miloblithe
Sep 6, 09:29 AM
I think the $599 model, now with the core duo of course, is a good deal. I can't really say the same thing about the $799 model.
Although, a refurb core solo can now be had for $479. :)
The $799 model isn't a very good deal compared to the iMac, definitely. Add memory to get up to 1GB, and put in a 160GB HD like the $1199 iMac model, and you're already up to $1074 for the mini. For that $125 extra dollars you get a graphics card, a significantly faster processor, faster HD, a bit more expandability, and of course a screen.
Unless you specifically want the mini form factor, or have specific limit intentions for its use, it's not that good deal as a computer. If it were $100, that'd make a huge difference.
Although, a refurb core solo can now be had for $479. :)
The $799 model isn't a very good deal compared to the iMac, definitely. Add memory to get up to 1GB, and put in a 160GB HD like the $1199 iMac model, and you're already up to $1074 for the mini. For that $125 extra dollars you get a graphics card, a significantly faster processor, faster HD, a bit more expandability, and of course a screen.
Unless you specifically want the mini form factor, or have specific limit intentions for its use, it's not that good deal as a computer. If it were $100, that'd make a huge difference.
czeluff
Jan 12, 12:25 PM
I think the "Air" more likely refers to over the air rentals.
Bingo! This guy nailed it. Apple maintains a professional naming scheme for all of their machines. "Macbook Air" is NOT one of them.
Based on the current specs listed, here's what consumers would choose between (and this is why those specs are wrong):
Macbook: 13.3", ~$1100, Optical Drive.
Macbook Air: 13.3, ~$1500, No Optical Drive.
Sounds like a pretty dumb decision to me. I'll take the cheaper one ANY DAY.
Bingo! This guy nailed it. Apple maintains a professional naming scheme for all of their machines. "Macbook Air" is NOT one of them.
Based on the current specs listed, here's what consumers would choose between (and this is why those specs are wrong):
Macbook: 13.3", ~$1100, Optical Drive.
Macbook Air: 13.3, ~$1500, No Optical Drive.
Sounds like a pretty dumb decision to me. I'll take the cheaper one ANY DAY.
takao
Feb 28, 07:59 AM
I currently have a 4.7L V8 Dodge Dakota. I'd buy a diesel version of it in a heartbeat. I could still get the power/hauling ability needed but have the mileage to justify having the pickup.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
i just looked up the torque on the new 4.7 v8: 446nm ... compared to this thread Chevrolet Cruze 2011 new diesel with 360nm from a 2.0 I4 ... no wonder you would want a diesel for pulling ;) (the 3.7 v6 entry engine only produced 319 nm of torque ... in a truck heavier than the moon)
that the US car makers still sells trucks, pickups etc. without diesel options is simply a complete lack of any common sense. diesel engines are practically made to be perfect for pulling and towing in commercial vehicles
for it's south american Amarok pick up VW simply took the 2.0 I4 TDI from the golf/jetta and set up the engine slightly different in regards to the power/torque band and ends up with an engine which was very likely cheaper to develop, cheaper to build had less weight and still achieves 400nm of torque
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
i just looked up the torque on the new 4.7 v8: 446nm ... compared to this thread Chevrolet Cruze 2011 new diesel with 360nm from a 2.0 I4 ... no wonder you would want a diesel for pulling ;) (the 3.7 v6 entry engine only produced 319 nm of torque ... in a truck heavier than the moon)
that the US car makers still sells trucks, pickups etc. without diesel options is simply a complete lack of any common sense. diesel engines are practically made to be perfect for pulling and towing in commercial vehicles
for it's south american Amarok pick up VW simply took the 2.0 I4 TDI from the golf/jetta and set up the engine slightly different in regards to the power/torque band and ends up with an engine which was very likely cheaper to develop, cheaper to build had less weight and still achieves 400nm of torque
MicroByte
Sep 12, 04:53 PM
I just picked up the Belkin Grip Vue at BestBuy in Wilmington, DE. Very pleased.
What color? The ones I saw at BB today were light blue, bright green and pink.
What color? The ones I saw at BB today were light blue, bright green and pink.
lorductape
Jan 12, 10:19 AM
if you look at the codenames for many products, and I'm talking about way back to the apple II days, air seems more like a codename for a product than the product name itself. Maybe they will announce something like they did with the "iTV" and refer to it by its codename, because they don't have a name yet and it's not even out for official release yet.
FireStar
Oct 20, 03:12 PM
i found one that matches a case that i bought for my iphone a while back!
[tIMG]http://thmb.inkfrog.com/thumbn/cimo/itouch4_dualgel_blue_01.jpg=800[/IMG]
snatched it up for 6 bucks! what a deal. i think i might get black next..
Darn. I thought it wasn't generic for a second. But it still looks nice.
[tIMG]http://thmb.inkfrog.com/thumbn/cimo/itouch4_dualgel_blue_01.jpg=800[/IMG]
snatched it up for 6 bucks! what a deal. i think i might get black next..
Darn. I thought it wasn't generic for a second. But it still looks nice.
Piggie
Mar 26, 07:56 AM
I will admit for a "tech demo" this is very impressive.
There are however 2 issues.
1: As has been said, wires hanging out of the side of the ipad, which are just going to drop out in time.
2: For many games a touch screen is just hopeless as a controller.
Imagine taking the steering wheel and pedals out of a real car and putting an iPad on the dashboard.
It does not matter how great the car is, how nice the quality of the machine, what size engine you have, it's still going to be ruined, and make you a slow terrible driver as you can't cannot control it very well using a touch screen.
And I'd say the same in 10 years time if the iPad10 had four times the power of todays PS3 or Xbox360
It just won't work for many games.
There are however 2 issues.
1: As has been said, wires hanging out of the side of the ipad, which are just going to drop out in time.
2: For many games a touch screen is just hopeless as a controller.
Imagine taking the steering wheel and pedals out of a real car and putting an iPad on the dashboard.
It does not matter how great the car is, how nice the quality of the machine, what size engine you have, it's still going to be ruined, and make you a slow terrible driver as you can't cannot control it very well using a touch screen.
And I'd say the same in 10 years time if the iPad10 had four times the power of todays PS3 or Xbox360
It just won't work for many games.
BornAgainMac
Nov 15, 09:19 AM
I wonder how Handbrake, iDVD encoding, or Quicktime encoding will take advantage of the extra cores?
milo
Sep 5, 04:29 PM
Where's my new mac mini damnit! :mad:
Disappointed :(
Anyone know if it will be having a revision or if all of this was baseless dross, little more than hype?
Be patient. We'll probably see it in the next couple weeks, definitely by the end of the month.
Disappointed :(
Anyone know if it will be having a revision or if all of this was baseless dross, little more than hype?
Be patient. We'll probably see it in the next couple weeks, definitely by the end of the month.
lordonuthin
Mar 30, 01:04 PM
Your PPD has improved a lot :eek:
Still no new Mac Pro announced...
On another note, I updated four computer to 10.6.3 that were running a3 and all of them resumed and finished. Can't wait for a3 bigadv.
Also rumors are all over the place for PPD on the new Nvidia GTX 480. Soem say 13k PPD, some say 29k...
I know, bigadv sure make a difference! :D
I think Apple won't announce a new Mac Pro until the developer's conference in June :( but hopefully that means new goodies like usb 3 and sata 3 as well as an inside redesign for 2.5 inch ssd's :) imagine 4 ssd slots as well as 4 3.5 inch drive slots!! woo hoo, just a dream though.
I will wait until I can catch my Mac right after a new wu starts for 10.6.3, just in case...
The GTX 480 is very tempting especially at the same price point as the GTX295. I have one open PCIe slot... but I will wait until I hear more about it. I'm also waiting for Linux gpu3, but that could be a very long time :(
Still no new Mac Pro announced...
On another note, I updated four computer to 10.6.3 that were running a3 and all of them resumed and finished. Can't wait for a3 bigadv.
Also rumors are all over the place for PPD on the new Nvidia GTX 480. Soem say 13k PPD, some say 29k...
I know, bigadv sure make a difference! :D
I think Apple won't announce a new Mac Pro until the developer's conference in June :( but hopefully that means new goodies like usb 3 and sata 3 as well as an inside redesign for 2.5 inch ssd's :) imagine 4 ssd slots as well as 4 3.5 inch drive slots!! woo hoo, just a dream though.
I will wait until I can catch my Mac right after a new wu starts for 10.6.3, just in case...
The GTX 480 is very tempting especially at the same price point as the GTX295. I have one open PCIe slot... but I will wait until I hear more about it. I'm also waiting for Linux gpu3, but that could be a very long time :(
chukronos
Sep 7, 01:37 PM
I think it will have to be a rental or stream service. There is no way I would pay $14.99 for a lower quality movie at the same price I would pay for a DVD at circuit city or best buy. I know Steve Jobs has been fighting with the movie companies to have a uniform price. Unfortunately, these companies get pretty greedy and don't see the big picture.
I also don't think apple would put out an option, like $14.99 downloads, when that doesn't make sense.
-Chuck
I also don't think apple would put out an option, like $14.99 downloads, when that doesn't make sense.
-Chuck
henrikrox
Mar 24, 01:37 PM
anyone want to guess what we will see in the new imac?
gpus i mean
gpus i mean
vaderhater245
Feb 27, 10:09 PM
Finishing my graphic design degree this May. The large intuos might get replaced by a cintiq very soon.
APPLENEWBIE
Aug 24, 07:10 PM
am I right in thinking that there is still no way to do extended desktop (two monitors displaying different stuff) on a Mini?
quadgirl
Sep 1, 03:32 PM
I disagree.
Merom makes more sense. Yes, they did get a G5 inside of the iMac, BUT, it was known for serious reliability problems. Overheating, blown capacitors, etc. The G5 iMac was really a poor design because it could *never* handle that much heat.
So, if they are going to use Merom, great. It's a small case, it doesn't have big fans (like the Mac Pro), I would rather have a cool (not hot) case with quiet fans as well as a reliable machine.
We can always hope for a Conroe mini-Mac Pro, but it will probably never happen.
The G5 is an insanely hot processor (along the lines of the Pentium 4 netburst cpus) and Apple should have a medal for making it work. Conroes are cool, really cool, so it can be done.
Maybe Apple's priority is to keep the iMac silent and as slim as possible (beauty before power). The problem is that the Merom maxes out at 2.33 ghz and the Macbook Pro 17" may well end up with that processor. It doesn't make sense to keep a consumer desktop at the same speed of the pro laptop. But then again, neither does it make sense putting a laptop processor in a desktop, unless a slim/quiet design is Apple's priority.
Merom makes more sense. Yes, they did get a G5 inside of the iMac, BUT, it was known for serious reliability problems. Overheating, blown capacitors, etc. The G5 iMac was really a poor design because it could *never* handle that much heat.
So, if they are going to use Merom, great. It's a small case, it doesn't have big fans (like the Mac Pro), I would rather have a cool (not hot) case with quiet fans as well as a reliable machine.
We can always hope for a Conroe mini-Mac Pro, but it will probably never happen.
The G5 is an insanely hot processor (along the lines of the Pentium 4 netburst cpus) and Apple should have a medal for making it work. Conroes are cool, really cool, so it can be done.
Maybe Apple's priority is to keep the iMac silent and as slim as possible (beauty before power). The problem is that the Merom maxes out at 2.33 ghz and the Macbook Pro 17" may well end up with that processor. It doesn't make sense to keep a consumer desktop at the same speed of the pro laptop. But then again, neither does it make sense putting a laptop processor in a desktop, unless a slim/quiet design is Apple's priority.
newagemac
May 3, 09:02 AM
But my iPhone is far more limited than my first Windows PC in that regard. Even with Windows 95 I could go from one app to another while letting the other on load in the background. iOS freezes everything. If I want a video to upload on Facebook, I have no choice but to keep the app open until it's done. On my PC, I can start the upload and then move on to other things while the process is completing.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
Uh, this comment is entirely wrong. With iOS, you can download something and move to another app and it will continue downloading in the background. The multitasking APIs have all the obvious backgrounding tasks covered and will likely include more if needed. Basically the goal is to allow background tasks when needed and when not needed let the app suspend and release resources to the apps you actually need. This method in iOS has proven to work far better than traditional operating systems like Mac OS X and Windows. That's why they are bringing it "Back to the Mac OS". The best parts of what they developed in iOS are being added in Lion.
