thejadedmonkey
Aug 7, 06:11 AM
For the sake of those who want to remain surprised until we see the video, there should be a page on MacRumors that says "will post link when video available" - so I can just check that page for the video to be uploaded later in the day. I plan to completely avoid all news until I see the video.
Can somebody do this?
This should help..
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/guide/appleevents/
Can somebody do this?
This should help..
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/guide/appleevents/
MCIowaRulz
Apr 19, 01:14 PM
FINALLY! I've been holding off for over a year upgrading my 2007 iMac because of the ancient ports. Give me my Thunderbolt!
I HAD YOU ALL BEAT:D
I'm GOING to upgrade from a slow single processor 867Mhz G4 from 2001 running Tiger with a 120GB+60GB HD and the ancient ATI 9000 Pro.:)
1 21.5 (or 24 please)
3.x Ghz Quad SB i7
8 GB (or 16GB)
2 TB HD
Ati 6000x series
etc etc:):)
I HAD YOU ALL BEAT:D
I'm GOING to upgrade from a slow single processor 867Mhz G4 from 2001 running Tiger with a 120GB+60GB HD and the ancient ATI 9000 Pro.:)
1 21.5 (or 24 please)
3.x Ghz Quad SB i7
8 GB (or 16GB)
2 TB HD
Ati 6000x series
etc etc:):)
DoFoT9
Mar 5, 08:12 PM
Wirelessly posted (nokia e63: Mozilla/5.0 (SymbianOS/9.2; U; Series60/3.1 NokiaE63-1/100.21.110; Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 ) AppleWebKit/413 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/413)
this is for F@H right? im keen to start up with my numerous amounts of computers.
where do i start? everything is all console based :(
oh wait its an installer thingo.. it wants a key hekp1
You can start here (http://folding.stanford.edu/), ask questions if you need any help or faster - google your question. It's a learning process but most people don't have any problems. AND thanks for joining the team (3446) that is.
Remember to set the machines so they don't sleep ... :p
I've got it all running and installed, but it won't start computing! Really annoying Grr ill figure it out eventually.
this is for F@H right? im keen to start up with my numerous amounts of computers.
where do i start? everything is all console based :(
oh wait its an installer thingo.. it wants a key hekp1
You can start here (http://folding.stanford.edu/), ask questions if you need any help or faster - google your question. It's a learning process but most people don't have any problems. AND thanks for joining the team (3446) that is.
Remember to set the machines so they don't sleep ... :p
I've got it all running and installed, but it won't start computing! Really annoying Grr ill figure it out eventually.
PBF
Apr 2, 05:32 PM
On a happier note -- I don't think I've seen this mentioned yet -- DP 2 seems to be taking about 1.5gb less space.
You sure? The DP2 installer is 3.7GB vs. 3.35GB of DP1.
You sure? The DP2 installer is 3.7GB vs. 3.35GB of DP1.
balamw
Sep 9, 05:56 PM
because im sure alot of people have a video ipod now or plan on getin one soon and say hey i wanna play movies on there i know i did i mean i like riping my own movies but some times its alot of work to rip a movie and put it on ur ipod this way people can just order there fav movie and put it in on ther ipod in a easy way
If that's the extent of it, I'm going to be very underwhelmed on Tuesday. 320x240 movies. (Maximum supported by the 5G iPod). Meh.
B
If that's the extent of it, I'm going to be very underwhelmed on Tuesday. 320x240 movies. (Maximum supported by the 5G iPod). Meh.
B
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
georgerussos
Sep 20, 04:13 PM
Ah, I got a nice silicon one and a nice polycarbonate one, then I will wait for Griffins. I also got a Zagg Shield :) My iPod is going to be shiny as new!!
eddietr
Jan 11, 09:40 PM
what if this slim macbook had a touch pad keyboard? that would be one way to make it smaller
That would be interesting.
The one thing miss about my old thinkpad is the eraser mouse thing in the middle of the keyboard.
