rockthecasbah
Sep 1, 02:00 PM
23 inches? No thanks. A bit too much space for me... but kudos to those that can use it, and if Apple can make it work more power to them.
BRLawyer
Nov 16, 04:03 AM
well, OSX whooped xp for multicore usage then
Notwithstandign such long-standing facts, there are still some MS fanboys here who think Windows is better for multicore usage (not to mention multitasking, which has been ALWAYS better in OS X)... :rolleyes:
Zune is dead, Windows is dead...face it.
Notwithstandign such long-standing facts, there are still some MS fanboys here who think Windows is better for multicore usage (not to mention multitasking, which has been ALWAYS better in OS X)... :rolleyes:
Zune is dead, Windows is dead...face it.
Benjy91
Apr 2, 07:58 PM
I much prefer this approach to advertising, the "If you don't have an iPhone" ad was just horrible.
Benguitar
Nov 24, 08:12 AM
Totally overkill for a pair of Oakley's, but hey, that's your choice. They're not our sunglasses.
I'm not rich, But I plan on getting another pair in the future, So when I'm carrying $400.00 worth of merchandise that can be fit into a water proof, shock proof, dust proof, etc case that only cost $40.00 I'm happy with it.
Sorry why do you need to keep then dry?! I'm sure they will get wet if you are a coast guard! and how much was that case?
Not saying that I need to keep them dry, But mainly for shock, drop, dirt stuff.
I don't want to put $200-$400 dollars worth of sunglasses just "in my carryon or checked bag" knowing how things get handled in airports.
I'm also a guitarists, So, I tend to be a little on the protective side of things when I use cases. ;)
Case cost $40.00
I'm not rich, But I plan on getting another pair in the future, So when I'm carrying $400.00 worth of merchandise that can be fit into a water proof, shock proof, dust proof, etc case that only cost $40.00 I'm happy with it.
Sorry why do you need to keep then dry?! I'm sure they will get wet if you are a coast guard! and how much was that case?
Not saying that I need to keep them dry, But mainly for shock, drop, dirt stuff.
I don't want to put $200-$400 dollars worth of sunglasses just "in my carryon or checked bag" knowing how things get handled in airports.
I'm also a guitarists, So, I tend to be a little on the protective side of things when I use cases. ;)
Case cost $40.00
Carniphage
Nov 30, 03:22 AM
I'll speak loud and clear:
DVR
iTunes Store can't now nor will it likely ever replace Dish Network for me. Just let me record my shows either directly with iTV or via something connected to it. I hope when this is released, HD DVD and Blu-ray make there way into Macs.
No No No No No!
All a DVR is - is a better VHS. A way of watching broadcast TV a little more easily. It's a timeshifter, but it is not revolutionary.
DVRs are popular with the (few) people who have them because they end some of the scheduling tyranny of the broadcasters.
But the problem is not scheduling. The problem is broadcasting itself.
Every modern business has had to face up to the opportunities and challenges of the Internet. One of the most significant is what they call disintermediation. Cutting out the middle men. Buying direct.
TV needs to be disintermediated. The advertisers and the networks get in the way. There needs to be a better pathway between producers and consumers.
Advertisers screw-up television. They influence content. Great shows are pulled, not because they don't have enough enthusiastic viewers, but because they don't attract enough consumers of sanitary towels or tooth whitener.
Lousy shows clog up the airwaves because they attract a large number of bottom-dwelling viewers who might just notice the ad for low-price hemorrhoid cream.
Broadcast TV is a business model from the 50s which needs to die. But if you *really* want your TV content determined by the marketeers of ant-acid remedies then stick with your DVR. Stick with Celebrity Love Spacktard. Cheer it up for American Idle. Wave pom poms like a sixteen year-old for the vacuous, empty spam that the networks churn out, to fill the gaps between revenue-generating advertising.
But while dreaming of Celebutard Love Assault... just for a second, imagine how much better TV could be if we could pay Joss Wheadon for Firefly DIRECTLY, or pay someone to make Star Trek with the same level of integrity as Battlestar.
Hint - if it started to suck, we would stop paying.
I'd prefer my television direct.
Screw the advertisers. Screw the networks. Screw Rupert Murdoch. In fact, pull down your dish and cram it in Rupert Murdoch.
Go iTV
C.
DVR
iTunes Store can't now nor will it likely ever replace Dish Network for me. Just let me record my shows either directly with iTV or via something connected to it. I hope when this is released, HD DVD and Blu-ray make there way into Macs.
No No No No No!
All a DVR is - is a better VHS. A way of watching broadcast TV a little more easily. It's a timeshifter, but it is not revolutionary.
DVRs are popular with the (few) people who have them because they end some of the scheduling tyranny of the broadcasters.
But the problem is not scheduling. The problem is broadcasting itself.
Every modern business has had to face up to the opportunities and challenges of the Internet. One of the most significant is what they call disintermediation. Cutting out the middle men. Buying direct.
TV needs to be disintermediated. The advertisers and the networks get in the way. There needs to be a better pathway between producers and consumers.
Advertisers screw-up television. They influence content. Great shows are pulled, not because they don't have enough enthusiastic viewers, but because they don't attract enough consumers of sanitary towels or tooth whitener.
Lousy shows clog up the airwaves because they attract a large number of bottom-dwelling viewers who might just notice the ad for low-price hemorrhoid cream.
Broadcast TV is a business model from the 50s which needs to die. But if you *really* want your TV content determined by the marketeers of ant-acid remedies then stick with your DVR. Stick with Celebrity Love Spacktard. Cheer it up for American Idle. Wave pom poms like a sixteen year-old for the vacuous, empty spam that the networks churn out, to fill the gaps between revenue-generating advertising.
But while dreaming of Celebutard Love Assault... just for a second, imagine how much better TV could be if we could pay Joss Wheadon for Firefly DIRECTLY, or pay someone to make Star Trek with the same level of integrity as Battlestar.
Hint - if it started to suck, we would stop paying.
I'd prefer my television direct.
Screw the advertisers. Screw the networks. Screw Rupert Murdoch. In fact, pull down your dish and cram it in Rupert Murdoch.
Go iTV
C.
appleguru1
Sep 14, 10:05 AM
...my iPhone 4 still gets the best reception of any phone I've ever owned, regardless of how I hold it or whether or not it has a case on it...
GregA
Dec 31, 10:53 PM
On Demand. This category amongst cable companies are expanding very rapidly and offering free content left and right. Good example is HBO, nearly *ALL* of their shows are On Demand now which is instant access to all of their shows. Generally speaking (for people who use HBO On Demand), this has been extremely popular, maybe this is why HBO is still not being sold on iTunes? Why download when you have access to nearly all of the HBO content for free and instantaneous?
That's interesting. Apple doesn't have a subscription model - so this kind of service isn't on iTunes.
But it is something iTunes/iTV would be able to easily do (technically). I could subscribe to HBO On Demand for $10/mth (or whatever) without paying for a full cable service.
I guess the problem with a subscription model is, for now, the cost of bandwidth to Apple. A bittorrent-like sharing system might solve that.
That's interesting. Apple doesn't have a subscription model - so this kind of service isn't on iTunes.
But it is something iTunes/iTV would be able to easily do (technically). I could subscribe to HBO On Demand for $10/mth (or whatever) without paying for a full cable service.
I guess the problem with a subscription model is, for now, the cost of bandwidth to Apple. A bittorrent-like sharing system might solve that.
Doctor Q
Nov 29, 04:20 PM
the analyst also believes the iTV will have advanced user interface software to further the ultimate goal of improving user experience and simplifying consumers' use of content.Maybe during boring movie credits the iTV will switch the display to a Visualizer, like the one in iTunes, or automatically change all commercials into Get A Mac ads.
Stella
Aug 16, 09:33 AM
If the report is from Digitimes then it can't be true.
They are consistently full of *****.
I'm surpised this isn't on page 2.
They are consistently full of *****.
I'm surpised this isn't on page 2.
leosaysfosho
Sep 27, 01:59 PM
so i saw griffin cases shown on the weekly ad, does anyone own them? If so, comments about it would be nice before purchasing!
heehee
Apr 10, 12:13 AM
My fiancee and I both have stick shift cars. :cool:
Nugget
Jan 1, 05:20 PM
Sounds like the keynote will either be really boring or really surprising.
bigjohn
Jul 18, 08:48 AM
Only way this works is if Apple makes the movie available for download/rental a week or two before DVD release (or earlier, like hotel PPV). Otherwise, I'll just *obtain* it elsewhere.
vincenz
Feb 20, 03:31 PM
http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/4189/p1000762s.jpg
Who's the gal? ;)
Who's the gal? ;)
suzerain
Jul 18, 12:30 PM
I disagree: people already spend time/gas/money DRIVING to a video store to rent something that become worse than useless: you have to drive again to return it :) Or, with Netflix you just have to mail it, but the wait is days--much longer than a download.
If people still drive to the video store to rent movies, then why are Blockbuster et al. going out of business? Everyone I know uses Netflix, not stores, nowadays, unless they don't have a computer, in which case iTunes is not their target market anyway.
I don't see online rental cutting into, like, BitTorrent, personally...if that was the point of the iTunes Store (to provide an alternative to pirating).
Rentals are stupid...what if something comes up and I can't watch my movie within the alotted time? I'm just screwed, then?
