macquariumguy
Mar 18, 09:03 AM
Oh boy, another war. :(
twoodcc
Nov 29, 02:04 PM
Can't wait for MWSF to get some more details from Steve! Between this, the iPhone, an iTablet and the new widescreen video iPod there will be plenty for him to reveal - along with our iLife 07 and Leopard previews as well. ;) :cool:
i agree. can't wait til January! hopefully i'll have some money saved up for one of those things
i agree. can't wait til January! hopefully i'll have some money saved up for one of those things
iJohnHenry
Mar 19, 03:03 PM
is that why the war in afghanistan ended so successfully years ago? oh wait..... :p
Well, it is somewhat negated when you have a bordering country aiding and abetting the 'enemy'.
Well, it is somewhat negated when you have a bordering country aiding and abetting the 'enemy'.
alexhasfun28
Apr 2, 07:24 PM
This is something people need to realize once in a while. It’s not about CPU and RAM. A Droid Incredible can have an 8 megapixel camera, and the photo quality may be not be the best people expect. An iPhone 4 can have 5 megapixels in a sensor and people are delighted with the quality!
Specs are nice, but learning that it actually WORKS, is something other.
Specs are nice, but learning that it actually WORKS, is something other.
gkarris
Nov 27, 09:04 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
Phobophobia
Jul 20, 02:50 AM
Vista will sell more copies in its first two weeks than Leopard in its first year. As several hundred thousand years of humanity have demonstrated, rhyme and reason matters little.
I have doubts about this statement.
Leopard will be able to run on all macs from the past several years. Vista requires a relatively new machine.
Vista likely will cost much more than Leopard.
Most copies of Vista will be sold with new computers.
Steve has been saving the good stuff for Leopard. He's known for a long time that he needs to steal M$'s thunder with this release.
I have doubts about this statement.
Leopard will be able to run on all macs from the past several years. Vista requires a relatively new machine.
Vista likely will cost much more than Leopard.
Most copies of Vista will be sold with new computers.
Steve has been saving the good stuff for Leopard. He's known for a long time that he needs to steal M$'s thunder with this release.
Earendil
Nov 28, 10:36 AM
Well, you just made my point better than me.
PS, that isn't hard :rolleyes:
I just noticed that you are the same person I just (imho) shredded in two different posts above. Care to make a stand against anything I said as a direct response to your points? Or are you just gonna feed off someone else and reiterate yourself again?
PS, that isn't hard :rolleyes:
I just noticed that you are the same person I just (imho) shredded in two different posts above. Care to make a stand against anything I said as a direct response to your points? Or are you just gonna feed off someone else and reiterate yourself again?
Multimedia
Sep 7, 11:10 AM
Now that iMac is Core 2 Duo, the Academic $899 17" iMac is a mini killer config.Except that I want to use my 24" monitor...Exactly. And because the 17" iMac Supports External up to 1920 x 1200 24" Second Monitor Spanning you not only can, you gain the benefit of an additional 1440 x 900 desktop space almost for FREE @ $899. It's still only Intel 950 IG, but it's cheap and doable like from the mini & MacBooks only with 3.5" SATA HD inside etc etc. It's a miracle. :eek:
Multimedia
Aug 29, 12:05 PM
I know this is off topic. But you guys and gals have got to go download the new Bob Dylan Blues Music Video Ad for iTunes pre-selling his new album "Modern Times" (http://www.apple.com/ipod/ads/dylan/). It is incredible! :eek: :cool:
I think this is the best Ad Apple has ever delivered - bar none. I put it on single repeat in iTunes and it never gets old.
I think this is the best Ad Apple has ever delivered - bar none. I put it on single repeat in iTunes and it never gets old.
Tonsko
Jan 6, 10:14 AM
If properly maintained, mileage holds no bounds! BMW's will go to 250k easy.
The engines will, no problem. It's all the expensive bits around them that can't!
The engines will, no problem. It's all the expensive bits around them that can't!
Kirkafur
Apr 1, 10:24 PM
Can anyone comment on scrolling for pre-multitouch trackpads?
Is there now an option to disable reverse scrolling for non-unibody notebooks?
Is there now an option to disable reverse scrolling for non-unibody notebooks?
torn
Sep 24, 11:01 AM
It's already been released. Best Buy has been selling them for more than a week now.
Could you please give me the link? I can't find it on bestbuy's online store.
Could you please give me the link? I can't find it on bestbuy's online store.
kainjow
Aug 16, 02:08 PM
The only wireless I want to see in an iPod is Bluetooth for wireless syncing to your computer, and that could be done with a special dock. Other than that, it's pointless and just sucks battery power.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 02:38 PM
I am a current law student who has concentrated in IP, particularly trademark law.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
It was my understanding that Apple filed in 2008 and got some level of approval in early 2011. I imagine it is analogous to a "patent pending".
I imagine this case will then bear on the final full approval of the trademark.
Apple should file for "The App Store" in the interim as well as "appstore". The latter is used by amazon.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
It was my understanding that Apple filed in 2008 and got some level of approval in early 2011. I imagine it is analogous to a "patent pending".
I imagine this case will then bear on the final full approval of the trademark.
Apple should file for "The App Store" in the interim as well as "appstore". The latter is used by amazon.
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!
imnotatfault
Aug 19, 06:49 AM
Anyway, would you mind sharing why you want it so bad as I asked above?
I don't think it's really all that necessary until we have a much more prominent wireless infrastructure that isn't T-Mobile trying to charge you 7.99/hr to log on. Until then, it's nearly pointless unless you live in NYC, Boston, Chicago, etc.
I don't think it's really all that necessary until we have a much more prominent wireless infrastructure that isn't T-Mobile trying to charge you 7.99/hr to log on. Until then, it's nearly pointless unless you live in NYC, Boston, Chicago, etc.
toddybody
Apr 26, 01:02 PM
App Store [TM]
My Bad :P
My Bad :P
iOzzie
Mar 22, 10:06 PM
Long live the Classic.
My 160 is almost full, put me down for a refresh :)
My 160 is almost full, put me down for a refresh :)
maflynn
May 2, 05:10 PM
the iPadification of OSX continues.
iJohnHenry
Apr 9, 04:59 PM
I know how to drive a manual, but it has been ages since last time I have been in one
Same here.
I've had a flat-head Ford (stearing column shift), Chevy Cavalier, Porsche, Chevy Corvair Corsa :eek:, with some autos in between, and ever since.
When you drive to/from Toronto all the time, standard just makes no sense, now that autos are much more efficient.
Same here.
I've had a flat-head Ford (stearing column shift), Chevy Cavalier, Porsche, Chevy Corvair Corsa :eek:, with some autos in between, and ever since.
When you drive to/from Toronto all the time, standard just makes no sense, now that autos are much more efficient.
Snowcat001
Jun 22, 12:13 PM
Then what was the point in the iPad?
have fun carrying an iMac :)
have fun carrying an iMac :)
Evangelion
Aug 29, 12:36 PM
.You think my post is spam? :confused:
well, if you post the same thing in several threads (especially if it's unrelated to the subject of the discussion), then yes, i think it's spam
well, if you post the same thing in several threads (especially if it's unrelated to the subject of the discussion), then yes, i think it's spam
KevanDual2.5
Sep 7, 03:16 AM
You are alone on this one - the end of the G5 iMac has already happened, in fact it happened a long time ago when Apple introduced the first Intel iMacs. Hate to break it to ya, but G5 iMacs haven't been around for a long time, nor does a 24" G5 iMac even exist. :p :cool:
As for this new incarnation of the Intel iMac though, it totally depends on Apple's strategy. If they want to leave it as a desktop computer, yeah, it probably doesn't make sense to get much bigger. However, if they want to eventually incorporate a TV tuner and make it even more media-centric, and have it evolve into something else, then this may just be the beginning, not the end. :cool:
As other people have recognised..... the reference to G5 is in relation to the exterior, not the chipset.
I don't know whether you're right or wrong about a possible design change in the near future, but your terminology is wrong.
The G5 iMac is not a model. The G5 is a CPU. The iMac has not been a "G5" (or, to be more correct, has not had a G5) since January.
It's just "iMac." A G5 with a Core 2 Duo chip is like spouting off how you have a great "Intel Pentium Athlon machine made by AMD." People will see right through the ignorance.
Some people have recognised that the reference to G5 relates to the exterior design, not the chips inside.
As for this new incarnation of the Intel iMac though, it totally depends on Apple's strategy. If they want to leave it as a desktop computer, yeah, it probably doesn't make sense to get much bigger. However, if they want to eventually incorporate a TV tuner and make it even more media-centric, and have it evolve into something else, then this may just be the beginning, not the end. :cool:
As other people have recognised..... the reference to G5 is in relation to the exterior, not the chipset.
I don't know whether you're right or wrong about a possible design change in the near future, but your terminology is wrong.
The G5 iMac is not a model. The G5 is a CPU. The iMac has not been a "G5" (or, to be more correct, has not had a G5) since January.
It's just "iMac." A G5 with a Core 2 Duo chip is like spouting off how you have a great "Intel Pentium Athlon machine made by AMD." People will see right through the ignorance.
Some people have recognised that the reference to G5 relates to the exterior design, not the chips inside.
tablo13
Sep 19, 12:28 AM
He got it from Hong Kong.
He's being sarcastic. :rolleyes:
EDIT: nvm, he bought two :p
He's being sarcastic. :rolleyes:
EDIT: nvm, he bought two :p