Not that the eraser head is that great of a pointing device, it's just that not having to move your hands from typing to moving to typing to moving is really convenient.
They could achieve the same by just merging the keyboard and trackpad together.
That would be interesting.
The one thing miss about my old thinkpad is the eraser mouse thing in the middle of the keyboard.
Not that the eraser head is that great of a pointing device, it's just that not having to move your hands from typing to moving to typing to moving is really convenient.
They could achieve the same by just merging the keyboard and trackpad together.
reel2reel
Apr 12, 10:17 PM
Available on the App Store?!?
Seriously, this better come in a box.
I can't get this approved for use without probably buying it myself first, let alone using my own iTunes account, which brings up a whole lot of licensing issues at work. And before you say "create a iTunes account for work."... Tying the corporate credit card to a shared iTunes account? I'd have a better chance of having our CEO give me one of his Jaguars than that. Not to mention, IT would slaughter me for the amount of bandwidth I'd use in downloading it.
I was wondering about this, too. How in hell is licensing going to work for companies. Time will tell, I guess.
Seriously, this better come in a box.
I can't get this approved for use without probably buying it myself first, let alone using my own iTunes account, which brings up a whole lot of licensing issues at work. And before you say "create a iTunes account for work."... Tying the corporate credit card to a shared iTunes account? I'd have a better chance of having our CEO give me one of his Jaguars than that. Not to mention, IT would slaughter me for the amount of bandwidth I'd use in downloading it.
I was wondering about this, too. How in hell is licensing going to work for companies. Time will tell, I guess.
Kane08
Apr 2, 10:53 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Best post yet
Best post yet
LethalWolfe
Apr 5, 01:57 PM
What are you talking about? iTMS not generating profit? Geez, check your facts!
You are the one in need of fact checking. Jobs has said in a number of interviews that iTMS will generate enough money to basically break even. iTMS is there to sell iPods, not to make a profit.
Lethal
You are the one in need of fact checking. Jobs has said in a number of interviews that iTMS will generate enough money to basically break even. iTMS is there to sell iPods, not to make a profit.
Lethal
.jpg "Frosted Pink Flowers Wallpaper")
Bernard SG
Oct 21, 05:52 AM
14 million devices sold in Q3 2010.
'Nuff said.
'Nuff said.
steve2112
Feb 22, 09:46 PM
That has changed. The Cummins, Powerstroke, and Duramax now have to meet the stringent emissions regulations. Why do you think they cost $8K now compared to the $3-4K before the new emission laws?
I thought anything with a GVWR of over 10k lbs was exempt from those standards. I know they are exempt from CAFE fuel economy standards.
I thought anything with a GVWR of over 10k lbs was exempt from those standards. I know they are exempt from CAFE fuel economy standards.
gnasher729
Apr 26, 12:55 PM
Yes Amazon jump on the "it's generic" bandwagon. :rolleyes:
Please lets just keep this thread about the response and not "But how is it generic. . ." "Apple didn't create App. . ." "Well Amazon is right it's generic. . ."
I don't think it's generic that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. I'm moving on.
Amazon's problem is that Apple actually has a valid trademark. Microsoft did the right thing: They probably want to use the trademarked term, so they sued Apple to get the trademark invalidated _before_ using it. There is no legal risk for Microsoft there; worst case they lose the court case and have to pay their lawyers and go home, that's it. Amazon did the wrong thing: They just used the trademarked term. They continue using it throughout this lawsuit apparently. So if Amazon loses, this could be very, very expensive for them.
Amazon did something similar with their cloud-based streaming service, which they started without permission of the record companies. Which means they are ahead of Apple and Google, but they are being sued now, and if anything sticks, this could be very, very expensive. Much more expensive than using "App Store" without Apple's permission.
Please lets just keep this thread about the response and not "But how is it generic. . ." "Apple didn't create App. . ." "Well Amazon is right it's generic. . ."
I don't think it's generic that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. I'm moving on.
Amazon's problem is that Apple actually has a valid trademark. Microsoft did the right thing: They probably want to use the trademarked term, so they sued Apple to get the trademark invalidated _before_ using it. There is no legal risk for Microsoft there; worst case they lose the court case and have to pay their lawyers and go home, that's it. Amazon did the wrong thing: They just used the trademarked term. They continue using it throughout this lawsuit apparently. So if Amazon loses, this could be very, very expensive for them.
Amazon did something similar with their cloud-based streaming service, which they started without permission of the record companies. Which means they are ahead of Apple and Google, but they are being sued now, and if anything sticks, this could be very, very expensive. Much more expensive than using "App Store" without Apple's permission.
benjayman2
Feb 28, 01:57 PM
First attempt to get everything in one shot.
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/6433/img0390ko.jpg (http://img141.imageshack.us/i/img0390ko.jpg/)
Gave up and started taking pics of parts of our new room.
http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/3861/img0392y.jpg (http://img651.imageshack.us/i/img0392y.jpg/)
Digital and Analog entertainment
http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/4808/img0394m.jpg (http://img193.imageshack.us/i/img0394m.jpg/)
Second attempt to get everything in one shot.
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/9025/img0396ki.jpg (http://img87.imageshack.us/i/img0396ki.jpg/)
Pic from the window bay.
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/1438/img0398p.jpg (http://img84.imageshack.us/i/img0398p.jpg/)
The only pic that I thought turned out decent.
http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/1701/img0386of.jpg
Hardware in the sig
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/6433/img0390ko.jpg (http://img141.imageshack.us/i/img0390ko.jpg/)
Gave up and started taking pics of parts of our new room.
http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/3861/img0392y.jpg (http://img651.imageshack.us/i/img0392y.jpg/)
Digital and Analog entertainment
http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/4808/img0394m.jpg (http://img193.imageshack.us/i/img0394m.jpg/)
Second attempt to get everything in one shot.
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/9025/img0396ki.jpg (http://img87.imageshack.us/i/img0396ki.jpg/)
Pic from the window bay.
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/1438/img0398p.jpg (http://img84.imageshack.us/i/img0398p.jpg/)
The only pic that I thought turned out decent.
http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/1701/img0386of.jpg
Hardware in the sig
spyd4r
Oct 23, 09:19 PM
I have been patiently waiting for the new macbook pro just as long as the rest of you, but i have had it, they are like 1.5 - 2 months behind their competitors now.. I am just about ready to drop the money and upgrade my PC desktop instead...they betttter hurrry! ;)
Gatesbasher
Apr 3, 02:40 PM
Man. People complaining and I won't even get mine 'till the 28th. Looks like I won't be part of the fun.
You must be new. Where did you get the idea that you have to have an iPad, or even know what an iPad is, in order to complain? No Flash!! Substandard cameras!! No Blu-Ray drive!! No "stereo" speakers!! Walled Garden�!! No 1GB Memory!! "Light bleed!!!" "Light bleed!!!!" "Liiiiiight Bleeeeed!!!!!!!!!!"
Now Go!
You must be new. Where did you get the idea that you have to have an iPad, or even know what an iPad is, in order to complain? No Flash!! Substandard cameras!! No Blu-Ray drive!! No "stereo" speakers!! Walled Garden�!! No 1GB Memory!! "Light bleed!!!" "Light bleed!!!!" "Liiiiiight Bleeeeed!!!!!!!!!!"
Now Go!
macidiot
Jul 19, 04:33 PM
When the "real" machines are out, Vista will be out as well. Unless Leopard has revolutionary improvements, the difference between Windows and OSX+iLife would be much less than that it is today. I would still appreciate the UNIX under the hood, but I doubt most consumers care. If Mac sales or market share starts to come down a bit due to fewer switchers, the share price could easily crash.
Vista vs. Leopard is a moot point. There is enough pent up demand for high end desktops to fuel growth for some time. Switchers aren't material in this market. Besides, desktop buyers aren't waiting for Leopard, they are waiting for universal binaries from Adobe.
Vista will have zero near term effect. The simple truth is that you won't see widespread adoption of Vista for at least 12-18 months. And that is assuming Vista actually ships when it is supposed to. Which is no sure thing.
As for the consumer, what they care about is stability and security. imo, that is what is getting switchers. Your right that they don't care how it's being done. However, Vista will be far more secure than xp when it comes out. At least for a month or so. It will take at least a few weeks for good malware to come out for it...
Vista vs. Leopard is a moot point. There is enough pent up demand for high end desktops to fuel growth for some time. Switchers aren't material in this market. Besides, desktop buyers aren't waiting for Leopard, they are waiting for universal binaries from Adobe.
Vista will have zero near term effect. The simple truth is that you won't see widespread adoption of Vista for at least 12-18 months. And that is assuming Vista actually ships when it is supposed to. Which is no sure thing.
As for the consumer, what they care about is stability and security. imo, that is what is getting switchers. Your right that they don't care how it's being done. However, Vista will be far more secure than xp when it comes out. At least for a month or so. It will take at least a few weeks for good malware to come out for it...
Spoony
Apr 26, 02:02 PM
Also i've never had a Mac.
Does apple use the term "applications" for their software as opposed to "programs" like windows.
If that is the case all Apple is doing is shortening their Mac name Applications to App. Everyone else is just copying them.
Everyone else can call them programs and lets call it a day.
Does apple use the term "applications" for their software as opposed to "programs" like windows.
If that is the case all Apple is doing is shortening their Mac name Applications to App. Everyone else is just copying them.
Everyone else can call them programs and lets call it a day.
Choppaface
Oct 23, 11:28 PM
I've got a dual 2.33ghz Core 2 Duo in my mac mini and its FASTTTTT the new mbps will be nice BUY BUY BUY
iGav
Mar 4, 12:21 PM
Keeping weight down is all-important. Which is why I remain in love with the Lotus Elise. It proves that less weight fixes everything - better handling, acceleration, braking, fuel economy...of course in a hybrid, the battery pack is always the vexed question. Even the best batteries are still expensive and relatively heavy.
But even the Elise isn't immune, it's all relative of course, but it's gained roughly 170kg since the Series 1. :eek:
But along with aerodynamics... it's perhaps the most important factor in, as you say... handling, acceleration, braking, fuel economy... pretty much everything.
When you think how innovative a car like the Audi A2 was, I do find the lack of real progress over the last 12 years particularly sad. 10 years ago, the A2 was a sub 1000kg (sub 900kg in certain trim) proper 4 seater, its 3 cylinder TDI engine could easily achieve 70+mpg imp without even trying (according to Wiki 107.8 mpg & 140 mpg imp were also achieved).
The 1.2 TDI version emitted 81g/km CO2, featured Stop/Start, an Eco mode that disengaged the clutch when the accelerator was released to maximise free wheeling and was rated at 94mpg.
And this was 10 years ago...
In many ways, it's shameful today that we think that 60 or even 70mpg is somehow remarkable for a family car. :(
the Cruze diesel, which may be able to equal or exceed the new Jetta TDI's level of equipment, refinement and pricepoint.
But not the brand image... that could perhaps be the biggest stumbling block of all, it certainly is in Europe anyway.
Personally... I don't think GM have a clue, and that's one of the reasons why they got themselves into one almighty hell of a mess, and only time will tell if they can get themselves out of it. I'm still of the opinion that GM's decision to attempt to introduce Chevrolet into the European market will ultimately prove futile.
Here in the US, the sedan (saloon) is king, even on smaller cars like the Focus and Corolla. That is slowly beginning to change, but Americans still like three-box cars over hatchbacks. Personally I prefer hatchbacks and wagons, though larger cars still look good as sedans.
