LOLaMac
Mar 25, 06:38 PM
I recall some of the naysayers around here not even a year ago stating that such a device would never be suitable for gaming. And here we are. With HD output to your TV.
Vision, people. Vision.
I can hook it up to my TV and play in 1080, but....why would I want to? I watched the video on YouTube, and compared to Gran Turismo 5, F1 DiRT 2 and the upcoming Shift 2, etc, this game looks like crap. And I get to play it with no wheel or even a gamepad? Thanks, but no thanks.
Vision, people. Vision.
I can hook it up to my TV and play in 1080, but....why would I want to? I watched the video on YouTube, and compared to Gran Turismo 5, F1 DiRT 2 and the upcoming Shift 2, etc, this game looks like crap. And I get to play it with no wheel or even a gamepad? Thanks, but no thanks.
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 03:24 PM
No, I don't like Apple to force me to buy Intel.
Cool story bro, would read again. If you want the fusion so badly then buy a PC. No one's forcing you to buy from Apple.
So, this doesn't mean it would be possible to upgrade a 2010 15" MBP's GPU from the INTEL HD graphics to anything different does it??
This INTEL HD sucks really bad...
Why should you care about the IGP in your 2010 15" MBP? You have a discrete GPU(NVIDIA 330M) alongside it that it should automatically switch to while under heavy load.
Cool story bro, would read again. If you want the fusion so badly then buy a PC. No one's forcing you to buy from Apple.
So, this doesn't mean it would be possible to upgrade a 2010 15" MBP's GPU from the INTEL HD graphics to anything different does it??
This INTEL HD sucks really bad...
Why should you care about the IGP in your 2010 15" MBP? You have a discrete GPU(NVIDIA 330M) alongside it that it should automatically switch to while under heavy load.
Mainyehc
Nov 28, 01:08 PM
Money talks. A big ad campaign will produce much increased Zune sales.
And it's also true for Apple. Many people buy iPods because they have seen all of those TV ads and billboards, not because they did extensive comparison shopping.
Come to think of it, a good number of iPod purchasers are filling demands of their kids, who specifically plead for iPods. And kids are greatly influenced by advertising.
Which kids? The same kids who are specifically pleading for MacBooks? ... Windows, and the ever-uncool Microsoft is getting long in the tooth (and those who may want Vista will have to start thinking about replacing their old PCs anyway), and and the Zune is too late in the game. It doesn't matter that they have 95% of PC marketshare and a lot of money to burn. So did the Roman Empire, for that matter (money, not marketshare :p )! Remember what that guy from Creative said about "spending billions on advertising"? Dit it work? They even had to resort to a foul patent infringement lawsuit to earn some cash and keep afloat!
Sure, if there's a company that can easily perform a media-blitz, it's Microsoft, but OTOH, if there's a company which is ALREADY doing it (try "doing it from day one"), it's Apple... It's actually quite impressive for such a small company! But then again, everything Apple does is quite impressive on its own. ;)
Anyway, isn't Apple historically a very marketing-happy company? "1984", "Lemmings", "Think Different", "Switch", "Silhouettes", now the "Get a Mac" campaign... Unlike a company we know, which is almost exclusively marketing-driven (FUD, vaporware, "Office Dinossaurs", "Start... something... whatever"... "Welcome to the Social", WTF?... :rolleyes: ). Apple has a top notch product, and M$ does not. And they will certainly respond if M$ even attempts doing something that remotely resembles a media-blitz, and will certainly come out on top (especially if, as a product-driven company that they are, they keep coming up with a stream of new, competitive iPods...).
The Zune is DOA, I'm afraid... And Microsoft isn't looking too good, either, and even though they'll still be around 10-15 years from now, they probably won't reach their 50th anniversary (unlike Apple, I'm guessing)... I might be wrong, but IMHO, this whole Zune-to-be debacle will be the first (or is it?) among many nails in M$'s coffin, because in this case they initially set out to compete with an established and nearly invincible leader, unlike their constant (and not that successful) attempts at controling emerging markets. Honestly, why does M$ keeps trying to "innovate" on each and every market, instead of just focusing on the PC platform? They are only making fools of themselves by reusing (our outright copying) other companies' designs, by slapping stock photos and un-catchy slogans all over their software and websites, etc... :rolleyes:
People may have fallen for their lines for 20+ years, but they may one day wise up as far as the PC market is concerned, I hope (of course, someone would have to come up with a viable Windows competitor, whether Apple's own OS X - not very likely for reasons everyone in this board is more than aware of -, or some OSS driven platform, who knows?)... Because they're already showing signs of that on the consumer electronics market. :cool:
And it's also true for Apple. Many people buy iPods because they have seen all of those TV ads and billboards, not because they did extensive comparison shopping.
