Rodimus Prime
Feb 23, 11:53 PM
on a random note just so you know switching to diesel you need to improve your MPG by around 30% for the switch to be carbon neutral. Remember Diesel as a lot more carbon in it per unit volume than unleaded.
czeluff
Oct 23, 12:03 PM
In my opinion, there is a VERY good possibility of the Macbook Pros being updated tomorrow. Here's Why:
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
If you look at the Macbook Pro's "last updated" section, you'll notice that it was April 24, 2006. Tomorrow will be October 24, exactly 6 month's difference. Coincidence? perhaps, but in my opinion if it's not tomorrow, it's not until late November.
Chad Z
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
If you look at the Macbook Pro's "last updated" section, you'll notice that it was April 24, 2006. Tomorrow will be October 24, exactly 6 month's difference. Coincidence? perhaps, but in my opinion if it's not tomorrow, it's not until late November.
Chad Z
andrew050703
Nov 15, 08:04 AM
Gosh, I'll be able to email and type Word docs SO much faster!! :p
yup, and my webpages will load in the blink of an eye... definitely worth whatever apple will charge. ;)
seriously though, how hard is it to get a program to multi-thread? (if thats the right term; being a complete programming novice, i've no idea)
yup, and my webpages will load in the blink of an eye... definitely worth whatever apple will charge. ;)
seriously though, how hard is it to get a program to multi-thread? (if thats the right term; being a complete programming novice, i've no idea)
RaceTripper
Jan 22, 09:17 PM
They make racing and sport seats
Right, Recaro makes race and sports car buckets. I doubt they make a single baby seat. They are probably licensing their name to it.
Right, Recaro makes race and sports car buckets. I doubt they make a single baby seat. They are probably licensing their name to it.
jagolden
Sep 7, 11:16 AM
I'm not sure whether to be offended by this grotesque post, or should just laugh at how utterly uneducated some people are when it comes to history and political ideology o.O
Anyway, this is probably not the best place for the communism argument, which invariably ends up with everyone agreeing it's a good theory, but half of the forum claiming "it won't work because of human nature" etc., at which point the debate cannot continue.
So back to Macs and ****?
Funny, that's what I thought reading your original post.
Cearly "education" didn't serve you as you started the communism argument.
Please, enlghten me, off forum, so I may better understand.
Considering your locations (UK and France) I'm not surprised.
Anyway, this is probably not the best place for the communism argument, which invariably ends up with everyone agreeing it's a good theory, but half of the forum claiming "it won't work because of human nature" etc., at which point the debate cannot continue.
So back to Macs and ****?
Funny, that's what I thought reading your original post.
Cearly "education" didn't serve you as you started the communism argument.
Please, enlghten me, off forum, so I may better understand.
Considering your locations (UK and France) I'm not surprised.
xelavelobos
Jan 1, 07:29 PM
I am very excited about this year, but apple will be smart not to do too much in one show. I mean how many surprises and new products can they release at one time before the public gets overwhelmed or exhausted (i.e. the dinosaur sequence in king kong)? I think they will focus on a few special things, probably not the phone though.
Leoff
Nov 27, 09:05 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
reel2reel
Apr 12, 09:18 PM
What was the render dialog ?
The ancient "rendering video..." progress bar you get to watch, which locks you out of every other function.
The ancient "rendering video..." progress bar you get to watch, which locks you out of every other function.
ingenious
Apr 7, 09:10 AM
Thats not true ! Ive been reading everyone's posts but you just don't want to see both sides of the story. I just want Apple to do better...
Look at this business weekly online story about Apple - very interesting
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/apr2004/tc2004047_5468_tc056.htm
really, this is what Ive been taking about...I think that most Mac users don't want to hear it
and this one too
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=8372
ok, YOU listen to "our side" of the story now!!!!! The point is, apple is NOT dying, they do not need saving, blah blah blah. just read the 100 posts above mine explaining this to you, but you refusing to listen. If you want apple to do better, then think that and leave the rest of us alone. I myself wouldn't mind having more of my contacts using a mac so i wouldn't have to do tech support for them all the time, but then again, that would cut down on people who force money on me for it..... :D
Look at this business weekly online story about Apple - very interesting
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/apr2004/tc2004047_5468_tc056.htm
really, this is what Ive been taking about...I think that most Mac users don't want to hear it
and this one too
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=8372
ok, YOU listen to "our side" of the story now!!!!! The point is, apple is NOT dying, they do not need saving, blah blah blah. just read the 100 posts above mine explaining this to you, but you refusing to listen. If you want apple to do better, then think that and leave the rest of us alone. I myself wouldn't mind having more of my contacts using a mac so i wouldn't have to do tech support for them all the time, but then again, that would cut down on people who force money on me for it..... :D
twoodcc
Sep 6, 09:57 AM
The Superdrive option in the base model has gone.
Earth to Apple: a Combo drive in 2002 was state of the art. A Combo drive in 2004 was a reasonably priced alternative to a DVD burner. A Combo drive in 2005 was an acceptable means of marketing differentiation. A Combo drive in 2006 (particularly with no option to buy a DVD burner) is an embarrassment...
i agree. i would never buy a computer that didn't have a dvd burner....and i'd never advise someone else to either
Earth to Apple: a Combo drive in 2002 was state of the art. A Combo drive in 2004 was a reasonably priced alternative to a DVD burner. A Combo drive in 2005 was an acceptable means of marketing differentiation. A Combo drive in 2006 (particularly with no option to buy a DVD burner) is an embarrassment...
i agree. i would never buy a computer that didn't have a dvd burner....and i'd never advise someone else to either
PodHead
Dec 1, 10:22 PM
You know what I would like with iTV?
Live content.
Think about it for a moment. I think everyone hates how expensive cable TV is. I am paying $45 per month just for 50 channels or so, with maybe 10 of those I actually watch (the networks, MSNBC, NESN, FSNE, ESPN, and a few other random ones).
Apple has the TV Shows issue fixed, thanks to $1.99 per show on iTunes and season passes.
However, live content is the big issue. I would love to ditch my cable tv subscription and go soley iTV. But I like to watch sports, especially baseball and football. Also you need TV for news events, especially breaking news. iTV and iTunes does not (yet) allow you to watch live streaming content.
If Apple could somehow strike a deal to cover sports and other live content such as news...that just really opens the door. Major League Baseball already does it with MLB.TV, except it is browser based. Imagine the same thing, but on iTV!?!?
Do that, and I would seriously cancel my cable tv subscription and go a la carte with iTunes. I spend roughly $540 a year on my 50 channels of cable TV, of which I at most watch 10 channels. I would much rather spend say $270 (half of the $540) on the 5 or so shows I watch, plus season passes for my local baseball and football teams, and the news channel of my choice.
That is where iTV could become a real winner.
I'm in the same boat!! Except I live in Japan. I rely solely on iTunes to watch my favorite shows in the U.S. But...I usually have to wait an extra day (not including the day it takes to appear on iTunes) to watch them. By the time the Packers have won (being optimistic) I'm two, sometimes three days behind (or ahead depending how you look at it) the news. I would totally stay up til 3:00 am to watch them live from the states.:p
Live content.
Think about it for a moment. I think everyone hates how expensive cable TV is. I am paying $45 per month just for 50 channels or so, with maybe 10 of those I actually watch (the networks, MSNBC, NESN, FSNE, ESPN, and a few other random ones).
Apple has the TV Shows issue fixed, thanks to $1.99 per show on iTunes and season passes.
However, live content is the big issue. I would love to ditch my cable tv subscription and go soley iTV. But I like to watch sports, especially baseball and football. Also you need TV for news events, especially breaking news. iTV and iTunes does not (yet) allow you to watch live streaming content.
If Apple could somehow strike a deal to cover sports and other live content such as news...that just really opens the door. Major League Baseball already does it with MLB.TV, except it is browser based. Imagine the same thing, but on iTV!?!?
Do that, and I would seriously cancel my cable tv subscription and go a la carte with iTunes. I spend roughly $540 a year on my 50 channels of cable TV, of which I at most watch 10 channels. I would much rather spend say $270 (half of the $540) on the 5 or so shows I watch, plus season passes for my local baseball and football teams, and the news channel of my choice.
That is where iTV could become a real winner.
I'm in the same boat!! Except I live in Japan. I rely solely on iTunes to watch my favorite shows in the U.S. But...I usually have to wait an extra day (not including the day it takes to appear on iTunes) to watch them. By the time the Packers have won (being optimistic) I'm two, sometimes three days behind (or ahead depending how you look at it) the news. I would totally stay up til 3:00 am to watch them live from the states.:p
Chupa Chupa
Apr 3, 09:19 AM
I feel like Apple could be saving some money here. Supplies are strained and there is a several week wait to get one. Do you really need more commercials right now?
Of course they are making billions of dollars, so I am sure they know what they are doing. :D
That is precisely why you have to run ads like this now... to remind people they want the iPad, even if they have to wait a few weeks, versus buying some other readily available tablet, which, on paper, looks as good or better than the iPad.
It's the old adage... out of sight, out of mind. With supplies constrained gotta keep the iPad2 in people's heads.
Of course they are making billions of dollars, so I am sure they know what they are doing. :D
That is precisely why you have to run ads like this now... to remind people they want the iPad, even if they have to wait a few weeks, versus buying some other readily available tablet, which, on paper, looks as good or better than the iPad.
It's the old adage... out of sight, out of mind. With supplies constrained gotta keep the iPad2 in people's heads.
uNext
Jan 1, 11:16 PM
I want new displays & new airport extreme.
Just this weekend, I went to my local apple store. I was extremely close to purchasing a 23" lcd display and the airport express. But then my sub-conscience voice started to talk to me and advised me to wait just 1 more week, to see what apple will offer. I cant wait for this event to roll around
and get no sleep in anticipation of what will be released it happens every year.
Just this weekend, I went to my local apple store. I was extremely close to purchasing a 23" lcd display and the airport express. But then my sub-conscience voice started to talk to me and advised me to wait just 1 more week, to see what apple will offer. I cant wait for this event to roll around
and get no sleep in anticipation of what will be released it happens every year.
iSax1234
Mar 24, 12:13 PM
So someone who is sterile due to medical reasons shouldn't be allowed to marry either? There's no natural way for them to reproduce.
You're twisting the argument. Guy + Girl have the possibility to make baby (if they're sterile that's an isolated case). Guy + Guy or Girl + Girl will never be able to have sexual intercourse and have children. Marriage today to most people is nothing more than a loosely binded formal contract, since it can be terminated at any time with little to no repercussions.
You're twisting the argument. Guy + Girl have the possibility to make baby (if they're sterile that's an isolated case). Guy + Guy or Girl + Girl will never be able to have sexual intercourse and have children. Marriage today to most people is nothing more than a loosely binded formal contract, since it can be terminated at any time with little to no repercussions.
nemaslov
Mar 22, 06:55 PM
It's for people who are SERIOUS about music and would never listen to anything less then lossless (whenever possible).
vincenz
Feb 22, 07:44 PM
Here is my setup. Old but do the job
20" iMac
13" MacBook
And my iPhone 3GS
missing from the pictures are my iPad and my ipods
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286276.jpg
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286270.jpg
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286272.jpg
I love the look of older apple tech still in use. It's a good reminder that you don't need to constantly update with every single product refresh. Helps that it's stylish too :cool:
20" iMac
13" MacBook
And my iPhone 3GS
missing from the pictures are my iPad and my ipods
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286276.jpg
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286270.jpg
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286272.jpg
I love the look of older apple tech still in use. It's a good reminder that you don't need to constantly update with every single product refresh. Helps that it's stylish too :cool:
PBF
Apr 1, 09:28 PM
^ Yup, same here. A little bit annoying having to reopen the same window.
twoodcc
Sep 6, 09:23 AM
well core2duo would have been better, but at least they got rid of the solo.*
MicroByte
Sep 13, 07:20 AM
It does not. With this new glass, I don't feel I need one. A screen protector is far softer and would take more damage in dents and scratches, not to mention expensive (and a pain) to replace.
One more question. For the glass side, if you were to put it face down on a table or flat surface, would the glass make contact or is there a pretty good space?
I used to love that I could do this with the Incase slider for my 3G iPod Touch.
One more question. For the glass side, if you were to put it face down on a table or flat surface, would the glass make contact or is there a pretty good space?
I used to love that I could do this with the Incase slider for my 3G iPod Touch.
NewSc2
Nov 29, 04:49 PM
New features? I can see it now...
Nike+iTV. Track your calories, heart rate, and more, while watching TV.
Nike+iTV. Track your calories, heart rate, and more, while watching TV.
Al1n
Apr 11, 07:26 AM
I never drove a manual in my life. LOL.