Have to say my preference is for saloons... occasionally an estate (particularly A4 & A6 allroads, also 159 Sportwagons, that sort of thing), hatches (the bigger ones anyway) & estates can/tend to be a little boomy in my experience. Saloons also often have better body rigidity too.
But even the Elise isn't immune, it's all relative of course, but it's gained roughly 170kg since the Series 1. :eek:
But along with aerodynamics... it's perhaps the most important factor in, as you say... handling, acceleration, braking, fuel economy... pretty much everything.
When you think how innovative a car like the Audi A2 was, I do find the lack of real progress over the last 12 years particularly sad. 10 years ago, the A2 was a sub 1000kg (sub 900kg in certain trim) proper 4 seater, its 3 cylinder TDI engine could easily achieve 70+mpg imp without even trying (according to Wiki 107.8 mpg & 140 mpg imp were also achieved).
The 1.2 TDI version emitted 81g/km CO2, featured Stop/Start, an Eco mode that disengaged the clutch when the accelerator was released to maximise free wheeling and was rated at 94mpg.
And this was 10 years ago...
In many ways, it's shameful today that we think that 60 or even 70mpg is somehow remarkable for a family car. :(
the Cruze diesel, which may be able to equal or exceed the new Jetta TDI's level of equipment, refinement and pricepoint.
But not the brand image... that could perhaps be the biggest stumbling block of all, it certainly is in Europe anyway.
Personally... I don't think GM have a clue, and that's one of the reasons why they got themselves into one almighty hell of a mess, and only time will tell if they can get themselves out of it. I'm still of the opinion that GM's decision to attempt to introduce Chevrolet into the European market will ultimately prove futile.
Here in the US, the sedan (saloon) is king, even on smaller cars like the Focus and Corolla. That is slowly beginning to change, but Americans still like three-box cars over hatchbacks. Personally I prefer hatchbacks and wagons, though larger cars still look good as sedans.
Have to say my preference is for saloons... occasionally an estate (particularly A4 & A6 allroads, also 159 Sportwagons, that sort of thing), hatches (the bigger ones anyway) & estates can/tend to be a little boomy in my experience. Saloons also often have better body rigidity too.
dongmin
Jan 11, 07:38 PM
AppleMatters believes a new MacBook - not MacBook Pro - will be announced at MWSF.
So this could be it, if true.
http://www.applematters.com/index.php/section/comments/the-definitive-matrix-of-macworld-08-predictions-and-rumors/
they also think the macbook's gonna have a super drive standard across the line, so they're obviously not talking about the same thing
So this could be it, if true.
http://www.applematters.com/index.php/section/comments/the-definitive-matrix-of-macworld-08-predictions-and-rumors/
they also think the macbook's gonna have a super drive standard across the line, so they're obviously not talking about the same thing
macmax77
Nov 29, 05:29 PM
Perhaps Microsoft should have a "switch" campaign like Apple for the Zune. Showing all the wonderful things like radio and squirting music and photos.
Wonderful equals bad taste?
Wonderful equals bad taste?
DreederOcUK
Nov 15, 05:02 PM
Im really looking forwards to this, if the 8-core 2.66 Macpro its going to cost just a little more than a quad 3ghz Macpro, im going to be buying as soon as it hits the website...
As a recent Mac switcher, coming straight in with a base spec macpro(4x2.66/4gb/1750gbHDD), im now happy to invest in a more powerful machine.
My only concern is the heat... my current Macpro runs 24/7 and 95% of the time is at full load across all 4 cores... and its still silent with temps never going over 52c... will these quad core chips run much hotter, meaning the front fans have to spin faster/noisier to keep the machine cool?
As a recent Mac switcher, coming straight in with a base spec macpro(4x2.66/4gb/1750gbHDD), im now happy to invest in a more powerful machine.
My only concern is the heat... my current Macpro runs 24/7 and 95% of the time is at full load across all 4 cores... and its still silent with temps never going over 52c... will these quad core chips run much hotter, meaning the front fans have to spin faster/noisier to keep the machine cool?