Evangelion
Aug 31, 07:19 AM
Grah. I hope this rumour proves incorrect. A processor that can't do x86-64 is planned obsolescence. I don't want to buy a computer that will be unable to run software in a few years!
What makes you think that it "can't run software"? Current 32bit CPU's will be usable for years to come.
What makes you think that it "can't run software"? Current 32bit CPU's will be usable for years to come.
zombierunner
Apr 19, 12:36 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Thank goodness .. Finally an iMac rumour ... I am still going to wait a bit more and buy it when the new iMacs ship with lion preinstalled .... July I guess
Really hoping for 1080p target display mode will be supported in the new iMacs ...
Thank goodness .. Finally an iMac rumour ... I am still going to wait a bit more and buy it when the new iMacs ship with lion preinstalled .... July I guess
Really hoping for 1080p target display mode will be supported in the new iMacs ...
minnesotamacman
Sep 1, 03:30 PM
You know.... If you wanted to have a beautiful ACD 23" or 30" and hide the computer, there is a bracket that allows a Mac Mini to sit behind the display. I personally don't mind the all-in-one. I was against it, until I got an iMac 2 months ago and love it. So, wouldn't bother me to have the 23" imac... I would get AppleCare and be happy for 3 years.
NAG
Apr 21, 11:54 AM
I'm betting it is a cache and somebody forgot to write code to cull the old data. Stupid mistake, in other words. Hopefully, Apple will say something either way.
Small White Car
Apr 12, 09:49 PM
No, but having features like face detection does suggest that it's a 'consumer' orientated product.
Personally, I don't mind. As long as all the old multitrack features are still available (and the price significantly drops, to say, $50-$300,) then I intend to buy it.
Eh. People bitched about Aperture getting these features too, but so far Aperture's never grabbed me by the neck and forced me to use them. I assume Final Cut will be the same.
Personally, I don't mind. As long as all the old multitrack features are still available (and the price significantly drops, to say, $50-$300,) then I intend to buy it.
Eh. People bitched about Aperture getting these features too, but so far Aperture's never grabbed me by the neck and forced me to use them. I assume Final Cut will be the same.
tablo13
Sep 21, 04:40 PM
I have the dermaSHOT case too, and I too find the top button a little hard to press. Kinda like I have to feel around for the button.
I also have a $1 one from China, not as thick as the Incipio, but the buttons feel good
Would you say the dermaSHOT is better?
Do you people know any good cheap(few bucks) TPU cases?
I also have a $1 one from China, not as thick as the Incipio, but the buttons feel good
Would you say the dermaSHOT is better?
Do you people know any good cheap(few bucks) TPU cases?
arkitect
Mar 22, 12:41 PM
Our Founding Fathers believed in God, proof alone is the pledge of allegiance "under god". Yes our country was founded on christian belief. Hate to say it, but it's true!
As for the invisible man in the sky I have no clue to what you are referring.
Which you will find with even the most cursory search was added in … wait for it… 1954.
Now, my USA history might be a tad rusty, but founding fathers that late? Uh huh?
:rolleyes:
Edit: Link (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance)
As for the invisible man in the sky I have no clue to what you are referring.
Which you will find with even the most cursory search was added in … wait for it… 1954.
Now, my USA history might be a tad rusty, but founding fathers that late? Uh huh?
:rolleyes:
Edit: Link (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance)
kiljoy616
Jun 22, 04:34 PM
Has anyone else here used touchscreen computers? They're a pain! Verging on useless. When I had one I thought it was fun for a few minutes, then I went back to keyboard and mouse.
I hope this isn't the start of OSX being replaced by iOS. I like my compatibility and "free" OS (not being limited to a store, being able to do things without voiding the warranty, etc).
desktop are a pain with this, but laptops can have some functional reasons, could mean widgets on OSX will be going away and ipad iphone apps will come into play. I can only dream :(
I hope this isn't the start of OSX being replaced by iOS. I like my compatibility and "free" OS (not being limited to a store, being able to do things without voiding the warranty, etc).
desktop are a pain with this, but laptops can have some functional reasons, could mean widgets on OSX will be going away and ipad iphone apps will come into play. I can only dream :(
broncopde
Jun 24, 02:01 AM
I just don't see people wanting to have their arms up like that to use a desktop computer. It works so well on the iPad cause you can use it where your hands are already sitting (in your lap). But this...doesn't strike as being very practical at all.
oMc
Feb 28, 02:41 PM
@benjayman2 : very nice setup.
wkhahn
Sep 7, 12:48 PM
Using an advanced video codec like h.264, you can get decent quality in 720p at 6 Mbps and 1080p at 8 Mbps. (Look at the HD trailers on apple.com)
With current cable modems now getting 8 Mbps download speeds, we're not talking 2 and a half days, we're talking realtime or close to it.
I'm betting apple skips "DVD Quality" (whatever that means) and goes straight into HD. It is the 21st Century after all...
On my lunch break at work, I just downloaded a couple of HD trailers, both 2min30sec in length; 1 at 480p and the other at 720p. My set up is an 3.0Ghz Pentium D, 1G ram, 256K Nvidia Gforce 6800, 20" Dell Digital LCD.
I could tell no difference in file quality. The problem lies in download time. Both files average dl speed was 150KBps. Thats 1.2Mbps if my math is right. The 420p file took 4:28 to dl, translating to 3:34:24 for a 2hr movie. For 720p, it took 12:39, meaning a full movie would take 9:28:45.
I know my cable provider offers up to 4Mbps downlaods, for about $120/month. And thats before the cable servise itself. Even then its not dedicated. Most people with cable will opt for their providers basic service ,like $40 - 50/month for 500-600kbps, or 1/2 as fast as my test. The movies would take twice as long to dl. 19hrs to downlaod will not fly. 7hrs may not either.
If the compression works to get a DVD quality movie down to 1G, then it could be downloaded in about 1h50mim, nearly realtime at work, or 3h40min at home. At work, I would only need maybe a 15min buffer before I start watching, and not catch up to the dl. But at home, I would need about 1h40min buffer. Maybe this is acceptable to some, but if I can walk to Wal-mart or Blockbuster and back in that time, then what's the consumer advantage beyond the novelty?
I'm sure apple engineers can do these same napkin calculations. There would have to be some alternative to the straight dl. Maybe a torrent of some kind built into iTunes 7. I don't know. Just thinking.
With current cable modems now getting 8 Mbps download speeds, we're not talking 2 and a half days, we're talking realtime or close to it.
I'm betting apple skips "DVD Quality" (whatever that means) and goes straight into HD. It is the 21st Century after all...
On my lunch break at work, I just downloaded a couple of HD trailers, both 2min30sec in length; 1 at 480p and the other at 720p. My set up is an 3.0Ghz Pentium D, 1G ram, 256K Nvidia Gforce 6800, 20" Dell Digital LCD.
I could tell no difference in file quality. The problem lies in download time. Both files average dl speed was 150KBps. Thats 1.2Mbps if my math is right. The 420p file took 4:28 to dl, translating to 3:34:24 for a 2hr movie. For 720p, it took 12:39, meaning a full movie would take 9:28:45.
I know my cable provider offers up to 4Mbps downlaods, for about $120/month. And thats before the cable servise itself. Even then its not dedicated. Most people with cable will opt for their providers basic service ,like $40 - 50/month for 500-600kbps, or 1/2 as fast as my test. The movies would take twice as long to dl. 19hrs to downlaod will not fly. 7hrs may not either.
If the compression works to get a DVD quality movie down to 1G, then it could be downloaded in about 1h50mim, nearly realtime at work, or 3h40min at home. At work, I would only need maybe a 15min buffer before I start watching, and not catch up to the dl. But at home, I would need about 1h40min buffer. Maybe this is acceptable to some, but if I can walk to Wal-mart or Blockbuster and back in that time, then what's the consumer advantage beyond the novelty?
I'm sure apple engineers can do these same napkin calculations. There would have to be some alternative to the straight dl. Maybe a torrent of some kind built into iTunes 7. I don't know. Just thinking.
JGowan
Jan 13, 01:03 AM
I think it's going to be a tablet that slaps the crap out of the Kindle. It'll be a full on computer tablet that does eBooks, too and is totally wireless like Kindle and can surf the internet like Kindle (free, like Kindle) but, again gives Kindle a sound beating in every single way known to man.
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.
iDAG
Jan 11, 08:07 PM
AirMac is actually the name of an Apple product in Japan. I believe its just an Airport
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/AirMac
arn
LOL then IDK what to call a Mac with Air :) Maybe it just has a ton of fans in it so everyone can stop whining about how hot there notebook is. :cool:
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/AirMac
arn
LOL then IDK what to call a Mac with Air :) Maybe it just has a ton of fans in it so everyone can stop whining about how hot there notebook is. :cool:
Lurchdubious
Nov 24, 07:29 PM
Asics Gel Enduro -6
http://images.bizrate.com/resize?sq=360&uid=1990525352
Asics Tiger Gel -Acclaim
http://www.shoecarnival.com/images/products/cn_149749_MED.jpg
Bungees for my truck
http://www.diytools.co.uk/diy/Images/DB_Detail/_98549_195903.jpg
New Adidas jacket (minus the Notre Dame logo)
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41IIdahahLL.jpg
http://images.bizrate.com/resize?sq=360&uid=1990525352
Asics Tiger Gel -Acclaim
http://www.shoecarnival.com/images/products/cn_149749_MED.jpg
Bungees for my truck
http://www.diytools.co.uk/diy/Images/DB_Detail/_98549_195903.jpg
New Adidas jacket (minus the Notre Dame logo)
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41IIdahahLL.jpg
sammich
Oct 24, 05:19 AM
Haven't seen this mentioned in a while...
If they do release the new MBP's tomorrow, what is the chance that Apple's skunkworks will be working for a readyboost-like feature? It'll help us guys who can't wait until March/April for Santa Rosa, stick in a CF card reader into the MBP and a 2gb+ card and presto (could work quite well with the new hard sleep feature).
If they do release the new MBP's tomorrow, what is the chance that Apple's skunkworks will be working for a readyboost-like feature? It'll help us guys who can't wait until March/April for Santa Rosa, stick in a CF card reader into the MBP and a 2gb+ card and presto (could work quite well with the new hard sleep feature).
rlreif
Jul 18, 12:39 PM
i was worried that it would only be sales... i never want to own movies, and the very seldom exception, i want to own in a better quality than what we get from itunes... they would have gotten zero business from me in movie sales, but for rentals i will use it all the time
Sabenth
Jul 14, 06:22 AM
I have both an xbox 360 (and I will get the HD-DVD player for a steal I might add) and a Sony Vaio AR with blu-ray hooked up to my HDtv. Yes it is expensive, but when you see the quality its definitely worth it.
I am going to steer clear of the Playstation3. The ps2 and psp just didnt impress me enough, although it will win the console wars simply because its a PlayStation. When you think about it, it has never really had the best console, N64 was better and would have won the first war had it not been on cartlidge and the xbox was better because of the online play, the ps2 was shocking online.
The winner will be nintendo if they get it all done in time the ds has wiped the floor with the psp here in europe .. As for all this blue ray bussines i like the idea of it but not as a main feature of any computer system not just apple ... i am still getting my head around dvd rw -/ what ever format ... Blue ray will just cause more chaos to the public plus at the current prices they can sod off...
I am going to steer clear of the Playstation3. The ps2 and psp just didnt impress me enough, although it will win the console wars simply because its a PlayStation. When you think about it, it has never really had the best console, N64 was better and would have won the first war had it not been on cartlidge and the xbox was better because of the online play, the ps2 was shocking online.
The winner will be nintendo if they get it all done in time the ds has wiped the floor with the psp here in europe .. As for all this blue ray bussines i like the idea of it but not as a main feature of any computer system not just apple ... i am still getting my head around dvd rw -/ what ever format ... Blue ray will just cause more chaos to the public plus at the current prices they can sod off...
Earendil
Nov 28, 10:32 AM
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs?
*snip*
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20".
*snip*
But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
And that percentage shoots up when you take into account only the Pro style Towers. And it's a shame your Cinema display is showing age sooner than I would think it should. Still, in my own experience with color reproduction and accuracy in Photography, the cinema displays I have used have exceeded my Dell 2005. In regular computer use I wouldn't be able to tell them apart (aside from the back light bleed on the Dell).
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Do you see any fan boys making posts here? I see some people here that are ignorant of the way monitors work and yet are trying to pass opinions on Apple/Dell/LCD market as gold though.
That's the issue though, currently Apple doesn't sell a consumer computer that either doesn't already come with a monitor, or where you aren't supposed to already have a monitor.
the MacBook and iMac both have screens built in, the MacMini, if you saw any of it's advertisements or presentation, is meant as a direct replacement for a PC box. i.e. bring your own mouse, keyboard and monitor. I as well as another guy have already said this though.
It's a problem, still, I want too want Apple to sell a consumer level monitor. But Apple certainly doesn't have to enter that market if they don't want to. Besides, the market for a cheap 17" monitor is TINY. You're talking Mini owners (who don't already have a monitor) maybe a few laptop owners, and...? G5 owners? If you're plugin a $150 LCD up to a G5 you should be shot :P Unless you are running three at once or something.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
Many professionals run Duel 20" screens. In fact I see this setup far more often that a 30" screen.
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one.
wow wow wow. You just me on that logic jump. Apple sells some high end systems to Professions in industry that demand at least a certain standard. Apple also sells other computers. Apple Sells monitors that are aiming at (hitting is another matter) those professionals that demand a certain standard. Apple doesn't currently sell any other monitors. How is that proof that Apple is trying to personally screw you out of your cash?
Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
Yeah, there is a gap, and I do see it as a problem. No one in the entire thread is disagreeing with that. You ideas on why there is a gap is viewed a little bit more negative than I would, but whatever.
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper.
Another huge jump in logic based on no facts and stretched assumptions. Do you know what Apple takes home at the end of the day from each monitor sale, each iMac sale, and each Mini sale? Can you provide that data to back up any of your conclusions? It sure would go a long way in getting anyone to side with you on that point. However, until you do, I'm going to say this one more time:
Cinema Display = Pro quality Display (I don't give a hoot if your eyes can't see it, the components alone show it, and that is what cost money to make not your eye sight)
Pro Quality = not cheap, don't go looking for a $200 monitor for pro work.
And for the last time, I'm still waiting for someone to show me a display that matches the Cinemas tech specs and qualifications and also cost downwards in the $400 range that people keep speaking about. Because until someone does, I'm inclined to believe, based on my own looking, that Apple is right with the industry on this one (or close) and all our whining on cost means jack.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it.
In light of that little sarcastc jab, the irony is that you are one of, if not the only user, to have admitted to owning a 20" Cinema display in this thread so far :rolleyes:
[quote]I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right?
I'll just quote myself on this one...
[QUOTE=Earendil]You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in back lighting and change in color based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benefits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level monitor for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
But if you had been following the thread you'd know that about me already...
But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
No, you are asking for two very different things here.
1. You are asking Apple to produce a consumer level monitor that you can afford and falls in line with the market. I think everyone agrees with this idea, whether there is a large enough market for Apple to justify it (only Aple costumers would consider them) is up for debate.
and...
2. You are asking Apple to drop the price on their Pro displays without giving a reason (all your reasons apply to a consumer LCD), nor have you provided a similarly speced display to show that Apple is out of line with it's pricing.
There are large difference between a Mini and a G5. Just because most people wouldn't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. Just relax and trust me that in two properly functioning displays, Apple's monitors are very good, and imho should never be compared to Apple's displays unless you are trying to convince a consumer (who can't tell the difference) not to buy it and buy an alternative display. I have done this before. Just like you'd never compare a Mini and a G5 unless grandma was thinking about buying a G5 to surf the web with...
~Tyler
*snip*
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20".
*snip*
But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
And that percentage shoots up when you take into account only the Pro style Towers. And it's a shame your Cinema display is showing age sooner than I would think it should. Still, in my own experience with color reproduction and accuracy in Photography, the cinema displays I have used have exceeded my Dell 2005. In regular computer use I wouldn't be able to tell them apart (aside from the back light bleed on the Dell).
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Do you see any fan boys making posts here? I see some people here that are ignorant of the way monitors work and yet are trying to pass opinions on Apple/Dell/LCD market as gold though.
That's the issue though, currently Apple doesn't sell a consumer computer that either doesn't already come with a monitor, or where you aren't supposed to already have a monitor.
the MacBook and iMac both have screens built in, the MacMini, if you saw any of it's advertisements or presentation, is meant as a direct replacement for a PC box. i.e. bring your own mouse, keyboard and monitor. I as well as another guy have already said this though.
It's a problem, still, I want too want Apple to sell a consumer level monitor. But Apple certainly doesn't have to enter that market if they don't want to. Besides, the market for a cheap 17" monitor is TINY. You're talking Mini owners (who don't already have a monitor) maybe a few laptop owners, and...? G5 owners? If you're plugin a $150 LCD up to a G5 you should be shot :P Unless you are running three at once or something.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
Many professionals run Duel 20" screens. In fact I see this setup far more often that a 30" screen.
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one.
wow wow wow. You just me on that logic jump. Apple sells some high end systems to Professions in industry that demand at least a certain standard. Apple also sells other computers. Apple Sells monitors that are aiming at (hitting is another matter) those professionals that demand a certain standard. Apple doesn't currently sell any other monitors. How is that proof that Apple is trying to personally screw you out of your cash?
Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
Yeah, there is a gap, and I do see it as a problem. No one in the entire thread is disagreeing with that. You ideas on why there is a gap is viewed a little bit more negative than I would, but whatever.
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper.
Another huge jump in logic based on no facts and stretched assumptions. Do you know what Apple takes home at the end of the day from each monitor sale, each iMac sale, and each Mini sale? Can you provide that data to back up any of your conclusions? It sure would go a long way in getting anyone to side with you on that point. However, until you do, I'm going to say this one more time:
Cinema Display = Pro quality Display (I don't give a hoot if your eyes can't see it, the components alone show it, and that is what cost money to make not your eye sight)
Pro Quality = not cheap, don't go looking for a $200 monitor for pro work.
And for the last time, I'm still waiting for someone to show me a display that matches the Cinemas tech specs and qualifications and also cost downwards in the $400 range that people keep speaking about. Because until someone does, I'm inclined to believe, based on my own looking, that Apple is right with the industry on this one (or close) and all our whining on cost means jack.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it.
In light of that little sarcastc jab, the irony is that you are one of, if not the only user, to have admitted to owning a 20" Cinema display in this thread so far :rolleyes:
[quote]I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right?
I'll just quote myself on this one...
[QUOTE=Earendil]You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in back lighting and change in color based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benefits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level monitor for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
But if you had been following the thread you'd know that about me already...
But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
No, you are asking for two very different things here.
1. You are asking Apple to produce a consumer level monitor that you can afford and falls in line with the market. I think everyone agrees with this idea, whether there is a large enough market for Apple to justify it (only Aple costumers would consider them) is up for debate.
and...
2. You are asking Apple to drop the price on their Pro displays without giving a reason (all your reasons apply to a consumer LCD), nor have you provided a similarly speced display to show that Apple is out of line with it's pricing.
There are large difference between a Mini and a G5. Just because most people wouldn't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. Just relax and trust me that in two properly functioning displays, Apple's monitors are very good, and imho should never be compared to Apple's displays unless you are trying to convince a consumer (who can't tell the difference) not to buy it and buy an alternative display. I have done this before. Just like you'd never compare a Mini and a G5 unless grandma was thinking about buying a G5 to surf the web with...
~Tyler
MacHamster68
Apr 9, 11:14 PM
i too have no problems with gear sticks on both sides of the road , i actually prefer to have the gear stick on my left side , despite i learned to drive with that gear stick to my right as i lived then in Germany and all cars i had had been fitted that way ..until i crossed the channel and bought a car in the UK
but the future is automatic as in 10 years only people with a income of over �100000pa will be able to afford to run a fossil fuel powered car (prediction for europe with in latest years 30pence/cent annually increase in mind i guess liter price of �5 in 2020 )anyway and electro engines need no gear sticks at all
but the future is automatic as in 10 years only people with a income of over �100000pa will be able to afford to run a fossil fuel powered car (prediction for europe with in latest years 30pence/cent annually increase in mind i guess liter price of �5 in 2020 )anyway and electro engines need no gear sticks at all
Eraserhead
Mar 19, 10:10 AM
Must we get involved in this? Can't France do something for once by themselves, or any other european nations for that matter?
The US isn't the only country in the UN...
The US isn't the only country in the UN...
Aeolius
Apr 26, 12:49 PM
How long until Apple releases a product called "Amazon", then? Named after the river, of course.
evilgEEk
Sep 5, 12:14 AM
...or on 25 September (Photokina)...
Oye, I hope it's sooner than that. I want to buy a mini for my office, but I can't wait that long. The 12th is about as long as I can wait, so come on Apple, help me out! :D
Oye, I hope it's sooner than that. I want to buy a mini for my office, but I can't wait that long. The 12th is about as long as I can wait, so come on Apple, help me out! :D
Eraserhead
Mar 19, 10:10 AM
Must we get involved in this? Can't France do something for once by themselves, or any other european nations for that matter?
The US isn't the only country in the UN...
The US isn't the only country in the UN...
אין תגובות:
הוסף רשומת תגובה