I think most people's problem is that they mistakenly viewed iOS as inferior in every way to Mac OS X but in many ways it is cutting edge and far better than OS X and Windows have ever been. The way iOS multitasking works is the reason very powerful and memory hungry apps like iMove and GarageBand for iPad work so surprisingly well on such a limited memory device. The apps get to use a much larger percentage of the CPU, GPU, and RAM than they do on traditional OSes under normal usage where you have multiple apps open.
Right now I have a bunch of tabs open in Safari on my Mac and it's consuming a little over 1GB of RAM and lots of CPU. If I switch to Photoshop, Safari is still going to be using up all that RAM and CPU I really need for Photoshop when I don't plan on using Safari again until later today. And I don't want to shut it down because I have a bunch things in these tabs that I want to get back to later today including partially typed forum replies, halfway read articles, etc. On the iPad, Safari would suspend and release the RAM and CPU to my currently used RAM/CPU hungry app. That's what they need to bring to Lion.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
Uh, this comment is entirely wrong. With iOS, you can download something and move to another app and it will continue downloading in the background. The multitasking APIs have all the obvious backgrounding tasks covered and will likely include more if needed. Basically the goal is to allow background tasks when needed and when not needed let the app suspend and release resources to the apps you actually need. This method in iOS has proven to work far better than traditional operating systems like Mac OS X and Windows. That's why they are bringing it "Back to the Mac OS". The best parts of what they developed in iOS are being added in Lion.
I think most people's problem is that they mistakenly viewed iOS as inferior in every way to Mac OS X but in many ways it is cutting edge and far better than OS X and Windows have ever been. The way iOS multitasking works is the reason very powerful and memory hungry apps like iMove and GarageBand for iPad work so surprisingly well on such a limited memory device. The apps get to use a much larger percentage of the CPU, GPU, and RAM than they do on traditional OSes under normal usage where you have multiple apps open.
Right now I have a bunch of tabs open in Safari on my Mac and it's consuming a little over 1GB of RAM and lots of CPU. If I switch to Photoshop, Safari is still going to be using up all that RAM and CPU I really need for Photoshop when I don't plan on using Safari again until later today. And I don't want to shut it down because I have a bunch things in these tabs that I want to get back to later today including partially typed forum replies, halfway read articles, etc. On the iPad, Safari would suspend and release the RAM and CPU to my currently used RAM/CPU hungry app. That's what they need to bring to Lion.
mrgreen4242
Nov 28, 10:43 AM
OK, this is out of hand... all of you who are complaining about Dell being half the price of the Apple LCDs read the topic that's been linked like 5 times, it's pretty interesting and informative.
Now, all of you who are complaining about those people complain shut up and listen (or read) for a minute. They aren't complaining that Apple is charging to much for what they are offering, it's that they aren't offering any alternative for non-pro users. There are people who want, and would pay a bit more than Dell prices, for a similar piece of hardware with Apple's quality and design, but they aren't willing to pay 50%+ more for a professional grade piece of hardware.
A 17" consumer line of displays would solve the problem without negatively effecting the pro line of hardware. If it sold well (and I'm betting it would, especially if it was the same panel as the 17" iMac with a USB2 hub, iSight, and built in speakers in an iPod styled casing for ~$249) a 19" with the same features but a higher res (although all the 19" widescreens I've seen have had the same res as 17" WS ... someone must make a 19" panel with res between 1440x900 and 1680x1050) for ~$349 or so it'd really fill out Apple product line to meet the needs of all consumers, "prosumers", and real pros.
Now, all of you who are complaining about those people complain shut up and listen (or read) for a minute. They aren't complaining that Apple is charging to much for what they are offering, it's that they aren't offering any alternative for non-pro users. There are people who want, and would pay a bit more than Dell prices, for a similar piece of hardware with Apple's quality and design, but they aren't willing to pay 50%+ more for a professional grade piece of hardware.
A 17" consumer line of displays would solve the problem without negatively effecting the pro line of hardware. If it sold well (and I'm betting it would, especially if it was the same panel as the 17" iMac with a USB2 hub, iSight, and built in speakers in an iPod styled casing for ~$249) a 19" with the same features but a higher res (although all the 19" widescreens I've seen have had the same res as 17" WS ... someone must make a 19" panel with res between 1440x900 and 1680x1050) for ~$349 or so it'd really fill out Apple product line to meet the needs of all consumers, "prosumers", and real pros.
aaps59
Feb 8, 08:26 AM
http://www.jimmirehman.com/charger/Blackedout.jpg
2008 Dodge Charger SE
http://www.jimmirehman.com/charger/Signaturev1.jpg
Thats an epic Charger, I like em' for the stealth cop looks.
Charger Police Interceptor's FTW!
2008 Dodge Charger SE
http://www.jimmirehman.com/charger/Signaturev1.jpg
Thats an epic Charger, I like em' for the stealth cop looks.
Charger Police Interceptor's FTW!
Dougie H
Mar 25, 09:41 PM
I find it frustrating that Firemint continues to hype this game and talk innovation when the game does not even work as advertised today, supporting both original and second iPad's. Crash and burn. How about a news release on the improvements they will be making to stop the crashing rather than this pathetic self promoting fallacy.
Edge100
Sep 1, 12:47 PM
Hmm... the problem with that line-up is that when consumers see the shiny new advert saying "Meet the new iMacs" they'll look at the clock speeds and say "What new iMacs?". I think it would be reasonable for Apple to offer...
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,699 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,199 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
No way would I pay an extra $500 for an 8% faster machine and a slighly larger display, when for that money I can go with the 20" and buy a second widescreen 20" display and have a HUGE viewable area.
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,699 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,199 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
No way would I pay an extra $500 for an 8% faster machine and a slighly larger display, when for that money I can go with the 20" and buy a second widescreen 20" display and have a HUGE viewable area.
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
APPLENEWBIE
Aug 29, 04:40 PM
I would instantly buy for my office a small form factor (not necessarily as small as the mini) mac with, essentially, the same specs that the 20" iMac has, maybe a bit faster even, if it had dual video outputs, room for a lot of ram and a little better video processor. I don't need or want a built in monitor for the same reason I don't buy anything but individual, stand-alone stereo components. I do not need or want a MacPro. Even the base MP is way more than I need. Just my $.02.
Oops... Just noticed Mrgreen... you have it exactly right, for about $1200?
And keep the mini priced low. It was my first mac, and I only had the 'guts' to try it because it was so cheep... It is a great gateway drug...
Oops... Just noticed Mrgreen... you have it exactly right, for about $1200?
And keep the mini priced low. It was my first mac, and I only had the 'guts' to try it because it was so cheep... It is a great gateway drug...
Panther71
Sep 28, 04:09 PM
What is the best case right now? .... a leather case type thing with a screen cover :apple:
I am also looking for this type of case. Has any company come out with a leather case yet for the 4g?
I am also looking for this type of case. Has any company come out with a leather case yet for the 4g?
led1002
Mar 19, 03:14 PM
Granted, it's life is far from over but I get the impression that Apple is telling me that unless I am willing to pony up $2500.00 - $3000.00, that my only options are either old or unupgradable products.
Actually it's $1800-3000, for a G5 64 bit computer. Where do you buy your computers from? No wonder Apple can't dispell the myths even Mac users don't know how much they cost!
Actually it's $1800-3000, for a G5 64 bit computer. Where do you buy your computers from? No wonder Apple can't dispell the myths even Mac users don't know how much they cost!
stagi
Jul 19, 05:37 PM
Sounds like some pretty sweet things are coming for iTunes, can't wait!