drive won't see the light of day in Apple computers until early 2007.
Abstract
Nov 27, 04:19 AM
After being here for 3 years, Surely he's not a troll. ;)
MacNewsFix
Apr 12, 11:18 PM
Because Apple says "Tape is Dead" doesn't make it true...just like Blu-Ray isn't gone. So that begs the question--is there tape output support (machine interfacing, et al) for FCX?
If you are talking HDCAM SR, the one factory where it was produced is located in Sendai and was destroyed in the recent tsunami. Nobody knows how soon the factory will be back up, but likely no time soon. 10 tapes were recently sold on Ebay for $5000. The general consensus is the recent tragedy will accelerate the death of tape.
If you are talking HDCAM SR, the one factory where it was produced is located in Sendai and was destroyed in the recent tsunami. Nobody knows how soon the factory will be back up, but likely no time soon. 10 tapes were recently sold on Ebay for $5000. The general consensus is the recent tragedy will accelerate the death of tape.
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.
guez
Sep 7, 03:37 PM
Actually the move to Intel has opened Apple to fast depreciation - and that isnt going away.
Many here seem to 'bitch' that Mac is now in competition with the PC in the hardware stakes and sadly that damages your resale value however the benefits are immense, I am sure Apple will be able to secure lower unit costs aswell as faster processors and newer technology. Its great for apple and for us buying, just bad if you sell hardware before it looses all value completely. It also means we will see these refreshes more often and so we will be buying more up to date hardware which as a PC user is great...
This raises an interesting question. I'm not so much interested in depreciation as obsolescence. My experience has been that if you buy the right Mac (this is key), it can last 4 years, or more, and system updates/upgrades will not seriously degrade performance (sometimes there can even be an improvement, as with Panther). This is NOT my experience with Wintel. Is this going to change with Intel? Perhaps the readership of this blog does not fall in this category, but Macs have historically appealed to those who want to spend a little more money for more value (including a longer useful life)-the same people who drive a Honda Civic into the ground rather than buying a Chevy Malibu every three years (sorry, I couldn't think of another example).
Are we entering the age of the Walmart-ifation of Macs: less value, but cheaper?
Many here seem to 'bitch' that Mac is now in competition with the PC in the hardware stakes and sadly that damages your resale value however the benefits are immense, I am sure Apple will be able to secure lower unit costs aswell as faster processors and newer technology. Its great for apple and for us buying, just bad if you sell hardware before it looses all value completely. It also means we will see these refreshes more often and so we will be buying more up to date hardware which as a PC user is great...
This raises an interesting question. I'm not so much interested in depreciation as obsolescence. My experience has been that if you buy the right Mac (this is key), it can last 4 years, or more, and system updates/upgrades will not seriously degrade performance (sometimes there can even be an improvement, as with Panther). This is NOT my experience with Wintel. Is this going to change with Intel? Perhaps the readership of this blog does not fall in this category, but Macs have historically appealed to those who want to spend a little more money for more value (including a longer useful life)-the same people who drive a Honda Civic into the ground rather than buying a Chevy Malibu every three years (sorry, I couldn't think of another example).
Are we entering the age of the Walmart-ifation of Macs: less value, but cheaper?
TheBobcat
Nov 29, 03:35 PM
With HDMI, they'd have to be shooting higher than 480p. I'd say they'd go all out with 1080p, why not?
BillyShears
Jan 12, 08:17 AM
People here seem to want to condone ANY decision Apple may wish to make. Already people seem to be defensive on the "MacBook Air" name which is probably just a rumor and also seem to be defensive of Apple's decision to remove the optical drive - something we don't even know will happen! People are defensive of Apple's decision to ship the new Mac Pros with the 8800GT and not something of higher spec, people are defensive of Apple's decision not to release a mid-tower.
I don't see how the external optical drive falls into the category of things to be "defended." The others, sure, because you don't have the choice of the name, the graphics card, or mid-tower. But so far the rumours suggest the external optical drive is optional (as in, buy a MacBook or MacBook Pro with built-in drive - this isn't across the product line). What I see are people hoping for a feature: a lighter notebook.
I don't see how the external optical drive falls into the category of things to be "defended." The others, sure, because you don't have the choice of the name, the graphics card, or mid-tower. But so far the rumours suggest the external optical drive is optional (as in, buy a MacBook or MacBook Pro with built-in drive - this isn't across the product line). What I see are people hoping for a feature: a lighter notebook.
No comments:
Post a Comment