That's why the Netflix model is brilliant, though saddled with a delay...you can watch the movie whenever you want.
If people still drive to the video store to rent movies, then why are Blockbuster et al. going out of business? Everyone I know uses Netflix, not stores, nowadays, unless they don't have a computer, in which case iTunes is not their target market anyway.
I don't see online rental cutting into, like, BitTorrent, personally...if that was the point of the iTunes Store (to provide an alternative to pirating).
Rentals are stupid...what if something comes up and I can't watch my movie within the alotted time? I'm just screwed, then?
That's why the Netflix model is brilliant, though saddled with a delay...you can watch the movie whenever you want.
lilcosco08
Mar 25, 09:58 PM
Welp, that GPU will be able to power the rumored better display of the iPad 3 :D
kalsta
May 2, 11:05 PM
I'm glad Apple is thinking for themselves and leaving the purists behind as they adopt newer, better ways of doing things. The idea of installing from a disc image is ridiculous. Anyone I've explained it to can understand it, but always mention there must be a better way. "Install" is much better than launching a disc image, opening an applications window, and then dragging the icon over to the other window.
Fair comment. Disk images and dragging apps into the application folder makes sense to me, but I can see how it might confuse new users. (I like the control of where I put my apps. For instance, when I am testing various trial apps I prefer to put them in categorised folders rather than litter my application folder with apps I may never use again or even remember what they do.)
Pre- App Store we typically had this or a drawn out installation wizard, but nothing in-between. Why not a simple one window installer that offers to place the self-contained app package in the application folder by default? It could have an advanced button for more options, but keep it ultra simple and fast for most users.
Fair comment. Disk images and dragging apps into the application folder makes sense to me, but I can see how it might confuse new users. (I like the control of where I put my apps. For instance, when I am testing various trial apps I prefer to put them in categorised folders rather than litter my application folder with apps I may never use again or even remember what they do.)
Pre- App Store we typically had this or a drawn out installation wizard, but nothing in-between. Why not a simple one window installer that offers to place the self-contained app package in the application folder by default? It could have an advanced button for more options, but keep it ultra simple and fast for most users.
kultschar
Mar 26, 09:43 AM
Would seem a good next step is to empower the ATV with this kind of processing power, while allowing the use of iphones/touches/ipads as controllers. Imaging HUDs and virtual controllers - or Garageband Hero?
Maybe you wouldn't have full length epic saga games (or maybe you would via streaming), but for $99 + $5-$10 a game, you have a serious competitor to traditional consoles.
Yup - this is surely the way the ATV is going to go or get the tech good enough to allow airplay thru the iPad for gaming, imagine not poss with the delay / lag currently
Maybe you wouldn't have full length epic saga games (or maybe you would via streaming), but for $99 + $5-$10 a game, you have a serious competitor to traditional consoles.
Yup - this is surely the way the ATV is going to go or get the tech good enough to allow airplay thru the iPad for gaming, imagine not poss with the delay / lag currently
danielwsmithee
Nov 27, 03:28 PM
If Apple wasn't satisfied with the number of units they were moving, and had a markup far above their (real) competitors, I would think Apple would lower it's prices, don't you? That would be the only way to make money if they weren't actually selling the monitors.Exactly that is why Apple needs a refresh to the prices. We both see eye-to-eye on the quality of their product and it's superiority. I'm just stating that their prices are stale and need a refresh. Something on the order of $499 (20"), $899 (23"), and $1699 (30").
TangoCharlie
Aug 25, 06:17 AM
Um, the Mini does have four USB-ports, and a FireWire-port.
OOps, you're quite right!!
http://images.apple.com/uk/macmini/images/indexports20060229.jpg
http://images.apple.com/uk/macmini/images/indexports20060229.jpg
:o
OOps, you're quite right!!
http://images.apple.com/uk/macmini/images/indexports20060229.jpg
http://images.apple.com/uk/macmini/images/indexports20060229.jpg
:o
firestarter
Mar 19, 12:00 PM
Editorials, they're like *******s. :D
Many on the right and some on the left here have been all over him for dragging his feet. Murdoch's NY rag said Hillary was the only one who wanted to take military action and it took her 3 weeks to gather enough administration support. Then again, who the hell knows?
Absolutely. Bloody politicians... where's Wikileaks when you need it! :D
Many on the right and some on the left here have been all over him for dragging his feet. Murdoch's NY rag said Hillary was the only one who wanted to take military action and it took her 3 weeks to gather enough administration support. Then again, who the hell knows?
Absolutely. Bloody politicians... where's Wikileaks when you need it! :D
archer75
May 3, 04:37 PM
Well, you got what you wanted on the 2GB 6970m! At least as a BTO option.
Yep, I am pleasantly surprised. I ordered one.
Yep, I am pleasantly surprised. I ordered one.
zivilist
Apr 19, 01:36 PM
Please...Please...Please...provide a pro graphics card option (FirePro or Quadro)
Not possible: the iMac is not a workstation. Hopefully a big HD6xxx and a big hexa and quadcore are included.
I just hope that the SSD option is more affordable. For me the top chip on the 27inch is a no-brainer but the SSD turns a $2200 computer into a $2950 computer. Hell, in San Francisco I have to tack 9.5% tax on that too.
Agreed. 64 GB and 128 GB SSD option would be nice (already posted this feedback to apple).
Not possible: the iMac is not a workstation. Hopefully a big HD6xxx and a big hexa and quadcore are included.
I just hope that the SSD option is more affordable. For me the top chip on the 27inch is a no-brainer but the SSD turns a $2200 computer into a $2950 computer. Hell, in San Francisco I have to tack 9.5% tax on that too.
Agreed. 64 GB and 128 GB SSD option would be nice (already posted this feedback to apple).
mrgreen4242
Aug 29, 03:43 PM
I also think that making the mini bigger makes sense. I mean the Cube was a wonderful design and a few times larger than the mini.
Both of them have external power supplies, which from an esthetic point of view isn't the most pleasing. A larger design could potentially include an interal power supply, although it might make it a good deal nosier, I'm not sure.
We've all been crying for a new cube since the mini came out... is the mini an awesome machine? Absolutely, I love mine. But there is a market for a headless iMac/Cube/MacPro mini... people like me. I don't need a quad core computer. I don't need 16gb of RAM. I don't need 4 harddrive bays, or even two optical drive slots.
I do want a fast CPU, an upgradable GPU, a couple of full size HDDs and a full size optical drive. I also want something quiet, relatively affordable (something a bit less than an iMac would be idea), and stylish.
I don't think that Apple would lose Mac Pro sales to something like this - they might lose iMac sales but if the margins are the same for them who cares, and any loss of mini sales would be upsells, so it'd be a good thing.
I think a lot PC types, especially gamers, would be interested, bringing in new markets... None of my gamer friends would be satisfied by an iMac, but neither would they shell out $2-3k for a Mac Pro.
Let's see, the mini is 6.5x6.5x2 inches, would anyone even notice if it went to 8.5x8.5x4? Even better would be 8x8x8, just for the cube dimensions, done in iPod white (or black), would look stellar on a desktop. Core 2 Duo 1.83ghz, 4 RAM slots for an 8gb max with 512mb installed stock, 1 16x PCIe w/ 7300GT base (BTO options), 1 PCI slot, 2 3.5" drive bays w/ 160gb standard, 1 5.25" bay w/ SD, AE, BT2, 6 USB2 (4 back, 2 front), 1 FW 400, 1 eSATA (in place of FW800)... $999 anyone? BTO options for slower/fast CPUs and GPUs, more RAM, bigger HDD and a $200 TV tuner/video encoder breakout box... :D
Both of them have external power supplies, which from an esthetic point of view isn't the most pleasing. A larger design could potentially include an interal power supply, although it might make it a good deal nosier, I'm not sure.
We've all been crying for a new cube since the mini came out... is the mini an awesome machine? Absolutely, I love mine. But there is a market for a headless iMac/Cube/MacPro mini... people like me. I don't need a quad core computer. I don't need 16gb of RAM. I don't need 4 harddrive bays, or even two optical drive slots.
I do want a fast CPU, an upgradable GPU, a couple of full size HDDs and a full size optical drive. I also want something quiet, relatively affordable (something a bit less than an iMac would be idea), and stylish.
I don't think that Apple would lose Mac Pro sales to something like this - they might lose iMac sales but if the margins are the same for them who cares, and any loss of mini sales would be upsells, so it'd be a good thing.
I think a lot PC types, especially gamers, would be interested, bringing in new markets... None of my gamer friends would be satisfied by an iMac, but neither would they shell out $2-3k for a Mac Pro.
Let's see, the mini is 6.5x6.5x2 inches, would anyone even notice if it went to 8.5x8.5x4? Even better would be 8x8x8, just for the cube dimensions, done in iPod white (or black), would look stellar on a desktop. Core 2 Duo 1.83ghz, 4 RAM slots for an 8gb max with 512mb installed stock, 1 16x PCIe w/ 7300GT base (BTO options), 1 PCI slot, 2 3.5" drive bays w/ 160gb standard, 1 5.25" bay w/ SD, AE, BT2, 6 USB2 (4 back, 2 front), 1 FW 400, 1 eSATA (in place of FW800)... $999 anyone? BTO options for slower/fast CPUs and GPUs, more RAM, bigger HDD and a $200 TV tuner/video encoder breakout box... :D
No comments:
Post a Comment