viperguy
Aug 29, 01:55 PM
LoL
The discussion in thinksecret is so fun at the moment, you can't even imagine how.
Basically everyone was talkin about it's video card, how it should be upgraded and things like that
But then these messages came into topic
User1
I think the Mac mini has a future as long as they can get a better video output and a DVR.
User2
It'd be great if they added a nuclear reactor.
User3
Will it include a pony?
Coments? Mine: LOL
The discussion in thinksecret is so fun at the moment, you can't even imagine how.
Basically everyone was talkin about it's video card, how it should be upgraded and things like that
But then these messages came into topic
User1
I think the Mac mini has a future as long as they can get a better video output and a DVR.
User2
It'd be great if they added a nuclear reactor.
User3
Will it include a pony?
Coments? Mine: LOL
AlphaDogg
Feb 18, 05:07 PM
I want that poster!!! Where did you get it?
Which poster? The SJ poster?
Which poster? The SJ poster?
bketchum
Sep 1, 12:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCaveMann
I think this rumor should be taken with a grain of salt. It seems highly unlikely a 23 inch imac would emerge (or even should emerge).
I couldn't disagree with you more.
This size represents the iMac that can display Full resolution 1080p HD content. If they introduce this and then eventually throw a Blu-ray in there they've got the killer combination. Front Row is already setup to be a home-theatre replacement. I mean come on, it's basically an HDTV...it's 1080p, it's got a remote, and it's got front row... This will sell like crack... Digital crack...
I agree. If this rumor is true, this will be my next computer. I'm shopping for an LCD TV and a computer. A 23-inch iMac would cover both for me nicely. Fingers crossed.
Originally Posted by CaptainCaveMann
I think this rumor should be taken with a grain of salt. It seems highly unlikely a 23 inch imac would emerge (or even should emerge).
I couldn't disagree with you more.
This size represents the iMac that can display Full resolution 1080p HD content. If they introduce this and then eventually throw a Blu-ray in there they've got the killer combination. Front Row is already setup to be a home-theatre replacement. I mean come on, it's basically an HDTV...it's 1080p, it's got a remote, and it's got front row... This will sell like crack... Digital crack...
I agree. If this rumor is true, this will be my next computer. I'm shopping for an LCD TV and a computer. A 23-inch iMac would cover both for me nicely. Fingers crossed.
ErikGrim
Apr 4, 07:25 PM
I don't know about this whole fullscreen mode thing. The more "features" they add, the less I like it. I like to see pertinent information at a glance. I don't understand why the menu bar has to be hidden. I lose the ability to see my battery %, wifi status, even the time of day at a glance. All for what? to save 20 pixels of space? I'm sorry but if you need screen space that badly you should invest in a bigger monitor. Even the iOS devices leave the information bar at the top... :o
Just my thoughts...
Then don't use full screen �? No one is forcing it on you.
I use full screen for mail on my 27". Would be useless to put Safari on FS on that size, but I can see why it would be useful on an 11" Air.
Just my thoughts...
Then don't use full screen �? No one is forcing it on you.
I use full screen for mail on my 27". Would be useless to put Safari on FS on that size, but I can see why it would be useful on an 11" Air.
Apple 26.2
Apr 21, 08:07 PM
:apple: apologists unite!
Judo
Mar 25, 04:08 PM
Pretty interesting.
Could portable consoles be the future?
Switch the ipad to TV mode so it acts as a Apple TV/Game console with a bluetooth controller.
Could be pretty cool.
Could portable consoles be the future?
Switch the ipad to TV mode so it acts as a Apple TV/Game console with a bluetooth controller.
Could be pretty cool.
shawnce
Aug 29, 09:45 AM
Assuming the rumor is correct (really the core duo is just fine for such a machine at this point in time)... it may allow Apple to drop prices on the mini which not only makes it available to more potential switchers but makes a little more room in their product line up for a mini tower.
A mini tower in the 1000-1600 dollar range would allow us to buy Macs for developers (as a second system often) and QA folks since they can run Windows, Linux and Mac OS X natively. It would allow the maximum flexibility to our teams and at a price point that matches with the Dell crap desktops systems we currently purchase.
We would still of course purchase Mac Pros for the developers that need them the most (as a primary system) but a mini tower would easily double or triple what we would purchase.
The Mac mini does work in the space but it is just a little underpowered on the IO and expansion front to be fully useful as a secondary developer system.
A mini tower in the 1000-1600 dollar range would allow us to buy Macs for developers (as a second system often) and QA folks since they can run Windows, Linux and Mac OS X natively. It would allow the maximum flexibility to our teams and at a price point that matches with the Dell crap desktops systems we currently purchase.
We would still of course purchase Mac Pros for the developers that need them the most (as a primary system) but a mini tower would easily double or triple what we would purchase.
The Mac mini does work in the space but it is just a little underpowered on the IO and expansion front to be fully useful as a secondary developer system.
ErikCLDR
Feb 7, 04:32 PM
2005 LR3 SE, mountain road in Northern New Hampshire
Very nice, how's yours holding up?
My parents have '07 LR3 and an '07 Range Rover sport. Both have been very reliable aside from some software issues in the RRS that were quickly sorted out. There have been a couple little things but overall they have been much more reliable than our previous Discoveries.
We had an LR4 as a loaner and it's like night and day over the LR3. The interior is significantly nicer and the ride is smoother.
Very nice, how's yours holding up?
My parents have '07 LR3 and an '07 Range Rover sport. Both have been very reliable aside from some software issues in the RRS that were quickly sorted out. There have been a couple little things but overall they have been much more reliable than our previous Discoveries.
We had an LR4 as a loaner and it's like night and day over the LR3. The interior is significantly nicer and the ride is smoother.
animatedude
Sep 14, 07:04 PM
who the **** CARES about consumer reports? in fact i bet if you do a poll in here,most users will vote they didn't even know such thing even existed.
boycott the consumers reports.
boycott the consumers reports.
Chupa Chupa
Sep 7, 02:37 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
You won't, but you are probably more technically savvy then 99% of the world population. How many people pay $10 for an album of songs encoded @ 128Mbps and couldn't be happier?
I also don't think apple would put out an option, like $14.99 downloads, when that doesn't make sense.
-Chuck
You won't, but you are probably more technically savvy then 99% of the world population. How many people pay $10 for an album of songs encoded @ 128Mbps and couldn't be happier?
fswmacguy
Sep 8, 08:44 PM
I've always been a sucker for the SwitchEasy products.
http://www.switcheasy.com/
But they do not have any iPod touch 4G cases yet. :C
http://www.switcheasy.com/
But they do not have any iPod touch 4G cases yet. :C
jaxstate
Jul 18, 02:44 PM
About darn time. I'm glad it will be a rental service. I rarely watch a movie more than once, and this will keep the priced down. Anything over 4 bucks per view isn't going to work.
yg17
Mar 22, 03:21 PM
ooooh. the rare red-crested triple-post!
It's an endangered species, but that's not going to stop the moderators from coming by eventually and shooting it :D
It's an endangered species, but that's not going to stop the moderators from coming by eventually and shooting it :D
rockstarjoe
Jul 18, 02:31 PM
Why not offer both a subscription and an a-la-carte system? The rental movies could be cheaper, lesser quality and last for only a certain amount of plays/days while the ones you buy to own can be of higher quality, more expensive and you get to keep it.
I think you are on to something here. I believe it will work like this:
!) Rent a movie from the ITMS and it will download (not stream) to your computer. It will be in a less than DVD quality format, most likely in whatever format plays on 6G ipod. Let's face it, the 6G ipod and the iTunes Movie service will both be announced at the same time, and that time is not WWDC. The movie sales will drive 6G ipod sales, therefore they must play on 6G ipods, therefore they will not be DVD quality.
2) Movies will have a limited number of plays, rather than a limited number of time to view. Or, alternately, you will pay-per-view (literally).
3) The movie rentals will be cheap (under $5). If you like the movie you will have the option to buy the DVD. Buying the DVD through iTMS will "unlock" the rented copy of the movie on your hardrive, allowing you to own it forever and also to burn it to DVD if you choose (although, again, it will be in less than DVD quality). The real copy of the DVD will be full price plus shipping and the hard copy of the DVD will arrive in the mail a few days later. It will be the same as the retail copy.
This means money for Apple from movie rentals, plus money for Apple from 6G ipod sales (and perhaps Mac Minis if Frontrow gets added in to this), plus money for the BIG STUDIOS for the rentals AND the DVD sales.
It is a win-win-win for the consumer, Apple, and the movie studios... thus I think this is the only way it will happen. What do you guys think? :)
I think you are on to something here. I believe it will work like this:
!) Rent a movie from the ITMS and it will download (not stream) to your computer. It will be in a less than DVD quality format, most likely in whatever format plays on 6G ipod. Let's face it, the 6G ipod and the iTunes Movie service will both be announced at the same time, and that time is not WWDC. The movie sales will drive 6G ipod sales, therefore they must play on 6G ipods, therefore they will not be DVD quality.
2) Movies will have a limited number of plays, rather than a limited number of time to view. Or, alternately, you will pay-per-view (literally).
3) The movie rentals will be cheap (under $5). If you like the movie you will have the option to buy the DVD. Buying the DVD through iTMS will "unlock" the rented copy of the movie on your hardrive, allowing you to own it forever and also to burn it to DVD if you choose (although, again, it will be in less than DVD quality). The real copy of the DVD will be full price plus shipping and the hard copy of the DVD will arrive in the mail a few days later. It will be the same as the retail copy.
This means money for Apple from movie rentals, plus money for Apple from 6G ipod sales (and perhaps Mac Minis if Frontrow gets added in to this), plus money for the BIG STUDIOS for the rentals AND the DVD sales.
It is a win-win-win for the consumer, Apple, and the movie studios... thus I think this is the only way it will happen. What do you guys think? :)
mc68k
Nov 18, 09:45 PM
I'm just kind of guessing here but I think folding is costing me about $50 a month :eek:holy crap dude, thats why i fold at work. since big adv i shut off my 4ghz hackie folder
how many machines do you have running?
how many machines do you have running?
Leoff
Nov 27, 09:05 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.
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
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.
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
jxyama
Apr 2, 09:09 AM
You have some good points here....but the basic arguement is how to survive in the future - How to grow the business....Itms doesn't make any money for Apple, the ipod is going to have too many similar players. So why not go for the lower end of the market - eg: like they did with the old "LC"s machines. People buy software but they don't want to shell out alot of money for hardware.
no worry, people's been saying that apple's been dying since like 10 years ago. and increasing the marketshare doesn't mean it's growing and not increasing the marketshare doesn't mean its future is doomed.
look at gateway. it just acquired eMachines and "doubled" its marketshare to 7%. apple is half that. and guess which company has been more profitable recently? which company is debt free? (hint: it's not gateway) and which company had to expand beyond just selling cheap PCs to continue its operation? (another hint: it's not apple.)
i see absolutely no economic reason why apple should bother selling cheap macs.
people who know what they want will pay for Macs. if they don't know what they want, they won't care if they got a Mac.
no worry, people's been saying that apple's been dying since like 10 years ago. and increasing the marketshare doesn't mean it's growing and not increasing the marketshare doesn't mean its future is doomed.
look at gateway. it just acquired eMachines and "doubled" its marketshare to 7%. apple is half that. and guess which company has been more profitable recently? which company is debt free? (hint: it's not gateway) and which company had to expand beyond just selling cheap PCs to continue its operation? (another hint: it's not apple.)
i see absolutely no economic reason why apple should bother selling cheap macs.
people who know what they want will pay for Macs. if they don't know what they want, they won't care if they got a Mac.
bretm
Sep 7, 09:59 AM
I've not bought a movie since 1995 on VHS. It's was just kind of silly having them litter up your shelves then and your hard disk now.
Bite the bullet like I did and toss all your jewel cases for CDs / DVDs. Now I just have a couple large binders on the shelf that contain all my software and CDs and DVDs. Nice and neat and takes up about 1/100th the space.
Bite the bullet like I did and toss all your jewel cases for CDs / DVDs. Now I just have a couple large binders on the shelf that contain all my software and CDs and DVDs. Nice and neat and takes up about 1/100th the space.
magbarn
Mar 22, 06:10 PM
Kill it!!!!!
The question is WHY? You can keep your nano/touch...
The question is WHY? You can keep your nano/touch...
ILL Robinson
Jan 12, 10:55 AM
The most obvious reason behind the name MacBook Air for me is the removal of the wired Ethernet connector to the MacBook. There is two thing that prevent from making a very slim notebook: an optical drive and an ethernet connector (look at the ethernet connector on a MacBook, it take most of the height of the notebook).
So the MacBook Air would be the first Apple notebook having only a wireless connection...
And I agree that it will be made of aluminium...
FrenchMac
Name or no, I completely agree with this. If the word "Air" isn't part of a product (and given the ad hook, it most likely is) expect Jobs to repeatedly use "Air" throughout the keynote.
All aside, we should start a thread where people can boast if their Mac product speculations were correct or admit they were flat out wrong.
So the MacBook Air would be the first Apple notebook having only a wireless connection...
And I agree that it will be made of aluminium...
FrenchMac
Name or no, I completely agree with this. If the word "Air" isn't part of a product (and given the ad hook, it most likely is) expect Jobs to repeatedly use "Air" throughout the keynote.
All aside, we should start a thread where people can boast if their Mac product speculations were correct or admit they were flat out wrong.
ghostlyorb
Mar 27, 07:48 PM
Good idea.. and really interests me... but I would prefer the map to be on the tv. I would have to "take my eyes off the road" to look at the map.
kelving525
Sep 23, 02:46 PM
Do you feel the same about the Night Sky color, or is it more the Aquamarine and Fuscia and neon blinding green? The Night Sky one looks pretty cool. I have no problem with purple colors as long as they are dark, which the Night Sky seems to be from pictures.
Yes, it is definitely dark purple-- not those neon purple.:cool:
Yes, it is definitely dark purple-- not those neon purple.:cool:
frankie
Sep 1, 03:42 PM
Many of the people on this thread are too new to remember the Performa fiascos of the early 90's. More than anything, Steve simplified the computer product line into 4 distinct quadrants. The only aberration to this is the Mac Mini.
Many of the people who bring up the Performa era are failing to remember that there were typically twenty or more Mac models at any given time. 20 is too many. 4 is too few. Many of us would be much happier if Apple offered 6-8 models (specifically, the xMac).
Many of the people who bring up the Performa era are failing to remember that there were typically twenty or more Mac models at any given time. 20 is too many. 4 is too few. Many of us would be much happier if Apple offered 6-8 models (specifically, the xMac).
Dmac77
Apr 11, 04:32 PM
What if it's not actually an automatic?
Seriously though, I do wonder if people take little things like this (being able to drive a stickshift) and pump up the importance of it, just to get some extremely minor satisfaction out of being "better" than other people.
Also, google "money shift" for the downside of having "full control."
I don't think people are pumping it up at all. I personally think that people who can't drive a standard transmission, are just lazy (and that goes for my mother, and her habit of doing her makeup while driving). People only get autos, because they don't want to have to "inconvenience" themselves with pushing down on the clutch and throwing the car into the next gear; because doing so requires them to stop shoving food down their face, or to get of the damn phone. I also hate to hear people moan about how inconvenient a standard transmission is during stop and go traffic; I mean it's not that bad, and I recently took my standard transmission accord to chicago and drove in stop and go traffic for over two hours, and it was not as annoying as some would make it out to be. People are just too willing to sacrifice the fun of driving for convenience.
-Don
Seriously though, I do wonder if people take little things like this (being able to drive a stickshift) and pump up the importance of it, just to get some extremely minor satisfaction out of being "better" than other people.
Also, google "money shift" for the downside of having "full control."
I don't think people are pumping it up at all. I personally think that people who can't drive a standard transmission, are just lazy (and that goes for my mother, and her habit of doing her makeup while driving). People only get autos, because they don't want to have to "inconvenience" themselves with pushing down on the clutch and throwing the car into the next gear; because doing so requires them to stop shoving food down their face, or to get of the damn phone. I also hate to hear people moan about how inconvenient a standard transmission is during stop and go traffic; I mean it's not that bad, and I recently took my standard transmission accord to chicago and drove in stop and go traffic for over two hours, and it was not as annoying as some would make it out to be. People are just too willing to sacrifice the fun of driving for convenience.
-Don
No comments:
Post a Comment