Come to think of it, a good number of iPod purchasers are filling demands of their kids, who specifically plead for iPods. And kids are greatly influenced by advertising.
Which kids? The same kids who are specifically pleading for MacBooks? ... Windows, and the ever-uncool Microsoft is getting long in the tooth (and those who may want Vista will have to start thinking about replacing their old PCs anyway), and and the Zune is too late in the game. It doesn't matter that they have 95% of PC marketshare and a lot of money to burn. So did the Roman Empire, for that matter (money, not marketshare :p )! Remember what that guy from Creative said about "spending billions on advertising"? Dit it work? They even had to resort to a foul patent infringement lawsuit to earn some cash and keep afloat!
Sure, if there's a company that can easily perform a media-blitz, it's Microsoft, but OTOH, if there's a company which is ALREADY doing it (try "doing it from day one"), it's Apple... It's actually quite impressive for such a small company! But then again, everything Apple does is quite impressive on its own. ;)
Anyway, isn't Apple historically a very marketing-happy company? "1984", "Lemmings", "Think Different", "Switch", "Silhouettes", now the "Get a Mac" campaign... Unlike a company we know, which is almost exclusively marketing-driven (FUD, vaporware, "Office Dinossaurs", "Start... something... whatever"... "Welcome to the Social", WTF?... :rolleyes: ). Apple has a top notch product, and M$ does not. And they will certainly respond if M$ even attempts doing something that remotely resembles a media-blitz, and will certainly come out on top (especially if, as a product-driven company that they are, they keep coming up with a stream of new, competitive iPods...).
The Zune is DOA, I'm afraid... And Microsoft isn't looking too good, either, and even though they'll still be around 10-15 years from now, they probably won't reach their 50th anniversary (unlike Apple, I'm guessing)... I might be wrong, but IMHO, this whole Zune-to-be debacle will be the first (or is it?) among many nails in M$'s coffin, because in this case they initially set out to compete with an established and nearly invincible leader, unlike their constant (and not that successful) attempts at controling emerging markets. Honestly, why does M$ keeps trying to "innovate" on each and every market, instead of just focusing on the PC platform? They are only making fools of themselves by reusing (our outright copying) other companies' designs, by slapping stock photos and un-catchy slogans all over their software and websites, etc... :rolleyes:
People may have fallen for their lines for 20+ years, but they may one day wise up as far as the PC market is concerned, I hope (of course, someone would have to come up with a viable Windows competitor, whether Apple's own OS X - not very likely for reasons everyone in this board is more than aware of -, or some OSS driven platform, who knows?)... Because they're already showing signs of that on the consumer electronics market. :cool:
The.316
Nov 24, 12:08 PM
Not going to post the orders, because they were too much, but I paid:
$150 on Gap.com
$175 on American Eagle.Com
$100 on Sallys Beauty Supply.Com (what can I say, I am a metrosexual lol)
$300 on Eastbay.Com
$200 on Ebay, for some shades, and various other things
Aside from Sallys and Ebay, everything was clothes. The problem is, I have no room for them when they come. I have so many shoes, jeans, shirts, etc., I have to figure out what to do with them. Luckily they are split between winter and summer clothes, otherwised, Id really be f'd.
$150 on Gap.com
$175 on American Eagle.Com
$100 on Sallys Beauty Supply.Com (what can I say, I am a metrosexual lol)
$300 on Eastbay.Com
$200 on Ebay, for some shades, and various other things
Aside from Sallys and Ebay, everything was clothes. The problem is, I have no room for them when they come. I have so many shoes, jeans, shirts, etc., I have to figure out what to do with them. Luckily they are split between winter and summer clothes, otherwised, Id really be f'd.
jwdsail
Apr 21, 01:21 PM
I like Franken, he's a good egg.. Shrug. Minnesota *needs* at least one elected official with an IQ higher than 40...
While I agree that this data (location data in general) really should be better protected against the chance of being intercepted without a user's permission, I think it's more impor
tant for all involved in this chicken little act re: iPhone location data to remember that most iPhone users already openly share all of this info and more on sites like Facebook, 4 Square, twitter, flickr, etc..
I don't share this type of data, I hate Facebook, 4square, etc... (and git off my lawn!!!) and if I'm using my iPhone camera, make sure I have location services turned off unless I want to use the gps data for MYSELF... Actually, unless I'm using Navigon I usually keep location services turned off ..
Sadly, the vast majority of smartphone users have handed over more data than this willingly, and don't really seem to care about privacy..
I think that's the real story in all of this, that few are picking up on. And, shrug, that's just pathetic. If all this chicken little energy was put towards educating consumers about their data, their privacy, you wouldn't need Franken to write a letter to Jobs. But, no one *really* wants educated consumers in any marketplace, be it music, video, phones, food... It's just bad for business. And states like MN should be the last to throw a stone in the glass house of privacy, just google how they want to track cars that *gasp* are *too efficient* ... to collect more taxes .. sigh.. God forbid they just raise the license/tag fees.. have to add expensive tech and invade citizen's privacy... sigh. I'd like to see Franken speak out against invasions of privacy by the state just as aggressively..
While I agree that this data (location data in general) really should be better protected against the chance of being intercepted without a user's permission, I think it's more impor
tant for all involved in this chicken little act re: iPhone location data to remember that most iPhone users already openly share all of this info and more on sites like Facebook, 4 Square, twitter, flickr, etc..
I don't share this type of data, I hate Facebook, 4square, etc... (and git off my lawn!!!) and if I'm using my iPhone camera, make sure I have location services turned off unless I want to use the gps data for MYSELF... Actually, unless I'm using Navigon I usually keep location services turned off ..
Sadly, the vast majority of smartphone users have handed over more data than this willingly, and don't really seem to care about privacy..
I think that's the real story in all of this, that few are picking up on. And, shrug, that's just pathetic. If all this chicken little energy was put towards educating consumers about their data, their privacy, you wouldn't need Franken to write a letter to Jobs. But, no one *really* wants educated consumers in any marketplace, be it music, video, phones, food... It's just bad for business. And states like MN should be the last to throw a stone in the glass house of privacy, just google how they want to track cars that *gasp* are *too efficient* ... to collect more taxes .. sigh.. God forbid they just raise the license/tag fees.. have to add expensive tech and invade citizen's privacy... sigh. I'd like to see Franken speak out against invasions of privacy by the state just as aggressively..
KnightWRX
Apr 16, 08:48 PM
That explains a lot. being 16 means he has very little real experience in driving and a pure rookie at it. The joy of driving is still in his system. Now days most of the time driving for me is a way to get from A to B.
I'm 32, still love driving, go to empty parking lots in winter to drift my Subaru around for fun (freaked out my girlfriend when I did it to her then brand new, sub-1000 km Kia Soul last January, which parking-brake drifted like a champ, even pulling a donut around another car, to much screaming and freaking out from the owner/passenger).
In the summer, I rip through country back roads for the kick of it, though nowadays, it's on my Harley rather than in my long lost loves (the 2.2L VTEC integra or the WRX) often leaving in the cold air of dawn to come back as dusk settles over the fields around my house.
You don't quit driving because you get old, you get old because you quit driving.
Driving in traffic every day like i said really made me consider going Automatic. hard to do a low speed crawl in a manual.
I find playing around with the clutch's friction point much easier than constant braking/not braking. Not to mention these days, on the motorcycle, what the hell is traffic anyhow ? You mean the obstacle course I use as a playground riding back from work to the gym ?
I'm 32, still love driving, go to empty parking lots in winter to drift my Subaru around for fun (freaked out my girlfriend when I did it to her then brand new, sub-1000 km Kia Soul last January, which parking-brake drifted like a champ, even pulling a donut around another car, to much screaming and freaking out from the owner/passenger).
In the summer, I rip through country back roads for the kick of it, though nowadays, it's on my Harley rather than in my long lost loves (the 2.2L VTEC integra or the WRX) often leaving in the cold air of dawn to come back as dusk settles over the fields around my house.
You don't quit driving because you get old, you get old because you quit driving.
Driving in traffic every day like i said really made me consider going Automatic. hard to do a low speed crawl in a manual.
I find playing around with the clutch's friction point much easier than constant braking/not braking. Not to mention these days, on the motorcycle, what the hell is traffic anyhow ? You mean the obstacle course I use as a playground riding back from work to the gym ?
KnightWRX
Apr 10, 06:31 PM
OK, so apparently you don't have experience with automatics...
But yet you have an opinion on how superior your choice of manuals is.
Yes, obviously the thick sarcasm and the pointing out of P R N D 2 1 means I've never stepped in and driven an automatic ;) I was kidding about not knowing how to drive automatic if it still isn't clear.
Really, is there even someone who doesn't know how to drive an automatic ? It's pretty self-explanatory, not much of a learning curve shifting from Park to Drive and hitting the gas. Of course, if one were to put it in Neutral not much would happen and Reverse is a very bad thing if you're looking to go forward.
I think we have a winner for the "humor impaired post of 2011".
I feel that coupes should be manual and the rest autos, except for 2 door suvs (wrangler, D90). Just my opinion.
Coupes are just awkward. Give me a good hatchback or wagon anytime. The agility of a coupe, the interior room of a light SUV.
Subaru doesn't make coupes, that should tell you something. No need to sacrifice all that interior space to get a sporty feel. Heck, a WRX feels much sportier than a damn Hyundai Tiburon and is much more convenient to boot (god I miss that car... stupid TS wagon I'm stuck driving these days...).
But yet you have an opinion on how superior your choice of manuals is.
Yes, obviously the thick sarcasm and the pointing out of P R N D 2 1 means I've never stepped in and driven an automatic ;) I was kidding about not knowing how to drive automatic if it still isn't clear.
Really, is there even someone who doesn't know how to drive an automatic ? It's pretty self-explanatory, not much of a learning curve shifting from Park to Drive and hitting the gas. Of course, if one were to put it in Neutral not much would happen and Reverse is a very bad thing if you're looking to go forward.
I think we have a winner for the "humor impaired post of 2011".
I feel that coupes should be manual and the rest autos, except for 2 door suvs (wrangler, D90). Just my opinion.
Coupes are just awkward. Give me a good hatchback or wagon anytime. The agility of a coupe, the interior room of a light SUV.
Subaru doesn't make coupes, that should tell you something. No need to sacrifice all that interior space to get a sporty feel. Heck, a WRX feels much sportier than a damn Hyundai Tiburon and is much more convenient to boot (god I miss that car... stupid TS wagon I'm stuck driving these days...).
MacinDoc
Apr 12, 10:36 PM
Wow, looks like the rumours WERE true after all! Apple killed the Pro of Final Cut Pro. That guy who turned the much admired iMovie into garbage has done it again. All they had to do was rewrite the engine with 64 bit support, had proper file handling, rendering titling tools amongst other necessary pro features and keep the same F*&$#@*&& interface as pro users of ANY pro software don't want to re-learn an interface for no reason! It takes YEARS before you really know a software under the hood.
We'll now see FCPx turn into a hit with amateurs and will be completely abandoned by pro users who will all return to avid.
Oh, they'll all switch to Avid to avoid learning a new interface, but of course, they won't have to learn a new interface to use Avid instead of FCP :rolleyes: . Not everyone who is a video editor has been around since the time of the dinosaurs. You're complaining that an automobile isn't a horse, so it must be inferior to the horse. If we always continue to do things in exactly the same way, we will never make any progress.
We'll now see FCPx turn into a hit with amateurs and will be completely abandoned by pro users who will all return to avid.
Oh, they'll all switch to Avid to avoid learning a new interface, but of course, they won't have to learn a new interface to use Avid instead of FCP :rolleyes: . Not everyone who is a video editor has been around since the time of the dinosaurs. You're complaining that an automobile isn't a horse, so it must be inferior to the horse. If we always continue to do things in exactly the same way, we will never make any progress.
leekohler
Mar 24, 12:15 PM
This is kinda funny actually.
"Our country wasn't founded on a "God" principle. well lets see
July 4, 1776:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"
Creator.....not god then who was it? Those atoms that just happened to bond together gave us rights?
Oh and again.
"he separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them"
So you'll argue. Separation of Church & State.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Respecting: admire (someone or something) deeply, as a result of their abilities, qualities
, or achievements
Congress shall make no law in favor of one religion, or prohibiting one. Lets see Christianity isn't the only belief system that frowns upon homosexuality so that kills your one religion statement.
There's so much wrong here that I don't even know where to begin. So let's start here- there are also religions supportive of homosexuality, such as Buddhism and Wicca. So there goes your argument. There are even many branches of Christianity that are supportive as well.
Now to the app. I don't see how its offensive. Would an anti-smoker app be offensive? Diligent smokers sign a petition with a minority of iOS users because it discriminates again their lifestyle.
This app is offensive because of what Exodus does- uses junk science to try to "cure" people who are not sick in the first place. They have done serious harm to many people. If you'd like sources and data, I'll be glad to provide it.
Apple holds the right to take it down, but I don't think it should have been.
They can do what they want.
No trying to substitute facts and history with your own beliefs. Homosexuality is not natural, there is no natural way for reproduction which is the whole purpose of sex or the "reproduction system" as it may be classified.
Oh- there's one in every bunch. :rolleyes:
Homosexuality is indeed natural. It's found in every animal species on the planet. There are good reasons for it- population control being one of them. Don't know if you've noticed, but humans are hardly at risk of dying out. We could do with less people. It's nature's birth control.
"Our country wasn't founded on a "God" principle. well lets see
July 4, 1776:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"
Creator.....not god then who was it? Those atoms that just happened to bond together gave us rights?
Oh and again.
"he separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them"
So you'll argue. Separation of Church & State.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Respecting: admire (someone or something) deeply, as a result of their abilities, qualities
, or achievements
Congress shall make no law in favor of one religion, or prohibiting one. Lets see Christianity isn't the only belief system that frowns upon homosexuality so that kills your one religion statement.
There's so much wrong here that I don't even know where to begin. So let's start here- there are also religions supportive of homosexuality, such as Buddhism and Wicca. So there goes your argument. There are even many branches of Christianity that are supportive as well.
Now to the app. I don't see how its offensive. Would an anti-smoker app be offensive? Diligent smokers sign a petition with a minority of iOS users because it discriminates again their lifestyle.
This app is offensive because of what Exodus does- uses junk science to try to "cure" people who are not sick in the first place. They have done serious harm to many people. If you'd like sources and data, I'll be glad to provide it.
Apple holds the right to take it down, but I don't think it should have been.
They can do what they want.
No trying to substitute facts and history with your own beliefs. Homosexuality is not natural, there is no natural way for reproduction which is the whole purpose of sex or the "reproduction system" as it may be classified.
Oh- there's one in every bunch. :rolleyes:
Homosexuality is indeed natural. It's found in every animal species on the planet. There are good reasons for it- population control being one of them. Don't know if you've noticed, but humans are hardly at risk of dying out. We could do with less people. It's nature's birth control.
cube
Mar 25, 11:40 AM
Because the Sandy Bridge IGP was not designed to do any sort of GPGPU work, point blank. We will have to wait for Ivy Bridge(next major release from Intel after Sandy Bridge) for GPGPU/OpenCL support on Intel's IGP.
The SB documentation says it supports Compute Shader 4, a subset of the DirectX 11 level Compute Shader 5.
What that means in terms of OpenCL, I don't know.
Intel said they'll continue to evaluate OpenCL during 2011.
The SB documentation says it supports Compute Shader 4, a subset of the DirectX 11 level Compute Shader 5.
What that means in terms of OpenCL, I don't know.
Intel said they'll continue to evaluate OpenCL during 2011.
macidiot
Jul 19, 03:59 PM
Actually, the analysts were pretty close this time, except for the profit margins. I'm thinking that the fact that the iPod is now using older parts (therefore cheaper parts) is pushing the cost down for Apple, and hence really making it a big cash cow and driving up the profit margin, even if they aren't selling quite as many as last quarter (which also has to do with seasonal decline).
Edit: oops... it appears as though the analysts definitely did blow the whole revenue expectation a bit. Missed that.
Actually, they were completely off base with their Mac estimates. Since it appears that most people on Wall St. think that Apple only makes iPods, this is no surprise.
Most estimates were for around 1 million Macs sold. Apple came in at 1.3 million. There's the margin difference right there.
Edit: oops... it appears as though the analysts definitely did blow the whole revenue expectation a bit. Missed that.
Actually, they were completely off base with their Mac estimates. Since it appears that most people on Wall St. think that Apple only makes iPods, this is no surprise.
Most estimates were for around 1 million Macs sold. Apple came in at 1.3 million. There's the margin difference right there.
islanders
Dec 29, 08:35 AM
It might also have the capacity to use a TV as a monitor through wireless airport. If there is a video processor, word processing text will also be crisp and clean. I could get a mac mini and iTV and use my new 42�� plasma as the monitor. :p
finchna
Oct 23, 09:20 AM
Apple needs to get away from making such a big deal our of small updates (processor change) as Intel will have such things changing more often than motorola or ibm ever did. apple should reserve such announcements and hoopla for major revisions or complete overhauls. based on recent benchmarks there is little performance improvement in these new chips save for the speed bump.
JFreak
Jul 18, 03:18 AM
Thing is Steve Jobs is going to pull the usual trick (stupid contracts) and only release this to the American public.
We can always hope that they also want to make business outside US.
We can always hope that they also want to make business outside US.
Troll
Apr 21, 04:41 PM
Why would Apple release an iMac refresh a couple of months before a new OS debuts? Also, this would be the FASTEST REFRESH IN APPLE HISTORY at 9 months.
You all fell for the hype and made Bri@n T0ng (eat that SEO) and Sea-NET advertising revenue. :rolleyes:
You all fell for the hype and made Bri@n T0ng (eat that SEO) and Sea-NET advertising revenue. :rolleyes:
Cagle
Apr 3, 01:15 AM
Wow that's a little extreme
that's not extreme, that's pure nuts :eek:
great ad, very restrained, no bashing, focusing on great software, something apple really needs to do to make the ipad more than an oversized ipod.
hard to believe the same company signed off on the recent iphone ads. good grief....
that's not extreme, that's pure nuts :eek:
great ad, very restrained, no bashing, focusing on great software, something apple really needs to do to make the ipad more than an oversized ipod.
hard to believe the same company signed off on the recent iphone ads. good grief....
PorterRocks
Apr 2, 07:30 PM
Did this ad make anyone else misty-eyed, or is it just me? Anyone? /s
Great ad though, Apple. :apple:
Great ad though, Apple. :apple:
ifjake
Jul 18, 09:37 AM
for me, price must be less than 5 dollars, but not 5 dollars. i'd say even 2 dollars, since we're not going to own it, and owning a 40 minutes show from iTMS costs that much. This has to be competitive with stuff like netflix where the actual DVD is likely going to be much better quality than the low resolution crap they're likely to use with iTMS. ideally i would expect something like the 480p HD trailers they have at apple.com, but given the size of these files (let's see 1.5 minute trailer at 480p (848x400 it says) is 40MB, so say, a 120 minute movie at similar bitrates would be 3.2 GB) you're going to have to rent it the night before you want to watch it just so it'll download, even at fast broadband speeds. i'd say this isn't going to work. of course, i've always thought that movies apart from actual physical media will never be able to reach the quality we're all now expecting (soon 1080p tops) and even used to (DVDs), so i'm definitely biased towards this not working.
milo
Aug 29, 09:15 AM
This is the lowest end machine Apple makes. Let's be realistic. This is a reasonable update for the base model. And it's probably being done in advance of a Core 2 Duo update to the iMac.
Compared to similarly priced PC's, $799 for a yonah duo 1.8 is pretty weak.
To be honest, I'd rather see the cheaper model drop in price (if not both) than a speed bump.
Compared to similarly priced PC's, $799 for a yonah duo 1.8 is pretty weak.
To be honest, I'd rather see the cheaper model drop in price (if not both) than a speed bump.
aznguyen316
Sep 14, 06:29 AM
^ cool thanks for the green pics. I like that color. I couldn't find those cases at either of my nearest BB's although online showed in stock.. hmm.
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."
Multimedia
Sep 6, 12:39 PM
Look, they discontinued the $50 BTO superdrive option on the lower end model. Are they purposely trying to drive me to Velocity Micro?The SAVE refurb page has what you want for $649. If you really want that model, pull the trigger.
Earendil
Nov 27, 09:49 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 gra
nd.
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 gra
nd.
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
Snowy_River
Nov 15, 02:14 PM
So, that means that there's no practical reason Apple couldn't give an 8-core BTO option right away... Say, for around an additional $999? (The 3GHz quad-core model is an additional $799.) For those that need it, the extra $200 would be well worth it. For those that just want the bragging rights, well, I guess they can afford the $200.