So, no, i can't drive a stick shift car. :)
So, no, i can't drive a stick shift car. :)
w00master
Dec 30, 10:11 AM
I think a lot of you are expecting way too much on the "iTV" and will be very disappointed when it gets released.
1. DVR Functionality?
Nope, I don't see it. Don't see it happening EVER. This places iTV in direct competition with Cable and Satellite providers, which (imho) is a losing battle. A good example is Tivo. While, Tivo is still lauded in the industry and consumers as having the "best DVR interface/UI," it's still not selling well to consumers. Why? Cable and Satellite providers are providing DVRs and a MUCH lower cost, and even though their UI/interface sucks terribly, because of the LOW COST, the Cable/Satellite boxes are outselling Tivos.
On Demand. This category amongst cable companies are expanding very rapidly and offering free content left and right. Good example is HBO, nearly *ALL* of their shows are On Demand now which is instant access to all of their shows. Generally speaking (for people who use HBO On Demand), this has been extremely popular, maybe this is why HBO is still not being sold on iTunes? Why download when you have access to nearly all of the HBO content for free and instantaneous?
2. Remote Desktop viewer?
Nope, don't see this at all either. If this were a Mac world only, MAYBE I could see this happening, but the harsh reality is that we live in a primarily Windows world. I really don't see Apple moving into utilizing Remote Desktop on Windows machines THROUGH iTV.
You have to remember that unlike iMac, Mac Pro, Macbooks, etc, the iTV will have to satisfy Windows users as well.
What do I see the iTV for? Streaming media, a glorified IP TV box, an easier way to bring the iPod to the living room. I really don't see it doing anything else. I'm hoping that I'm wrong.
w00master
1. DVR Functionality?
Nope, I don't see it. Don't see it happening EVER. This places iTV in direct competition with Cable and Satellite providers, which (imho) is a losing battle. A good example is Tivo. While, Tivo is still lauded in the industry and consumers as having the "best DVR interface/UI," it's still not selling well to consumers. Why? Cable and Satellite providers are providing DVRs and a MUCH lower cost, and even though their UI/interface sucks terribly, because of the LOW COST, the Cable/Satellite boxes are outselling Tivos.
On Demand. This category amongst cable companies are expanding very rapidly and offering free content left and right. Good example is HBO, nearly *ALL* of their shows are On Demand now which is instant access to all of their shows. Generally speaking (for people who use HBO On Demand), this has been extremely popular, maybe this is why HBO is still not being sold on iTunes? Why download when you have access to nearly all of the HBO content for free and instantaneous?
2. Remote Desktop viewer?
Nope, don't see this at all either. If this were a Mac world only, MAYBE I could see this happening, but the harsh reality is that we live in a primarily Windows world. I really don't see Apple moving into utilizing Remote Desktop on Windows machines THROUGH iTV.
You have to remember that unlike iMac, Mac Pro, Macbooks, etc, the iTV will have to satisfy Windows users as well.
What do I see the iTV for? Streaming media, a glorified IP TV box, an easier way to bring the iPod to the living room. I really don't see it doing anything else. I'm hoping that I'm wrong.
w00master
SandynJosh
Apr 2, 08:57 PM
This is something people need to realize once in a while. It�s not about CPU and RAM. A Droid Incredible can have an 8 megapixel camera, and the photo quality may be not be the best people expect. An iPhone 4 can have 5 megapixels in a sensor and people are delighted with the quality!
Specs are nice, but learning that it actually WORKS, is something other.
My HTC Incredible came with a 73 page manual. . . I get loads of pop-ups asking me if I want to do this or that. . . They disappear while I'm trying to figure out which course of action I want to take. . . The 73 page manual doesn't mention them. That's why it's not "Magical." it's "Incredible."
Specs are nice, but learning that it actually WORKS, is something other.
My HTC Incredible came with a 73 page manual. . . I get loads of pop-ups asking me if I want to do this or that. . . They disappear while I'm trying to figure out which course of action I want to take. . . The 73 page manual doesn't mention them. That's why it's not "Magical." it's "Incredible."
interestedabit
Apr 19, 11:15 AM
BTW: I dont know why we believe a word out of Brian Tong's mouth. He's probably the most worthless person on CNET. Brian Cooley is where its at!
A-welcome to the forums, Brian.. :)
A-welcome to the forums, Brian.. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment