Horrortaxi
May 2, 02:59 AM
I must have missed something. What does latin have to do with "Saving" Apple? :confused:
Nothing at all. He was showing us how smart he is. I tremble before his ostentatious display of knowledge. He is truly my superior. He doesn't need a point--that's how cool he is.
Nothing at all. He was showing us how smart he is. I tremble before his ostentatious display of knowledge. He is truly my superior. He doesn't need a point--that's how cool he is.
zoozx
Sep 6, 10:29 AM
Please explain to me who would buy a mini and why?
I just don't get it when a imac is close in price with a monitor.
What am I missing?
I just don't get it when a imac is close in price with a monitor.
What am I missing?
shawnce
Jul 19, 08:19 PM
The article posted:
- Desktops: 614,000, down 14% from previous quarter
- Portables: 498,000, up 60% from previous quarter
I belive these numbers are for last quarter (note they don't add to 1.3M macs). They should post a correction.
Yup... the correct numbers can be found in this PDF (http://images.apple.com/pr/pdf/q306data_sum.pdf) ... they should be 529,000 and 798,000 respectively.
- Desktops: 614,000, down 14% from previous quarter
- Portables: 498,000, up 60% from previous quarter
I belive these numbers are for last quarter (note they don't add to 1.3M macs). They should post a correction.
Yup... the correct numbers can be found in this PDF (http://images.apple.com/pr/pdf/q306data_sum.pdf) ... they should be 529,000 and 798,000 respectively.
PurrBall
Apr 1, 11:19 AM
AirDrop shows up on my iMac9,1 now; it was missing in DP1.
Also.. heh. This icon jumped out of Launchpad and won't go back! 279250
Also.. heh. This icon jumped out of Launchpad and won't go back! 279250
roadbloc
Apr 3, 03:03 AM
Miles better than them 'If you don't own an iPhone...' ones.
jholzner
Nov 27, 01:14 PM
meh - does this matter? Isn't 17" is getting to be a bit skimpy by any consumer standards.
I don't know anyone who has something bigger and are just consumers and not prosumers.
I don't know anyone who has something bigger and are just consumers and not prosumers.
ericinboston
Apr 20, 02:38 PM
My Mom's iMac is on its last legs. I think I got it for her in early 2006 and its screen is having some streaking problems. Otherwise it still works, but a lot of the latest Apple software won't load on it. ...
I'd be pretty ticked if my 4+ year old, $1300+ personal computer was a)having screen problems and b)was basically on it's last leg.
Every single Wintel and Mac machines I buy last at least 5 years...a high percentage of them last until 10 but by then they are so old it's almost pointless (such as only having USB 1.1 ports or old screen resolutions or floppy drives or small storage space) even though they run just fine.
You might want to spend $200 and see if it's just a memory and/or general performance problem that you can fix yourself.
I'd be pretty ticked if my 4+ year old, $1300+ personal computer was a)having screen problems and b)was basically on it's last leg.
Every single Wintel and Mac machines I buy last at least 5 years...a high percentage of them last until 10 but by then they are so old it's almost pointless (such as only having USB 1.1 ports or old screen resolutions or floppy drives or small storage space) even though they run just fine.
You might want to spend $200 and see if it's just a memory and/or general performance problem that you can fix yourself.
DamnItsHot
Apr 21, 05:06 PM
I think it is interesting that he says the data is easily accessible by "criminals and bad actors". As a politician he has a high probability of fitting in the criminal category and so far as his so called acting goes he definitely fits that category. Could he have been looking in the mirror when he spewed this garbage?
Couldn't make it as an actor so he went into a lower tier - politics. ;)
Couldn't make it as an actor so he went into a lower tier - politics. ;)
LERsince1991
Mar 1, 09:06 AM
Just a few more images from the iphone as I got the braided sleeving yesterday and fitted it all today, even neater lol :P
http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/6905/img0283.jpg
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4329/img0298z.jpg
http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/7519/img0297ny.jpg
http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/4659/img0280ib.jpg
http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/6905/img0283.jpg
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4329/img0298z.jpg
http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/7519/img0297ny.jpg
http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/4659/img0280ib.jpg
Link2999
Sep 11, 05:39 PM
http://www.daydeal.com/product.php?productid=46023
That one looks decent. It's also on amazon in black or blue and comes with a screen protector, but does not have free shipping (~$6 for shipping).
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0042L9J4G/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_2?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B001FWYXD2&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=159BBYV8FRJJCKH8WBHH (Includes Mirror Screen Protector)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0042LHDPI/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B001FWYXD2&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=159BBYV8FRJJCKH8WBHH (Includes Clear Screen Protector)
I'm currently holding off for a case that protects more than just the back.
That one looks decent. It's also on amazon in black or blue and comes with a screen protector, but does not have free shipping (~$6 for shipping).
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0042L9J4G/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_2?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B001FWYXD2&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=159BBYV8FRJJCKH8WBHH (Includes Mirror Screen Protector)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0042LHDPI/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B001FWYXD2&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=159BBYV8FRJJCKH8WBHH (Includes Clear Screen Protector)
I'm currently holding off for a case that protects more than just the back.
That-Is-Bull
Jan 12, 12:36 PM
I don't see the benefit of a MacBook Slim.
Can someone pursued me or tell me why it would be better then just having a MacBook?
Because it's too small for any power but it's too big for your pocket. Win-win.
Can someone pursued me or tell me why it would be better then just having a MacBook?
Because it's too small for any power but it's too big for your pocket. Win-win.
spinedoc77
Nov 6, 11:38 AM
They are just doing it for publicity I bet...
I've only had one dropped call with my iPhone 4
I've got 2 ip4's, one for me and one for my wife. They drop calls quite frequently, I wouldn't say a huge amount more than our old 3GS', but definitely noticeable more drops. It's funny how people who have no problems say that no one has any problems, but they do. I can noticeably drop my signal bars by just pressing my thumb on the antenna seam, and if I'm in a low signal area I can usually make the phone drop a call by putting my hand on that seam.
Now I still own my ip4, I like it, don't love it, but like it for what it does enough for me to keep it. I'm not complaining, but there is a need to temper both the "there is no problem" AND the "sky is falling" camps. Invariably, as with most other stuff in life, the truth lies somewhere in the middle, and there are some problems with the iphone4 but they aren't deal breakers. I think this is the vast majority of users who follow along on these forums and are amused by the vitriolic camps on both sides who fight to the bitter end to prove their point, I know I'm certainly amused at how much energy some put in to prove their point.
I've only had one dropped call with my iPhone 4
I've got 2 ip4's, one for me and one for my wife. They drop calls quite frequently, I wouldn't say a huge amount more than our old 3GS', but definitely noticeable more drops. It's funny how people who have no problems say that no one has any problems, but they do. I can noticeably drop my signal bars by just pressing my thumb on the antenna seam, and if I'm in a low signal area I can usually make the phone drop a call by putting my hand on that seam.
Now I still own my ip4, I like it, don't love it, but like it for what it does enough for me to keep it. I'm not complaining, but there is a need to temper both the "there is no problem" AND the "sky is falling" camps. Invariably, as with most other stuff in life, the truth lies somewhere in the middle, and there are some problems with the iphone4 but they aren't deal breakers. I think this is the vast majority of users who follow along on these forums and are amused by the vitriolic camps on both sides who fight to the bitter end to prove their point, I know I'm certainly amused at how much energy some put in to prove their point.
MacBoobsPro
Aug 7, 05:11 AM
Last time we played we beat you 3-0 in England im pretty sure.
We should have won the bloody world cup.
We dominated against Italy until Grosso dived and got the most dodgy penalty in history, then we would have smashed ukraine in the quarters, then we would have been in the semi's against Germany, then anythign could have happened. Lets just say FIFA didnt want us to win, because its the one sport we 'aren't meant to dominate'. So the ref played it that way.
People should have learned not to count out an Aussie. Our spirit means we have the best in every field from sport to soldiers.
We would kick ur ass
I didnt mean the England team. They cant win anything - in my opinion because of all the media crap. I meant I would PERSONALLY KICK YOUR ASS! :D
Anyhoo... lets not get off topic. Leopard and MacPros. WOO WOO!!!!! :D
We should have won the bloody world cup.
We dominated against Italy until Grosso dived and got the most dodgy penalty in history, then we would have smashed ukraine in the quarters, then we would have been in the semi's against Germany, then anythign could have happened. Lets just say FIFA didnt want us to win, because its the one sport we 'aren't meant to dominate'. So the ref played it that way.
People should have learned not to count out an Aussie. Our spirit means we have the best in every field from sport to soldiers.
We would kick ur ass
I didnt mean the England team. They cant win anything - in my opinion because of all the media crap. I meant I would PERSONALLY KICK YOUR ASS! :D
Anyhoo... lets not get off topic. Leopard and MacPros. WOO WOO!!!!! :D
Mac'Mo
Jan 1, 10:46 PM
i thought the iPhone rumor was laid to rest?
daneoni
Nov 25, 12:03 AM
Couldn't care less about the movie to be honest, but to avoid being nagged as anti-social(i am)...
SciFrog
Feb 10, 07:03 PM
You need to update to the 6.29 client.
Bigadv are still more ppd but on win side many people are switching to SMP2 because the a3 core is quite fast on 4 cores (8 virtual).
Soon bigadv units are switching to a3 core also. I would then hope that we will not be loosing units due to restart or power loss or network switching as the a3 core is now threaded.
Bigadv are still more ppd but on win side many people are switching to SMP2 because the a3 core is quite fast on 4 cores (8 virtual).
Soon bigadv units are switching to a3 core also. I would then hope that we will not be loosing units due to restart or power loss or network switching as the a3 core is now threaded.
AidenShaw
Nov 29, 08:42 PM
http://news.com.com/Intel+completes+design+of+Penryn+chip/2100-1006_3-6139487.html
Intel has taped out--or completed the design of--Penryn, a 45-nanometer chip that will be out toward the end of next year.
The company is also in the midst of making its first Penryn samples.
"They aren't out of the fab yet, but they are in the fab," said Mark Bohr, director of process technology at Intel, referring to chip factories, known as "fabs."
Intel showed off a memory chip made on the 45-nanometer process earlier this year.
The Penryn news underscores Intel's expertise in manufacturing. The company has introduced new manufacturing processes every two years. Meanwhile, competitors such as Advanced Micro Devices have had to space out these jumps. Intel started shipping chips made on the 65-nanometer process in October 2005. AMD won't ship its first 65-nano chips until next month.
______________________________________________
Disclaimer: The preceding headline exhibits excessive exuberance. In truth,
"No official details concerning the Penryn chip design were announced this time, however, according to previously published news-stories, the chip code-named Penryn is a 45nm incarnation of the dual-core Intel Core 2 Duo processor for mobile computers (code-named Merom) with SSE4 technology..."
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20061127154338.html
But, since Intel has stated that two dual-core dies in a package is the right way to do quad-core at 65nm, which implies that 45 nm is the right way to do quad-core per die, and two quad-cord dies in a package at 45 nm is the right way to do octo-core at 45nm - obviously we'll have a PowerBook G5 next Tuesday.
Intel has taped out--or completed the design of--Penryn, a 45-nanometer chip that will be out toward the end of next year.
The company is also in the midst of making its first Penryn samples.
"They aren't out of the fab yet, but they are in the fab," said Mark Bohr, director of process technology at Intel, referring to chip factories, known as "fabs."
Intel showed off a memory chip made on the 45-nanometer process earlier this year.
The Penryn news underscores Intel's expertise in manufacturing. The company has introduced new manufacturing processes every two years. Meanwhile, competitors such as Advanced Micro Devices have had to space out these jumps. Intel started shipping chips made on the 65-nanometer process in October 2005. AMD won't ship its first 65-nano chips until next month.
______________________________________________
Disclaimer: The preceding headline exhibits excessive exuberance. In truth,
"No official details concerning the Penryn chip design were announced this time, however, according to previously published news-stories, the chip code-named Penryn is a 45nm incarnation of the dual-core Intel Core 2 Duo processor for mobile computers (code-named Merom) with SSE4 technology..."
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20061127154338.html
But, since Intel has stated that two dual-core dies in a package is the right way to do quad-core at 65nm, which implies that 45 nm is the right way to do quad-core per die, and two quad-cord dies in a package at 45 nm is the right way to do octo-core at 45nm - obviously we'll have a PowerBook G5 next Tuesday.
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.
zombierunner
Apr 20, 08:38 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; sv-se) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
HDMI-in would be nice :-)
hell yea xbox 360 on imac in 1080p ... kanex xd and similar can only do 720p atm . need 1080p target display mode support
HDMI-in would be nice :-)
hell yea xbox 360 on imac in 1080p ... kanex xd and similar can only do 720p atm . need 1080p target display mode support
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
meanmusic
Sep 6, 10:24 PM
There has been talk about release movies at the theatre and DVD at the same time. It seems people would like the choice of where and when to see a movie. Home theatre technology brings the movie experience at home even large screen computers. What if Apple will be the first to experiment with viewing movies released to the theatre at home through the movie store? We've seen TV studios release TV episode sneak peeks and new episodes the following day it airs. Could this be the big thing? $14.99 to watch a new movie at home with the whole family is actually a bargain. Steve obviously has influence with Disney to make it possible. Imagine watch the next Disney/Pixar movie in the confort of your own home on a 24" wall mounted iMac.
imac_japan
Apr 2, 04:39 AM
problem is, what do you cut down in #1 and still make profit? it's clear that dirt cheap computer market is something apple's not interested in. they believe it makes no economic sense. apple is not a charity organization, it is NOT on some mission to spread the goodness of Mac OS... if they don't see an economic merit in offering dirt cheap Macs, they won't, just like any other businesses.
eMac is not meant to be cheap. iMac is not meant to be cheap. they are meant to be all-in-one. if you know enough to foresee that you may need to upgrade in the future, you get a PowerMac because all-in-one is not for you. if you want a cheap, upgradable machine, then, unfortunately, you are not within apple's target market. thus far, apple has been doing well with this philosophy and who's to tell them to change? (do note that "customers" wanting dirt cheap machines have far less economic leverage because, well, they are cheap. if $800 is too much for a complete computer/OS/bundled software, then nevermind what dell's offering, apple believes they are ok without catering to you. if $400 is your budget, then apple believes it won't matter to you whether you get a dell or a Mac. if you want a Mac for sure, apple is betting that you will put down $400 more and get an eMac.)
even if apple offered custom upgrade parts (and only apple parts will work with Macs - otherwise, people will just go out and buy stock parts), i doubt they will be well received - they will be "overpriced" afterall, just like their computers are "overpriced" especially according to these "cheap" customers.
You have some good points here....but the basic arguement is how to survive in the future - How to grow the business....Itms doesn't make any money for Apple, the ipod is going to have too many similar players. So why not go for the lower end of the market - eg: like they did with the old "LC"s machines. People buy software but they don't want to shell out alot of money for hardware.
eMac is not meant to be cheap. iMac is not meant to be cheap. they are meant to be all-in-one. if you know enough to foresee that you may need to upgrade in the future, you get a PowerMac because all-in-one is not for you. if you want a cheap, upgradable machine, then, unfortunately, you are not within apple's target market. thus far, apple has been doing well with this philosophy and who's to tell them to change? (do note that "customers" wanting dirt cheap machines have far less economic leverage because, well, they are cheap. if $800 is too much for a complete computer/OS/bundled software, then nevermind what dell's offering, apple believes they are ok without catering to you. if $400 is your budget, then apple believes it won't matter to you whether you get a dell or a Mac. if you want a Mac for sure, apple is betting that you will put down $400 more and get an eMac.)
even if apple offered custom upgrade parts (and only apple parts will work with Macs - otherwise, people will just go out and buy stock parts), i doubt they will be well received - they will be "overpriced" afterall, just like their computers are "overpriced" especially according to these "cheap" customers.
You have some good points here....but the basic arguement is how to survive in the future - How to grow the business....Itms doesn't make any money for Apple, the ipod is going to have too many similar players. So why not go for the lower end of the market - eg: like they did with the old "LC"s machines. People buy software but they don't want to shell out alot of money for hardware.
GregA
Mar 22, 10:15 PM
You serious?
- Add Radio
- Increase screen to around 3" (not enough to enter touch territory but a nice update)
- Add High Definition Output support
- Bluetooth Support
There are plenty of updates they could do, and now that the nano no longer has the click wheel the classic name can simply point to the iPod that has the click wheel.
Interesting. HD video with HDMI could replace the old AppleTV for people needing local storage. Add wifi and you could plug it into the TV to get the AppleTV interface, and use an iPhone as the remote.
- Add Radio
- Increase screen to around 3" (not enough to enter touch territory but a nice update)
- Add High Definition Output support
- Bluetooth Support
There are plenty of updates they could do, and now that the nano no longer has the click wheel the classic name can simply point to the iPod that has the click wheel.
Interesting. HD video with HDMI could replace the old AppleTV for people needing local storage. Add wifi and you could plug it into the TV to get the AppleTV interface, and use an iPhone as the remote.
Snips
Jan 12, 04:23 AM
I think 'air' would have been capitalised on the banner if it was a reference to a product name. Then again, maybe the product name will be lower case, for font 'coolness'.
I think the spec at the start of this thread would describe a MacBook update. It seems a natural progression that future MacBooks will be Alu cased. Isn't Steve already on the record as saying all Apple products are moving to Alu (& glass)?
Interestingly, that same spec doesn't say whether the so-called 'MacBook Air' has a hard drive - being flash-based would be a differentiator from a standard MacBook line-up, as I think there's still a market for a high-capacity MacBook product, as well as a lower capacity 'thin', or whatever, portable.
Other than that, I think 'something in the air' has to imply something wireless, rather than 'over the network'. I very much doubt it's wireless power though.
My bet would be a comprehensive wireless network play:
I think the spec at the start of this thread would describe a MacBook update. It seems a natural progression that future MacBooks will be Alu cased. Isn't Steve already on the record as saying all Apple products are moving to Alu (& glass)?
Interestingly, that same spec doesn't say whether the so-called 'MacBook Air' has a hard drive - being flash-based would be a differentiator from a standard MacBook line-up, as I think there's still a market for a high-capacity MacBook product, as well as a lower capacity 'thin', or whatever, portable.
Other than that, I think 'something in the air' has to imply something wireless, rather than 'over the network'. I very much doubt it's wireless power though.
My bet would be a comprehensive wireless network play: