.jpg "Tattoo Designs, new tattoo")
Queso
Jul 21, 08:20 AM
So we are still not back upto Q1 2000 numbers? :eek:
Except of course that Q1 is the Christmas quarter, not April to June :rolleyes:
Except of course that Q1 is the Christmas quarter, not April to June :rolleyes:
Lunja
Jan 7, 06:16 PM
Dear Mr Jobs,
All I want for MWSF is a new keyboard, because it's time we had some media buttons. And a paint app so that I don't have to buy Photoshop if I want to doodle something.
Thanks,
Lunja.
All I want for MWSF is a new keyboard, because it's time we had some media buttons. And a paint app so that I don't have to buy Photoshop if I want to doodle something.
Thanks,
Lunja.
BRLawyer
Aug 25, 11:23 AM
BestBuy says that MacMinis AND iMacs are sold out...will we see faster iMacs soon as well???
rmwebs
Mar 22, 04:31 PM
Disk space aside, there's nothing wrong with the current iPod Classic. It doesnt need bluetooth, microphones, cameras, etc - the hint is in the name...CLASSIC.
Wany bluetooth? Get a iTouch. You arent going to be listening to your library of 50,000 song on the way to work I'm sure it wouldnt kill you to load 10,000 onto an iTouch for the car. :rolleyes:
Wany bluetooth? Get a iTouch. You arent going to be listening to your library of 50,000 song on the way to work I'm sure it wouldnt kill you to load 10,000 onto an iTouch for the car. :rolleyes:
Eidorian
Jan 11, 04:53 PM
What does this mean for the regular MacBook then? Is it going to be another model or a replacement?
.JPG "new tattoo to friends,")
twoodcc
Nov 21, 08:32 AM
Folks, I'm trying to run FAH on my i7 iMac. I put in "-bigadv -smp 8 -local " into the 'extra parameters' tab of the Settings app. I've got 8 processes going and it all looks good.
Apart from entering "3446" as the team number, do I need a passkey?
yes, you need a passkey to get the bonus. and you won't get the bonus until you have 10 units with that passkey.
but please let us know how long it takes to do a frame. i would like to know how that machine does
Apart from entering "3446" as the team number, do I need a passkey?
yes, you need a passkey to get the bonus. and you won't get the bonus until you have 10 units with that passkey.
but please let us know how long it takes to do a frame. i would like to know how that machine does
islanders
Dec 27, 09:35 PM
I�m waiting on buying a HD DVD or BlueRay until the price comes down, so I could see iTV offering a HD alternative, and filling that niche.
Two premium channels cost $20 a month so iTV would sell you the device to steam movies, some broadcast, download like Tivo, so you wouldn�t need a Blueray or HD DVD.
What else could be practical? Of course it will have a hard drive� a cable box DVR has a hard drive.
If it also has the ability to surf the web and run a word processor, handle video from DVR and digital camera, I�ll get one�
That is if the price is about $500.
Some unanswered questions are where are they going to get the bandwidth to do all this? You will have to have a cable subscription, perhaps just a basic subscription, but even then bandwidth is limited.
They will need their own satellite, if they really want to compete. But that would make them iDish? hmmm
This could be very interesting. I have often wondered why all the cable companies and satellite companies are within $5 pricing difference of each other? Is this the rock bottom competitive price so they can break even or are these prices fixed?
I would love to get rid of so many commercials. I�m paying $78 a month for basic digital subscription and have to use a DVR to record programs so I can zap though the commercials.
Obviously I don�t know what the limitiatoins are here for an iCast or iDish, and anticipate something like a TiVo that can surf the web, upload video, and download HD.
Two premium channels cost $20 a month so iTV would sell you the device to steam movies, some broadcast, download like Tivo, so you wouldn�t need a Blueray or HD DVD.
What else could be practical? Of course it will have a hard drive� a cable box DVR has a hard drive.
If it also has the ability to surf the web and run a word processor, handle video from DVR and digital camera, I�ll get one�
That is if the price is about $500.
Some unanswered questions are where are they going to get the bandwidth to do all this? You will have to have a cable subscription, perhaps just a basic subscription, but even then bandwidth is limited.
They will need their own satellite, if they really want to compete. But that would make them iDish? hmmm
This could be very interesting. I have often wondered why all the cable companies and satellite companies are within $5 pricing difference of each other? Is this the rock bottom competitive price so they can break even or are these prices fixed?
I would love to get rid of so many commercials. I�m paying $78 a month for basic digital subscription and have to use a DVR to record programs so I can zap though the commercials.
Obviously I don�t know what the limitiatoins are here for an iCast or iDish, and anticipate something like a TiVo that can surf the web, upload video, and download HD.
Object-X
Nov 28, 03:25 AM
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.
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
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.
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
vvv
Nov 28, 08:25 PM
Which is a big distraction from the point? And what is the point? That the XBox is a bad analogy. It is best to consider their Windows CE->Smartphone one to see that the Zune is a bad idea. The only thing we can learn from the XBox and Microsoft is that Microsoft pees on their partners (NVidia) at the earliest opportunity. But we already knew that as soon as the Zune didn't support Plays For Sure.
MS never made a smartphone, they make the windows mobile software that runs on others hardware. The xbox is ms hardware and software, just like the zune. It's a entertainment market, just like the xbox, windows mobile software isn't in the entertainment market. There are far more direct comparisons between zune and xbox than between windows mobile and zune. As for peeing on their partners, what's new, I think we all know they don't play nice, instead they play to win.
MS never made a smartphone, they make the windows mobile software that runs on others hardware. The xbox is ms hardware and software, just like the zune. It's a entertainment market, just like the xbox, windows mobile software isn't in the entertainment market. There are far more direct comparisons between zune and xbox than between windows mobile and zune. As for peeing on their partners, what's new, I think we all know they don't play nice, instead they play to win.
likemyorbs
Mar 22, 12:35 PM
But then, I don't believe that's what many really believe when they say it... instead, I get the vibe that what they mean to say is 'why can't you just closet yourself and act straight?'.
I do think some people genuinely believe it's a choice. It's hard for some people to imagine that not everyone's minds work the same as theirs, and not just related to homosexuality. Chances are, someone who considers homosexuality a choice likely has issues with other groups of people as well.
I do think some people genuinely believe it's a choice. It's hard for some people to imagine that not everyone's minds work the same as theirs, and not just related to homosexuality. Chances are, someone who considers homosexuality a choice likely has issues with other groups of people as well.
neiltc13
Mar 25, 06:50 PM
It's pretty astounding, little more than a year later, that this is even possible on a tablet device, and to this degree of ease and sophistication. Compare the growth and advancement from January 2010 to March 2011.
You're not getting the point.
It is quite impressive, but a racing game is definitely not the sort of thing that is remotely comfortable to play on a touch screen. They need precise control to be fun and no tablet or touch screen device will ever off that.
You're not getting the point.
It is quite impressive, but a racing game is definitely not the sort of thing that is remotely comfortable to play on a touch screen. They need precise control to be fun and no tablet or touch screen device will ever off that.
Schizoid
Mar 24, 06:57 PM
This is potentially great news...
I had a stock ATI 5850 in the Mac Pro for a while, OS X didn't like it but Windows ran it perfectly... in the end bit the bullet and bought a 5870 Mac edition for about twice the market value of a standard PC card!
Great decision though, the Mac now runs about 20 times faster... not just games either... the whole UI is great now (I guess thanks to OpenCL et al)
...and whoever decided the GT120 was a good card for a Mac Pro needs to be shot!
I had a stock ATI 5850 in the Mac Pro for a while, OS X didn't like it but Windows ran it perfectly... in the end bit the bullet and bought a 5870 Mac edition for about twice the market value of a standard PC card!
Great decision though, the Mac now runs about 20 times faster... not just games either... the whole UI is great now (I guess thanks to OpenCL et al)
...and whoever decided the GT120 was a good card for a Mac Pro needs to be shot!
macidiot
Jul 19, 04:41 PM
How could the analysts be off by almost a billion dollars? Are they held to account for this?
Of course not. Their job is to not be accurate. Their job is to generate revenue, usually in the form of stock trades. If they are accurate, it is usually because the company they are covering essentially gave them the EXACT numbers.
Analyst downgrades stock, people sell. Analyst upgrades stock, people buy. rinse, repeat every couple of months.
However, most analysts are pleasant people. Must be from those mid-six figure salaries.
Of course not. Their job is to not be accurate. Their job is to generate revenue, usually in the form of stock trades. If they are accurate, it is usually because the company they are covering essentially gave them the EXACT numbers.
Analyst downgrades stock, people sell. Analyst upgrades stock, people buy. rinse, repeat every couple of months.
However, most analysts are pleasant people. Must be from those mid-six figure salaries.
ipodG8TR
Aug 17, 01:32 PM
XM blows as compared to Sirius
Especially since they have ads on their music stations now. Sirius had 600,00 subscribers before Stern and now has over 4 million. Sirius WILL surpass XM sometime in the next year. The reasons are simple:
1. Howard Stern
2. Exclusive NFL, NBA, NHL (all now) and Nascar (as of 2007) programming.
3. Commercial-free music stations
Especially since they have ads on their music stations now. Sirius had 600,00 subscribers before Stern and now has over 4 million. Sirius WILL surpass XM sometime in the next year. The reasons are simple:
1. Howard Stern
2. Exclusive NFL, NBA, NHL (all now) and Nascar (as of 2007) programming.
3. Commercial-free music stations
DMann
Jan 13, 01:56 PM
I could go a MacBook Xenon (quad core) ;)
hot, Hot, HOT!!!!
hot, Hot, HOT!!!!
macEfan
Nov 29, 10:30 PM
Its the Pippin 2!! this time its intel instead of Bandai!
lets hope so!
I want a pippin, but they are all so rare and expensive... would be grate if the itv let you play games on your tv!
lets hope so!
I want a pippin, but they are all so rare and expensive... would be grate if the itv let you play games on your tv!
prady16
Oct 23, 08:11 AM
I hope they start shipping them right away or at least have loooots of stock available at the retail stores!
walleyealx
Oct 23, 05:18 PM
any chance you think they are gonna put the update the MB the same time they do the MBP's?
Sbrocket
Jan 12, 04:33 AM
Geez, everyone looks over the simplest and most obvious interpretation to speculate on services that no one has seen proof for. Wimax and all this other stuff is reaching...why are you trying so hard? The MacBook Air is called such because, anyone? Bueller? Bueller?, it is so thin and light. Get it? There's something in the air...the new product? All this is reading way too much into it. I've seen stuff from analyzing the typeface to find the hidden meaning to Apple changing its logo (what??) to Wimax service built in <insert product here> to...you get the picture. Stop reading too much into it.
guez
Sep 7, 03:37 PM
Actually the move to Intel has opened Apple to fast depreciation - and that isnt going away.
Many here seem to 'bitch' that Mac is now in competition with the PC in the hardware stakes and sadly that damages your resale value however the benefits are immense, I am sure Apple will be able to secure lower unit costs aswell as faster processors and newer technology. Its great for apple and for us buying, just bad if you sell hardware before it looses all value completely. It also means we will see these refreshes more often and so we will be buying more up to date hardware which as a PC user is great...
This raises an interesting question. I'm not so much interested in depreciation as obsolescence. My experience has been that if you buy the right Mac (this is key), it can last 4 years, or more, and system updates/upgrades will not seriously degrade performance (sometimes there can even be an improvement, as with Panther). This is NOT my experience with Wintel. Is this going to change with Intel? Perhaps the readership of this blog does not fall in this category, but Macs have historically appealed to those who want to spend a little more money for more value (including a longer useful life)-the same people who drive a Honda Civic into the ground rather than buying a Chevy Malibu every three years (sorry, I couldn't think of another example).
Are we entering the age of the Walmart-ifation of Macs: less value, but cheaper?
Many here seem to 'bitch' that Mac is now in competition with the PC in the hardware stakes and sadly that damages your resale value however the benefits are immense, I am sure Apple will be able to secure lower unit costs aswell as faster processors and newer technology. Its great for apple and for us buying, just bad if you sell hardware before it looses all value completely. It also means we will see these refreshes more often and so we will be buying more up to date hardware which as a PC user is great...
This raises an interesting question. I'm not so much interested in depreciation as obsolescence. My experience has been that if you buy the right Mac (this is key), it can last 4 years, or more, and system updates/upgrades will not seriously degrade performance (sometimes there can even be an improvement, as with Panther). This is NOT my experience with Wintel. Is this going to change with Intel? Perhaps the readership of this blog does not fall in this category, but Macs have historically appealed to those who want to spend a little more money for more value (including a longer useful life)-the same people who drive a Honda Civic into the ground rather than buying a Chevy Malibu every three years (sorry, I couldn't think of another example).
Are we entering the age of the Walmart-ifation of Macs: less value, but cheaper?
coolfactor
Aug 7, 07:48 AM
OS X needs a robust Security System Preference Panel that provides virus checking and other defenses and actively monitors for intrusions.
Go to Sharing preference pane, enable the Firewall, click Advanced, and enabling Firewall Logging.
Your wish just came true. All blocked intrusions are now logged for your perusal.
Go to Sharing preference pane, enable the Firewall, click Advanced, and enabling Firewall Logging.
Your wish just came true. All blocked intrusions are now logged for your perusal.
hyperpasta
Jul 18, 02:03 PM
Rentals are stupid...what if something comes up and I can't watch my movie within the alotted time? I'm just screwed, then?
Actually, other online movie rental services serve up "frozen" movies. You can keep a frozen movie for a month without it expiring. To watch it, you must "thaw" the movie. Then it expires a week later. In this way, you can download a movie when convenient and watch when convenient... not much pressure at all. Simply thaw the movie when you're ready to watch.
The only way I see this being announced at WWDC is if it ties in with Leopard's rumored BitTorrent feature. However, this doesn't make much sense, since what will Tiger/Panther/Windows users do to get movies?
Actually, other online movie rental services serve up "frozen" movies. You can keep a frozen movie for a month without it expiring. To watch it, you must "thaw" the movie. Then it expires a week later. In this way, you can download a movie when convenient and watch when convenient... not much pressure at all. Simply thaw the movie when you're ready to watch.
The only way I see this being announced at WWDC is if it ties in with Leopard's rumored BitTorrent feature. However, this doesn't make much sense, since what will Tiger/Panther/Windows users do to get movies?
QuarterSwede
Apr 10, 06:03 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.
I had the same thought. Then again, I wasn't sure if he was being sarcastic.
But yet you have an opinion on how superior your choice of manuals is.
I had the same thought. Then again, I wasn't sure if he was being sarcastic.
Astro7x
Apr 26, 02:40 PM
Wirelessly posted (Iphone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
How can it be generic if no one had one before apple created there's? Suddenly everyone calls their market place an app store. There've been digital stores for years, and none were app stores.
Exactly. While "App Store" is a great term, I'm convinced that if Apple originally called it an "App Shop" that the Microsofts and Amazons would complain about that being a generic term too and want to use it.
How can it be generic if no one had one before apple created there's? Suddenly everyone calls their market place an app store. There've been digital stores for years, and none were app stores.
Exactly. While "App Store" is a great term, I'm convinced that if Apple originally called it an "App Shop" that the Microsofts and Amazons would complain about that being a generic term too and want to use it.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий