Peace
Aug 6, 10:17 PM
I just want to give a BIG..Hip Hip Hoorah!! to Arn for his hard work in giving us the very best Apple community website on the internet!!
Keep it up Bro!!
Keep it up Bro!!
banjomamo
Jul 14, 01:26 AM
I think it will be at least 12 more months before bluray shows up in an Apple machine - at least as a standard. The only real hint I have seen is that they already let you author the HD-DVD spec video in DVD SP. Maybe because the Bluray specs werent done in time for that release though.
grouse
Jul 20, 08:35 AM
If desktops sales are down 23%, is that revenue or units?
If it's revenue, then it's hardly surprising. If the most expensive models are essentially stalled waiting on new chips/new enclosures/new universal binary apps from Quark and Adobemedia, as backed up by reports that apple store staff in the last quarter have actually been advising punters NOT to buy the G5 towers, then actually that's pretty much as expected I'd have thought.
If new Mac Pro models are just around the corner then you'd expect a big leap for the 4th quarter. I, for one, am part of the higher spend pent-up demand sector. And don't forget, bureaux, design studios, architects, 3D motion design/modeller etcs have big budgets and if they pause on buying it is going to skew the Apple market. As everyone says, expect a big leap in the Desktop Pro market over the next two quarters.
If it's revenue, then it's hardly surprising. If the most expensive models are essentially stalled waiting on new chips/new enclosures/new universal binary apps from Quark and Adobemedia, as backed up by reports that apple store staff in the last quarter have actually been advising punters NOT to buy the G5 towers, then actually that's pretty much as expected I'd have thought.
If new Mac Pro models are just around the corner then you'd expect a big leap for the 4th quarter. I, for one, am part of the higher spend pent-up demand sector. And don't forget, bureaux, design studios, architects, 3D motion design/modeller etcs have big budgets and if they pause on buying it is going to skew the Apple market. As everyone says, expect a big leap in the Desktop Pro market over the next two quarters.
Jack97
Apr 3, 04:13 AM
Did anyone else thing that was a really bad advert? They hardly showed the product fully at all!
ldkaplan
Jan 2, 03:07 PM
You probably don't like penut butter cups either :-(
I have a treo 700p...I'd much rather have a mac version of some sort to keep my calendar, listen to music and take calls. A multi-tool might not be for everyone, but there are plenty of folks that would love it. And what if it had video chat as well?
I really like the iTV/iSight rumors. Someone needs to bring video chat for the home user to the mainstream. And if it's not dependent upon having a mac desktop (ie running some sort of light OS) then it would be a huge market hit, IMHO.
A phone is best used to make phone calls not for music. If you want to listen to music theres a nano... I dont like the idea of putting them together compromising each other.
Phone Compromises:
Worst reception or larger size due to the added multimedia.
Buttons are geared towards music instead of calls and stuff that is useful for making calls.
iPod Compromises:
Shorter battery life than iPod
No Line-out for superior audio quality.
Worst navigation for selecting songs.
I like a great phone and a great iPod. Not an alright phone and alright iPod in one place so I cant just carry one or the other.
I have a treo 700p...I'd much rather have a mac version of some sort to keep my calendar, listen to music and take calls. A multi-tool might not be for everyone, but there are plenty of folks that would love it. And what if it had video chat as well?
I really like the iTV/iSight rumors. Someone needs to bring video chat for the home user to the mainstream. And if it's not dependent upon having a mac desktop (ie running some sort of light OS) then it would be a huge market hit, IMHO.
A phone is best used to make phone calls not for music. If you want to listen to music theres a nano... I dont like the idea of putting them together compromising each other.
Phone Compromises:
Worst reception or larger size due to the added multimedia.
Buttons are geared towards music instead of calls and stuff that is useful for making calls.
iPod Compromises:
Shorter battery life than iPod
No Line-out for superior audio quality.
Worst navigation for selecting songs.
I like a great phone and a great iPod. Not an alright phone and alright iPod in one place so I cant just carry one or the other.
Tmelon
Apr 1, 04:21 PM
So I guess we won’t see any new features… Apple is busy polishing what we’ve got now…:/
Basically. Now they just need to polish what they gave us. It's honestly a lot though. I wouldn't feel ripped off for them charging money for it.
Almost all of the Applications have been enhanced, autosave, Launchpad, Mission Control, Versions, resume, Multitouch gestures, full screen apps and the Mac App Store.
Basically. Now they just need to polish what they gave us. It's honestly a lot though. I wouldn't feel ripped off for them charging money for it.
Almost all of the Applications have been enhanced, autosave, Launchpad, Mission Control, Versions, resume, Multitouch gestures, full screen apps and the Mac App Store.
Hastings101
Apr 2, 11:07 PM
Always have to use the word magical
Dagless
Apr 19, 05:21 PM
Very nice! My 2006 iMac would like to be replaced.
From what I've seen the current iMacs would be fine for me but I've been holding off because I think it's daft buying a Mac so late into it's cycle. Just give us some better video card options and I'm set.
From what I've seen the current iMacs would be fine for me but I've been holding off because I think it's daft buying a Mac so late into it's cycle. Just give us some better video card options and I'm set.
turbineseaplane
Jun 22, 02:08 PM
Exactly. When did the keyboard and mouse become public enemy number 1? These technologies have been perfected over years and years of real use.
If Apple introduces a touch iMac it's clearly a money grab, to sucker the public into thinking touch is somehow superior when in fact it is vastly inferior on a desktop monitor.
Yeah. This story does absolutely nothing for me.
My interest in "touch screen desktops" is so low I can't even describe it.
If Apple introduces a touch iMac it's clearly a money grab, to sucker the public into thinking touch is somehow superior when in fact it is vastly inferior on a desktop monitor.
Yeah. This story does absolutely nothing for me.
My interest in "touch screen desktops" is so low I can't even describe it.
jmsait19
Jul 18, 12:56 PM
A major consumer announcement at a developers conference? Not gonna happen. End of story!
ThinkSecret hasn't been right about anything since they got in trouble over leaks.
maybe so. but the lawsuit has been dropped now. maybe they are feeling ok to say the right things now...
ThinkSecret hasn't been right about anything since they got in trouble over leaks.
maybe so. but the lawsuit has been dropped now. maybe they are feeling ok to say the right things now...
Eidorian
Aug 26, 11:00 AM
Watch the WWDC keynote and note that the xserves now use Woodcrest which has a higher TDP than Conroe (95W compared to 65W). Also note what they say about Woodcrest having a better thermal environment that the G5's they were using before which were the same G5's (non-dual core) that the iMac used I believe. Conroe has better thermal characteristics than G5's, the Mac Pro and xserve prove that.
iMac will get Conroe. 2.4Ghz and 2.66Ghz. Conroe is the best value for performance processor that Intel are offering, so they need to use it SOMEWHERE in their lineup.Err...I was defending that Conroe could fit in the iMac. Especially having the G5 in there. (Woodcrest's TDP is 85W by the way...)
And look here (http://spamreaper.org/frankie/macintel.html)
iMac will get Conroe. 2.4Ghz and 2.66Ghz. Conroe is the best value for performance processor that Intel are offering, so they need to use it SOMEWHERE in their lineup.Err...I was defending that Conroe could fit in the iMac. Especially having the G5 in there. (Woodcrest's TDP is 85W by the way...)
And look here (http://spamreaper.org/frankie/macintel.html)
Queso
Jul 21, 08:20 AM
So we are still not back upto Q1 2000 numbers? :eek:
Except of course that Q1 is the Christmas quarter, not April to June :rolleyes:
Except of course that Q1 is the Christmas quarter, not April to June :rolleyes:
theBB
Jul 19, 04:33 PM
This is actually the general trend in the computer market since the rise of
portables against desktop machines. Portables are becoming increasingly
powerful (computational-wise) up to the point that the line between them
and Desktops is blurred.
Yes, laptops are getting more popular, but I don't remember other companies losing 23% of desktop sales in one year. I guess Apple sells few computers to companies who might be buying a bigger share of desktops nowadays, but still...
portables against desktop machines. Portables are becoming increasingly
powerful (computational-wise) up to the point that the line between them
and Desktops is blurred.
Yes, laptops are getting more popular, but I don't remember other companies losing 23% of desktop sales in one year. I guess Apple sells few computers to companies who might be buying a bigger share of desktops nowadays, but still...
toddybody
Mar 24, 01:12 PM
next step amd cpus
*Children Screaming in background
Im no snob against AMD GPUS...but their CPU's are nearly 2 generations behind intel. I dont think Bulldozer is going to match the 1155 SB, much less the upcoming 2011 socket chips.
What I want to see is a 27inch iMac with an HD 6970 2GB...Whoa whoa wee wow:eek:
*Children Screaming in background
Im no snob against AMD GPUS...but their CPU's are nearly 2 generations behind intel. I dont think Bulldozer is going to match the 1155 SB, much less the upcoming 2011 socket chips.
What I want to see is a 27inch iMac with an HD 6970 2GB...Whoa whoa wee wow:eek:
Krovem
Feb 6, 12:02 AM
2002 Audi A4. 18th birthday present
That looks pretty sick. I was looking at Audi a4 or a6 (02-05), and infinity g35 sedan.
That looks pretty sick. I was looking at Audi a4 or a6 (02-05), and infinity g35 sedan.
macthetiger85
Apr 26, 05:04 PM
And for all the non-legal "experts" out there.
Windows can be trademarked because while it is a generic term, it is not a generic term that describes the product or service.
If "Windows" was a window company, it could not be trademarked because it is a generic terms that describes the product or service.
A huge difference.
that's innacurate
Windows can be trademarked because while it is a generic term, it is not a generic term that describes the product or service.
If "Windows" was a window company, it could not be trademarked because it is a generic terms that describes the product or service.
A huge difference.
that's innacurate
thejadedmonkey
Nov 28, 07:46 AM
Congratulations, you just lost any arguments you wish to make. If Apple monitors are vastly overpriced for what you get, if you don't have any need for something that is superior to a regular consumer model, then why in the hell did you buy one?
Maybe he got an apple one first and didn't like it (but who's going to trash it), or one was a gift, or perhaps he wanted to go with the whole apple-theme.. Maybe he has TWO computers.
Why are you looking for a fight? I happen to have two different lava lamps. why? Because I can. thank you, don't bite my head off because I have two.
Maybe he got an apple one first and didn't like it (but who's going to trash it), or one was a gift, or perhaps he wanted to go with the whole apple-theme.. Maybe he has TWO computers.
Why are you looking for a fight? I happen to have two different lava lamps. why? Because I can. thank you, don't bite my head off because I have two.
SeaFox
Dec 28, 02:23 AM
Here is your quote SeaFox.
You are an condescending individual and take my post out of context.
You can't please all of the people all of the time.
"I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly."
I stand by the statement. WebTV failed because at the time everyone had CRT TVs, which are much blurrier than a computer monitor. Even if you are using a new plasma screen set you have to account for how you use your device. One sits in front of their monitor by a couple feet. This makes 12 point text readable. Now, step back from this thread about six feet or so, however far you usually sit from your TV, and you'll see why. Even if you're viewing the screen at the real resolution of the HD set (1920x1080 for the real nice sets) you're still not going to be wanting to read long passages to text from your TV. Kinda like people don't like reading books in their entirety one screen at a time in Acrobat.
When you ask a home entertainment device to perform the functions of a regular computer you're adding all sorts of complexity and starting down a slippery slope. Let's say Apple added the ability to view Word files to the iTV. Someone would complain that they couldn't edit them. Same with iMovie files. Now you have to add that functionality. Then someone would say "well, what about image files? I can already watch my iPhoto library, why can't I do color and brightness/contrast correction?"
This is exactly the same thing that comes up about the iPod and the Apple Phone. Yeah, the iPod has no built-in FM tuner, no voice memo ability, no built in recording ability, built in FM transmitter for the car, ect. And adding these features would make the interface more complicated, when one of the things that makes the iPod such a hit is it's simplicity. Why do current music playing phones suck? Because the player functionality is hidden under a bunch of unintuitive menus, just like most of the other bells and whistles that may have influenced you to buy the phone to begin with. It's the current state of overly complicated interface design that gets people excited about Apple entering the cell phone market.
Edit: Also, one last point. If you put too much functionality into the iTV that is normally relegated to a regular Mac, then charge less for the iTV, you're going to eat into sales of the Mac Mini. Apple wouldn't do this, and this is the main reason I don't think you'll see the ability to open Word files or surf the Net with the iTV, that and it just sounds like a weird feature to have in a set top box.
If you've got your Mini hooked up to your TV and its working good for you I applaud you. The iTV is clearly not aiming for your type of consumer. I've read articles about setting up Minis as PVR's with HD sets, and invariably the indivdulal has some difficulty finding a monitor resolution and refresh rate the HD set will play along with at first, and actual use of the device is hobbled by needing a wireless keyboard or similar. Apple is aiming for the average TV watching consumer with the iTV, who I can tell you from personal experience are not nearly as smart.
You are an condescending individual and take my post out of context.
You can't please all of the people all of the time.
"I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly."
I stand by the statement. WebTV failed because at the time everyone had CRT TVs, which are much blurrier than a computer monitor. Even if you are using a new plasma screen set you have to account for how you use your device. One sits in front of their monitor by a couple feet. This makes 12 point text readable. Now, step back from this thread about six feet or so, however far you usually sit from your TV, and you'll see why. Even if you're viewing the screen at the real resolution of the HD set (1920x1080 for the real nice sets) you're still not going to be wanting to read long passages to text from your TV. Kinda like people don't like reading books in their entirety one screen at a time in Acrobat.
When you ask a home entertainment device to perform the functions of a regular computer you're adding all sorts of complexity and starting down a slippery slope. Let's say Apple added the ability to view Word files to the iTV. Someone would complain that they couldn't edit them. Same with iMovie files. Now you have to add that functionality. Then someone would say "well, what about image files? I can already watch my iPhoto library, why can't I do color and brightness/contrast correction?"
This is exactly the same thing that comes up about the iPod and the Apple Phone. Yeah, the iPod has no built-in FM tuner, no voice memo ability, no built in recording ability, built in FM transmitter for the car, ect. And adding these features would make the interface more complicated, when one of the things that makes the iPod such a hit is it's simplicity. Why do current music playing phones suck? Because the player functionality is hidden under a bunch of unintuitive menus, just like most of the other bells and whistles that may have influenced you to buy the phone to begin with. It's the current state of overly complicated interface design that gets people excited about Apple entering the cell phone market.
Edit: Also, one last point. If you put too much functionality into the iTV that is normally relegated to a regular Mac, then charge less for the iTV, you're going to eat into sales of the Mac Mini. Apple wouldn't do this, and this is the main reason I don't think you'll see the ability to open Word files or surf the Net with the iTV, that and it just sounds like a weird feature to have in a set top box.
If you've got your Mini hooked up to your TV and its working good for you I applaud you. The iTV is clearly not aiming for your type of consumer. I've read articles about setting up Minis as PVR's with HD sets, and invariably the indivdulal has some difficulty finding a monitor resolution and refresh rate the HD set will play along with at first, and actual use of the device is hobbled by needing a wireless keyboard or similar. Apple is aiming for the average TV watching consumer with the iTV, who I can tell you from personal experience are not nearly as smart.
MCIowaRulz
Apr 12, 09:12 PM
You can follow this link
http://twitpic.com/photos/robimbs
Looks nice!
http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitpic/photos/large/275784142.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJF3XCCKACR3QDMOA&Expires=1302661762&Signature=frki81qIXmAgzK92lFfwqmHP8tQ%3D
http://twitpic.com/photos/robimbs
Looks nice!
http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitpic/photos/large/275784142.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJF3XCCKACR3QDMOA&Expires=1302661762&Signature=frki81qIXmAgzK92lFfwqmHP8tQ%3D
Tones2
Mar 22, 03:44 PM
The chance that the iPod Classic is updated to 220GB is zero. Apple has no plans to ever update a hard drive based non-touch portable device (they would not waste their time), and they've shown even less interest in increasing the capacity of any device beyond even 64GB flash.
Tony
Tony
Miker2k
Jan 12, 11:53 AM
Brrrrr
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.
iJohnHenry
Apr 17, 08:43 AM
I don't quite get your comment. What was humourous about my age exactly ?
It's my age, in comparison.
I still love driving. :D
It's my age, in comparison.
I still love driving. :D
slu
Jul 18, 10:07 AM
Good. I want to be able to rent TV shows as well. You can really only watch The Daily Show once.
Let me sum it up for everyone:
Renting music = Bad
Renting video = Good
Let me sum it up for everyone:
Renting music = Bad
Renting video = Good
