dornoforpyros
Nov 29, 08:15 AM
you know, I'm trying to figure out why the Zune is so universally hated, and I can't.
I mean, yes it's Microsoft, but given the success of the xBox I would have thought some faith had been restored in them. I mean no one has even used the damn thing yet and their panning it as if it's the worse mp3 ever released. Yes, it's meant to go head to head with the iPod, and yes, it will probably fail, but why are we not giving credit where it's due?
The 3 days/3 plays thing is kinda bunk, but the wifi sharing in the first place is a pretty neat idea. How many of you use iTunes sharing at work or in the dorm? Wouldn't it be nice if your iPods could do the same?
And what's wrong with a larger screen that works in both landscape and portrait? I have a feeling that were the iPod to have gotten this functionality first everyone would be tripping over their credit cards to order one.
I dunno, just seems like everyone is getting overly excited on joining the "trash the zune" bandwagon that they aren't willing to give any credit where it's due.
I mean, yes it's Microsoft, but given the success of the xBox I would have thought some faith had been restored in them. I mean no one has even used the damn thing yet and their panning it as if it's the worse mp3 ever released. Yes, it's meant to go head to head with the iPod, and yes, it will probably fail, but why are we not giving credit where it's due?
The 3 days/3 plays thing is kinda bunk, but the wifi sharing in the first place is a pretty neat idea. How many of you use iTunes sharing at work or in the dorm? Wouldn't it be nice if your iPods could do the same?
And what's wrong with a larger screen that works in both landscape and portrait? I have a feeling that were the iPod to have gotten this functionality first everyone would be tripping over their credit cards to order one.
I dunno, just seems like everyone is getting overly excited on joining the "trash the zune" bandwagon that they aren't willing to give any credit where it's due.
brianus
Sep 1, 01:05 PM
Most of the posts in this thread are about the 23" screen. Yes, I think it will happen to allow the imac to play 1080i/1080p HD.
But, how about the processors? Apple needs to have a Core 2 (Conroe not Merom) inside the imac. The imac is not a conventionally size desktop (not as much room inside as a tower) but Apple can not continue to use a laptop processor in the imac. If they do, then how will the Conroe be used in Apple's line up? In a Mac tower? I don't think so. Surely, a 23" iMac could house the Conroe suitably?
So I would say that the 23" iMac would kill 2 birds - Conroe and HD for the home user. :)
I completely agree with you that using Conroe would make more sense (the casing for the 17" and 20" models was originally designer for a G5, for pete's sake), but I disagree with the assumption that Conroe will *have* to be used in some way in Apple's lineup. Nobody's putting a gun to their head; they may well skip that processor entirely, as AppleInsider has suggested.
They may be responding to positive reviews and customer satisfaction with the relative silence of the Yonah iMacs compared to their G5 predecessors. I don't know how much hotter and louder an iMac would run with Conroe, but if it was noisy it would be a disappointment, as all the other desktop models they've released this year have been noticeably quieter.
Of course they won't offer it in aluminum, sheesh. Aluminum is the "pro" color, white and black are the "consumer" colors. Sheesh! Thought you people followed Apple.. anybody think they'll offer a "premium" black 23", same as they did for the higher-end MacBook? They are after all "siblings" in the product lineup.
Lastly I don't see them getting rid of the "chin" unless they come out with the rumored touch-screen, widescreen video iPods on the 12th too. I think the visual similarity between the iPod and iMac is quite intentional and not something they're likely to change unless the iPod itself changes.
But, how about the processors? Apple needs to have a Core 2 (Conroe not Merom) inside the imac. The imac is not a conventionally size desktop (not as much room inside as a tower) but Apple can not continue to use a laptop processor in the imac. If they do, then how will the Conroe be used in Apple's line up? In a Mac tower? I don't think so. Surely, a 23" iMac could house the Conroe suitably?
So I would say that the 23" iMac would kill 2 birds - Conroe and HD for the home user. :)
I completely agree with you that using Conroe would make more sense (the casing for the 17" and 20" models was originally designer for a G5, for pete's sake), but I disagree with the assumption that Conroe will *have* to be used in some way in Apple's lineup. Nobody's putting a gun to their head; they may well skip that processor entirely, as AppleInsider has suggested.
They may be responding to positive reviews and customer satisfaction with the relative silence of the Yonah iMacs compared to their G5 predecessors. I don't know how much hotter and louder an iMac would run with Conroe, but if it was noisy it would be a disappointment, as all the other desktop models they've released this year have been noticeably quieter.
Of course they won't offer it in aluminum, sheesh. Aluminum is the "pro" color, white and black are the "consumer" colors. Sheesh! Thought you people followed Apple.. anybody think they'll offer a "premium" black 23", same as they did for the higher-end MacBook? They are after all "siblings" in the product lineup.
Lastly I don't see them getting rid of the "chin" unless they come out with the rumored touch-screen, widescreen video iPods on the 12th too. I think the visual similarity between the iPod and iMac is quite intentional and not something they're likely to change unless the iPod itself changes.
benjayman2
Feb 28, 01:57 PM
First attempt to get everything in one shot.
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/6433/img0390ko.jpg (http://img141.imageshack.us/i/img0390ko.jpg/)
Gave up and started taking pics of parts of our new room.
http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/3861/img0392y.jpg (http://img651.imageshack.us/i/img0392y.jpg/)
Digital and Analog entertainment
http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/4808/img0394m.jpg (http://img193.imageshack.us/i/img0394m.jpg/)
Second attempt to get everything in one shot.
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/9025/img0396ki.jpg (http://img87.imageshack.us/i/img0396ki.jpg/)
Pic from the window bay.
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/1438/img0398p.jpg (http://img84.imageshack.us/i/img0398p.jpg/)
The only pic that I thought turned out decent.
http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/1701/img0386of.jpg
Hardware in the sig
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/6433/img0390ko.jpg (http://img141.imageshack.us/i/img0390ko.jpg/)
Gave up and started taking pics of parts of our new room.
http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/3861/img0392y.jpg (http://img651.imageshack.us/i/img0392y.jpg/)
Digital and Analog entertainment
http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/4808/img0394m.jpg (http://img193.imageshack.us/i/img0394m.jpg/)
Second attempt to get everything in one shot.
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/9025/img0396ki.jpg (http://img87.imageshack.us/i/img0396ki.jpg/)
Pic from the window bay.
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/1438/img0398p.jpg (http://img84.imageshack.us/i/img0398p.jpg/)
The only pic that I thought turned out decent.
http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/1701/img0386of.jpg
Hardware in the sig
plinden
Jul 20, 12:37 PM
Currently reporting at $60.80 at 12:44 ET. Up 6.73 from yesterday.
Yahoo article reports: According to Gartner, Apple shipped 766,000 PCs in the second quarter of the year, good enough for 4.6% of the U.S. market, and a 15.4% increase over a year ago. Apple's growth rate exceeded those of the No. 1 and No. 2 PC companies, Dell Inc.:)
Just to give some more figures - Gartner says worldwide PC sales are 55 million compared to 49.5 million this time last year, and 16.6 million in the US compared to 15.6 million last year.
But I wonder where they got 766,000 from. The sales figures separate out retail from regional sales, but considering that most Apple stores are in the US, the vast majority of the 216,000 retail sales would be in the US, so US sales could be anything between 642,000-858,000. That's 3.9%-5.2% US market share. Looks like they picked a percentage right in the middle, but I would say it's nearer to 5%. Of course, worldwide it's still only 2.4%.
To put this in perspective, Dell sold 9.73 million PC worldwide and 5.3 million in the US, ie. 7x Apple's shipments.
Yahoo article reports: According to Gartner, Apple shipped 766,000 PCs in the second quarter of the year, good enough for 4.6% of the U.S. market, and a 15.4% increase over a year ago. Apple's growth rate exceeded those of the No. 1 and No. 2 PC companies, Dell Inc.:)
Just to give some more figures - Gartner says worldwide PC sales are 55 million compared to 49.5 million this time last year, and 16.6 million in the US compared to 15.6 million last year.
But I wonder where they got 766,000 from. The sales figures separate out retail from regional sales, but considering that most Apple stores are in the US, the vast majority of the 216,000 retail sales would be in the US, so US sales could be anything between 642,000-858,000. That's 3.9%-5.2% US market share. Looks like they picked a percentage right in the middle, but I would say it's nearer to 5%. Of course, worldwide it's still only 2.4%.
To put this in perspective, Dell sold 9.73 million PC worldwide and 5.3 million in the US, ie. 7x Apple's shipments.
jettredmont
Apr 12, 09:55 PM
Also the guy who took a nice iMovie and made it unusable. I hope he doesn't fsck up FCP. Even iMovie had background rendering until he stripped it out.
Have you used iMovie recently? In the last two releases it has moved forward by leaps and bounds (and I'm fairly certain it does background rendering of everything...) Your criticism was true of the oriinal new iMovie, but since then they've been re-adding the features on the streamlined chassis and it is a rather nice program now.
Have you used iMovie recently? In the last two releases it has moved forward by leaps and bounds (and I'm fairly certain it does background rendering of everything...) Your criticism was true of the oriinal new iMovie, but since then they've been re-adding the features on the streamlined chassis and it is a rather nice program now.
MacFanJeff
Mar 26, 04:00 AM
While professionals can say bye bye to nVidia's CUDA processing and PhysX.
:-(
ATI/AMD is doing what they can, developing an OpenCL driven bullet physics port to Maya but they always seem to be one step behind - announcing a plugin for Maya 2011 in the same week that Autodesk announced that nVidia Physx is being integrated directly into Maya 2012 with real time physx cloth deformation, rigid body dynamics, and physx accelerated calculations for DMM destruction.
On the windows side, 3ds Max is getting Physx integration, too. Open CL is cool but it's got some ground to make up in the application world.
If you refer to my prior post in this thread, I too am a professional 3D content creator. As things stand currently, all software I use take better advantage of nVidia compared to ATI. Most of what I use prefer "CUDA" cores and eventually more "PhysX" integration.
This is why I can no longer use Apple at all in my work, I can not come close to getting what I can from a pair of 580 GTX factory OC cards in SLI for a Mac Pro. In fact, most of what Apple offers is still behind the curve.
It is the single area where Apple fails and I know from attending conferences that most of the big names simply don't care because they do not have enough users on that platform to matter. Don't get me wrong, I still think Apple is great for most all other areas and I recommend them to family and friends. But for the 3D professional market, there is no way I can use Apple without making many sacrifices.
:-(
ATI/AMD is doing what they can, developing an OpenCL driven bullet physics port to Maya but they always seem to be one step behind - announcing a plugin for Maya 2011 in the same week that Autodesk announced that nVidia Physx is being integrated directly into Maya 2012 with real time physx cloth deformation, rigid body dynamics, and physx accelerated calculations for DMM destruction.
On the windows side, 3ds Max is getting Physx integration, too. Open CL is cool but it's got some ground to make up in the application world.
If you refer to my prior post in this thread, I too am a professional 3D content creator. As things stand currently, all software I use take better advantage of nVidia compared to ATI. Most of what I use prefer "CUDA" cores and eventually more "PhysX" integration.
This is why I can no longer use Apple at all in my work, I can not come close to getting what I can from a pair of 580 GTX factory OC cards in SLI for a Mac Pro. In fact, most of what Apple offers is still behind the curve.
It is the single area where Apple fails and I know from attending conferences that most of the big names simply don't care because they do not have enough users on that platform to matter. Don't get me wrong, I still think Apple is great for most all other areas and I recommend them to family and friends. But for the 3D professional market, there is no way I can use Apple without making many sacrifices.
DrEasy
Mar 23, 02:08 AM
With a bigger hard drive, it would be conceivable to think of the iPod classic as a portable hard drive that you could also use for Time Machine backups. I would have a greater incentive in backing up my files if I could use my iPod that is always nearby. It would back up my files as I'm recharging it.
Or look at it the other way: there's plenty of portable hard drives in the market, but how many of you carry one "just in case"? Whereas if the portable hard drive doubles up as a very competent MP3 player, you will always have it with you.
Now there should be some data protection scheme so that if someone steals your iPod they can't use all your data. Encryption + some kind of pairing with your machines should do the job.
I know I'd buy such a thing...
Or look at it the other way: there's plenty of portable hard drives in the market, but how many of you carry one "just in case"? Whereas if the portable hard drive doubles up as a very competent MP3 player, you will always have it with you.
Now there should be some data protection scheme so that if someone steals your iPod they can't use all your data. Encryption + some kind of pairing with your machines should do the job.
I know I'd buy such a thing...
Al Coholic
Apr 21, 11:56 AM
As soon as I saw the name Al Franken I stopped reading. What a dufus.
LOL!
LOL!
Multimedia
Aug 29, 10:25 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Think Secret claims (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0608macmini.html) to have information on the rumored revision (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060824183848.shtml) to the Mac Mini. According to the site, Apple will replace the existing Core Solo model with the existing 1.66 GHz Core Duo model, and add a 1.83 GHz Core Duo model, effectively eliminating all single-core CPUs from Apple's computer product line.
The new systems are said to be "ready for production." Think Secret believes the models will be introduced in a few weeks time with little fanfare, although not totally under the radar like the last Mac Mini update (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/09/20050930023909.shtml).Not Core 2 Duo??!! :eek: :confused: :( I can't beleive they are not going to go Core 2 Duo in the mini before Thanksgiving.Only if they don't drop prices. Just depends what they charge, if they had core solo for $399 sales would go through the roof.And Apple would be losing money with every sale. :rolleyes:
And for all you Yonah FanBoys out there I say you are completely out of touch with reality living in some sort of parallel dimension where old obsolete stopgap technology prevails beyond it's short useful lifespan. :) It makes no sense to me why would a laptop be more powerful than a desktop. If you're gonna stay with core duo why not just make the mini a 1.83 & 2.00 GHz Core Duo machine like the macbooks. 1.66 & 1.83 on a core duo is pathetic in my opinions and solidifies my believe that the mini and i will never get along....at least for now. Thats just too much crippling to handle.Here here. I totally agree. Staying with Core Duo is insane, rude and greedy.
Think Secret claims (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0608macmini.html) to have information on the rumored revision (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060824183848.shtml) to the Mac Mini. According to the site, Apple will replace the existing Core Solo model with the existing 1.66 GHz Core Duo model, and add a 1.83 GHz Core Duo model, effectively eliminating all single-core CPUs from Apple's computer product line.
The new systems are said to be "ready for production." Think Secret believes the models will be introduced in a few weeks time with little fanfare, although not totally under the radar like the last Mac Mini update (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/09/20050930023909.shtml).Not Core 2 Duo??!! :eek: :confused: :( I can't beleive they are not going to go Core 2 Duo in the mini before Thanksgiving.Only if they don't drop prices. Just depends what they charge, if they had core solo for $399 sales would go through the roof.And Apple would be losing money with every sale. :rolleyes:
And for all you Yonah FanBoys out there I say you are completely out of touch with reality living in some sort of parallel dimension where old obsolete stopgap technology prevails beyond it's short useful lifespan. :) It makes no sense to me why would a laptop be more powerful than a desktop. If you're gonna stay with core duo why not just make the mini a 1.83 & 2.00 GHz Core Duo machine like the macbooks. 1.66 & 1.83 on a core duo is pathetic in my opinions and solidifies my believe that the mini and i will never get along....at least for now. Thats just too much crippling to handle.Here here. I totally agree. Staying with Core Duo is insane, rude and greedy.
oldwatery
Apr 26, 07:31 PM
anyone else getting a little bit fed up of apples lawsuits?
Count me in there.
Apple have become Big Brother and Big Bully lately.
In the past they trod more lightly.
Count me in there.
Apple have become Big Brother and Big Bully lately.
In the past they trod more lightly.
Funkatronic
Nov 26, 02:44 AM
Ordered this off threadless today
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2243/2217035691_7a17725fb6.jpg?v=0
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2243/2217035691_7a17725fb6.jpg?v=0
![neverland dwarf rabbits. neverland dwarf rabbits. Purebred Netherland Dwarf Doe; Purebred Netherland Dwarf Doe. Scepticalscribe. Feb 16, 07:18 AM. Go with the 5th Gen Nano[/B]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YquLpHCMKG4/0.jpg "neverland dwarf rabbits. Purebred Netherland Dwarf Doe; Purebred Netherland Dwarf Doe. Scepticalscribe. Feb 16, 07:18 AM. Go with the 5th Gen Nano[/B]")
JoEw
Jun 22, 05:20 PM
Touch interfaces don't NECESSARILY mean touchscreen interfaces.
The Magic Trackpad � http://www.macrumors.com/2010/06/07/apples-magic-trackpad-or-magic-slate-revealed/ � would allow for multi-touch on desktops, enabling many iOS applications to be used on a desktop computer (and obviously laptops could do the same thing with their trackpads).
Touch input in a desktop environment could be useful for manipulating or selecting MULTIPLE buttons/sliders/whatever at the same time � which you can't do with a mouse.
There are lots of ways this could be useful.
but a replacement of keyboard and mice don't think so...
The Magic Trackpad � http://www.macrumors.com/2010/06/07/apples-magic-trackpad-or-magic-slate-revealed/ � would allow for multi-touch on desktops, enabling many iOS applications to be used on a desktop computer (and obviously laptops could do the same thing with their trackpads).
Touch input in a desktop environment could be useful for manipulating or selecting MULTIPLE buttons/sliders/whatever at the same time � which you can't do with a mouse.
There are lots of ways this could be useful.
but a replacement of keyboard and mice don't think so...
MacRumors
Mar 22, 03:40 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/22/steve-jobs-no-plans-to-discontinue-ipod-classic/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/22/163626-ipod_classic_2009_all_sides.jpg
neverland dwarf rabbits. baby Dwarf rabbit for a now . baby Dwarf rabbit for a now . Speedy2. Oct 7, 05:28 PM. Yes, I have. Several times.
Scottish Netherland Dwarf
Chinchilla netherland dwarf
The Netherland Dwarf Show
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/22/163626-ipod_classic_2009_all_sides.jpg
iMpathetic
Nov 27, 09:33 PM
For the rig in my sig...
NZXT Phantom :D
http://thebestcasescenario.com/oneslowz28/newsdesk/NZXT_Phantom/Phantom_white_1.jpg
http://thebestcasescenario.com/oneslowz28/newsdesk/NZXT_Phantom/Phantom_white_lit.jpg
WD Raptor
http://www.hellas.rs/slike/hard-diskovi/WD1500HLFS.jpg
NZXT Phantom :D
http://thebestcasescenario.com/oneslowz28/newsdesk/NZXT_Phantom/Phantom_white_1.jpg
http://thebestcasescenario.com/oneslowz28/newsdesk/NZXT_Phantom/Phantom_white_lit.jpg
WD Raptor
http://www.hellas.rs/slike/hard-diskovi/WD1500HLFS.jpg
tny
Sep 7, 06:03 AM
Some people have recognised that the reference to G5 relates to the exterior design, not the chips inside.
Other people have figured out that the reference to "G5" is a mistaken label for the exterior design, you mean. "G5" refers to the processor, not the design. This design is going to be around for quite a while, I think; the most likely change will be to get rid of the "chin" when they are able to do so.
Other people have figured out that the reference to "G5" is a mistaken label for the exterior design, you mean. "G5" refers to the processor, not the design. This design is going to be around for quite a while, I think; the most likely change will be to get rid of the "chin" when they are able to do so.
chinesechikn
Mar 27, 03:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
OH noooos, you gots me theres. ;) It's not exactly easy to takes 'some' of me toys with me, but as a trade off I get an absolutely superior experience on all fronts. There are NO compromises to my controls. I get top notch visuals now that are much better than what can be done on dated consoles like the PS3 and 360, and at a much higher frame rate.
I have an iPad, I'm getting an iPad 2 for compatibility testing. I have a great phone that's similar to my iPad performance wise -- which I can plug a Wiimote into and play a ton of old games. I have a DS and I'm getting a 3DS.
I have portability for entertainment and there's nothing stoping me from bringing my PC, wheel, etc. to my friend's place, something I've done.
Who care's if the future iPad is up to par with a 360 visually as an example, it will still be subpar compared to my PC now and chances are it will still lack proper inputs.
If I wan to play a casual exploration game, a time killer, something that has fun direct interaction like World of Goo, I'll pull out my iPad. But for racing or any game that just plays better with a mouse, a wheel, a flightstick, and so on, I really can't care that my iPad or any future version is portable, if it makes playing these types of games lame.
Oh yay! These forums attract the angry Microsoft supporters, Android yahoos and now the rabid gamers are feeling insecure. We should all petition Apple to stop making compelling devices!
Here here
OH noooos, you gots me theres. ;) It's not exactly easy to takes 'some' of me toys with me, but as a trade off I get an absolutely superior experience on all fronts. There are NO compromises to my controls. I get top notch visuals now that are much better than what can be done on dated consoles like the PS3 and 360, and at a much higher frame rate.
I have an iPad, I'm getting an iPad 2 for compatibility testing. I have a great phone that's similar to my iPad performance wise -- which I can plug a Wiimote into and play a ton of old games. I have a DS and I'm getting a 3DS.
I have portability for entertainment and there's nothing stoping me from bringing my PC, wheel, etc. to my friend's place, something I've done.
Who care's if the future iPad is up to par with a 360 visually as an example, it will still be subpar compared to my PC now and chances are it will still lack proper inputs.
If I wan to play a casual exploration game, a time killer, something that has fun direct interaction like World of Goo, I'll pull out my iPad. But for racing or any game that just plays better with a mouse, a wheel, a flightstick, and so on, I really can't care that my iPad or any future version is portable, if it makes playing these types of games lame.
Oh yay! These forums attract the angry Microsoft supporters, Android yahoos and now the rabid gamers are feeling insecure. We should all petition Apple to stop making compelling devices!
Here here
Ochyandkaren
Mar 27, 02:53 AM
Ahaha, it's so much like a DS, I don't even.
http://www.ps3hax.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/nintendo-ds.jpg
Stupid BBC journalist Rory Cellan-Jones strikes again:
Gaming battle: 3DS v iPad 2 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/rorycellanjones/2011/03/3ds_v_ipad_2.html#comments) he wrote about the so much talked Death Of the Console.
netherland dwarf rabbits.
Perry, a Netherland Dwarf,
http://www.ps3hax.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/nintendo-ds.jpg
Stupid BBC journalist Rory Cellan-Jones strikes again:
Gaming battle: 3DS v iPad 2 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/rorycellanjones/2011/03/3ds_v_ipad_2.html#comments) he wrote about the so much talked Death Of the Console.
ezekielrage_99
Oct 23, 09:58 AM
So Macbooks next tuesday :confused:
shartypants
Apr 12, 08:36 PM
Seems late for an event. Since its FCP, should we have a video of the event? :) Or maybe it will come later after it is edited. ;)
miniConvert
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
Well, that's certainly a 'spirited' post! O_o
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
Well, that's certainly a 'spirited' post! O_o
SpinThis!
Apr 12, 09:43 PM
Yeah, I will not be shocked if this ends up being a Lion-only application.
Definitely. For better or worse...
The audio aligning features are going to be underrated but nice.
Definitely. For better or worse...
The audio aligning features are going to be underrated but nice.
Hollis
Jul 13, 11:23 PM
I'd think the option would come a bit later. I mean, who wants an optical drive that can currently play nothing and burn to nothing which will cost them $500-$1000 on a machine that is already very pricey.
Theres movies on Blu-Ray already.. and you can buy discs to burn too already... I think a BTO option is perfectly reasonable.
Theres movies on Blu-Ray already.. and you can buy discs to burn too already... I think a BTO option is perfectly reasonable.
jxyama
Mar 31, 07:01 AM
How about three options....
1) I was thinking of a cut down emac style for the 1st time, Dad and Mums, Student, Low income buyers. (eg: basic cut down version)
2) An expandable machine based on the above design (eg: middle of the road - same chip as 3 but much lower specs)
3) Macs for the professionals...and 2nd or 3rd time computer buyers (eg: high spec/price - Higher spec chip than 2)
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.
1) I was thinking of a cut down emac style for the 1st time, Dad and Mums, Student, Low income buyers. (eg: basic cut down version)
2) An expandable machine based on the above design (eg: middle of the road - same chip as 3 but much lower specs)
3) Macs for the professionals...and 2nd or 3rd time computer buyers (eg: high spec/price - Higher spec chip than 2)
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.
jettredmont
Aug 16, 02:00 PM
We need flat data rates on mobiles in the UK. It will happen (esp. if they want people to embrace 3g that they spent all the money on), it's just when.
While it's nice to dream, when you are talking about a service (downloading music from your server to your device) that the vast majority of people are going to be using many hours in a day, I doubt you'll see that being "cheap" on the current setups any time soon. For one, there isn't that kind of capacity in the networks. For another, while it may be different in the UK, there are still many pockets of poor or nonexistent coverage. Finally, the cost of portable storage is decreasing significantly (by which I mean, several orders of magnitude) faster than the cost of network bandwidth.
Network capacity is where it all starts off. Why are ringtones so expensive? Well, for one, because people still buy them. But, offering $1 or $0.25 ringtones would yield a killing for both the record companies (getting $0.25 for 1/6th of a song? Seems about right relative to $1/song) and greatly expand the service in terms of total market size (ie, 1/3rd revenue per download, but much more than 3x increase in number of downloads). Why don't they do this? Because their networks, to a one, could not stand for this traffic to increase enough that the market would expand enough to make the change profitable. When you pay $3 for a ringtone download you are paying primarily to keep other people from doing the same. Sounds perverse, but that's the reality when you have a limited-availability resource, it is the foundation of supply vs demand.
Expanding on the second: I'd never, ever, buy something that I would want to use when driving, for instance, across the "boring states" of Nevada and south-eastern Oregon, that requires a constant connection to any type of service. Why? Because even cell phones are useless for about a three hour stretch of Highway 95 going up from Winnemucca. If cell phones aren't working now, how long will it be before some next-generation service comes in and "wires" the place up?
I might shoot myself without my iPod to listen to during that three hours of scrubgrass, migrating crickets, and mountains.
But, seriously, you guys are talking about a concept that would have garnered a lot of conversation fifteen years ago. The fact of the day is, though, that networking is not getting cheaper at a rate of doubling bandwidth per year, and small, portable hard drive storage (or non-hard drive Flash storage, even moreso) is. Wireless networking isn't winning on power consumption either (Flash storage wins there by a longshot as well).
Until people start having libraries that are infeasible to transport with them (which means, hard drive space can't keep up with library space, which certainly isn't the case today as library space isn't doubling per year either)and which can be trickle-downloaded to a low-profile wireless device in realtime, the idea here is dead. Sorry, that's just the facts.
While it's nice to dream, when you are talking about a service (downloading music from your server to your device) that the vast majority of people are going to be using many hours in a day, I doubt you'll see that being "cheap" on the current setups any time soon. For one, there isn't that kind of capacity in the networks. For another, while it may be different in the UK, there are still many pockets of poor or nonexistent coverage. Finally, the cost of portable storage is decreasing significantly (by which I mean, several orders of magnitude) faster than the cost of network bandwidth.
Network capacity is where it all starts off. Why are ringtones so expensive? Well, for one, because people still buy them. But, offering $1 or $0.25 ringtones would yield a killing for both the record companies (getting $0.25 for 1/6th of a song? Seems about right relative to $1/song) and greatly expand the service in terms of total market size (ie, 1/3rd revenue per download, but much more than 3x increase in number of downloads). Why don't they do this? Because their networks, to a one, could not stand for this traffic to increase enough that the market would expand enough to make the change profitable. When you pay $3 for a ringtone download you are paying primarily to keep other people from doing the same. Sounds perverse, but that's the reality when you have a limited-availability resource, it is the foundation of supply vs demand.
Expanding on the second: I'd never, ever, buy something that I would want to use when driving, for instance, across the "boring states" of Nevada and south-eastern Oregon, that requires a constant connection to any type of service. Why? Because even cell phones are useless for about a three hour stretch of Highway 95 going up from Winnemucca. If cell phones aren't working now, how long will it be before some next-generation service comes in and "wires" the place up?
I might shoot myself without my iPod to listen to during that three hours of scrubgrass, migrating crickets, and mountains.
But, seriously, you guys are talking about a concept that would have garnered a lot of conversation fifteen years ago. The fact of the day is, though, that networking is not getting cheaper at a rate of doubling bandwidth per year, and small, portable hard drive storage (or non-hard drive Flash storage, even moreso) is. Wireless networking isn't winning on power consumption either (Flash storage wins there by a longshot as well).
Until people start having libraries that are infeasible to transport with them (which means, hard drive space can't keep up with library space, which certainly isn't the case today as library space isn't doubling per year either)and which can be trickle-downloaded to a low-profile wireless device in realtime, the idea here is dead. Sorry, that's just the facts.