chuckiej
Jul 18, 07:46 AM
They are not going to announce this at WWDC. Just cause its the next big event does not mean anything. They would certainly give this its own event.
:confused:
:confused:
Object-X
Nov 28, 04:48 PM
PS, that isn't hard :rolleyes:
I just noticed that you are the same person I just (imho) shredded in two different posts above. Care to make a stand against anything I said as a direct response to your points? Or are you just gonna feed off someone else and reiterate yourself again?
I don't have time to answer your lengthy response point for point at the moment, maybe later tonight.
So, since my subjective opinion means nothing to you, I offer the following reveiw for your consideration from AnandTech. They compare the Apple and Dell 20" monitors. The link is the last page which has the conclusions, you can read the whole thing if you like.
The short of it is, in their technical opinion the Dell is better than the Apple. What's that? A "consumer" monitor is better than a "pro" monitor? Say it ain't so.
http://www.anandtech.com/displays/showdoc.aspx?i=2400&p=11
So, I'll stick to my guns and say the Apple 20" monitor isn't worth the price they are asking, and they are keeping it high it to encourage iMac purchases over a mini/cinema combo. It's only an opinion. I don't mean to come off like I know more than I do. My opinion is based only on my experiance with both monitors and my own decison making process based on price and budget. Since we can't see the actual sales numbers there is no way to prove/disprove anything.
Oh, and the Dell was purchased for me by my work, the Apple by me for my home.
And just a funny aside. The Dell was stolen a few months ago by theives who broke into our offices. They took our Dell monitors and a Dell Precision workstation but left my $2000 Powermac G5 the Dell monitor was plugged into. Go figure. :rolleyes:
I got a 23" cinema to replace the Dell.
I just noticed that you are the same person I just (imho) shredded in two different posts above. Care to make a stand against anything I said as a direct response to your points? Or are you just gonna feed off someone else and reiterate yourself again?
I don't have time to answer your lengthy response point for point at the moment, maybe later tonight.
So, since my subjective opinion means nothing to you, I offer the following reveiw for your consideration from AnandTech. They compare the Apple and Dell 20" monitors. The link is the last page which has the conclusions, you can read the whole thing if you like.
The short of it is, in their technical opinion the Dell is better than the Apple. What's that? A "consumer" monitor is better than a "pro" monitor? Say it ain't so.
http://www.anandtech.com/displays/showdoc.aspx?i=2400&p=11
So, I'll stick to my guns and say the Apple 20" monitor isn't worth the price they are asking, and they are keeping it high it to encourage iMac purchases over a mini/cinema combo. It's only an opinion. I don't mean to come off like I know more than I do. My opinion is based only on my experiance with both monitors and my own decison making process based on price and budget. Since we can't see the actual sales numbers there is no way to prove/disprove anything.
Oh, and the Dell was purchased for me by my work, the Apple by me for my home.
And just a funny aside. The Dell was stolen a few months ago by theives who broke into our offices. They took our Dell monitors and a Dell Precision workstation but left my $2000 Powermac G5 the Dell monitor was plugged into. Go figure. :rolleyes:
I got a 23" cinema to replace the Dell.
Gem�tlichkeit
Nov 24, 10:07 AM
uh...
that seems awful clunky as a container for a pair of sunglasses...
I do believe that's a gun case.
that seems awful clunky as a container for a pair of sunglasses...
I do believe that's a gun case.
M-Life
Sep 4, 08:09 PM
Would something in this realm be feasible for the mini updates? Just wondering while waiting for updates. Of course this is very vague on my part.
$499: Core solo - 1.5
$599: Core duo Yonah - 1.66
$699: Core duo Yonah - 1.83
$799: Core 2 duo Merom - low end (Not sure what that is)
$499: Core solo - 1.5
$599: Core duo Yonah - 1.66
$699: Core duo Yonah - 1.83
$799: Core 2 duo Merom - low end (Not sure what that is)
Mr-Stabby
Apr 12, 09:10 PM
Oh yes :) 64 bit! At last :D
tablo13
Sep 24, 05:22 PM
Something I noticed about my Grip Vue today. The back seems to be collecting quite a bit of germs (dirt, etc.). For those of you who use a Mighty Mouse, think about how that collects dirt, but on a case.
Does it affect the iPod touch itself?
Does it affect the iPod touch itself?
toddybody
Mar 24, 01:40 PM
power-hungry gpu monsters.
6970 folks, not 6990 :)
6970 folks, not 6990 :)
yetanotherdave
Nov 25, 07:06 PM
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51O1uMSRhXL._SS500_.jpg
Just got back from seeing him live. Brilliant gig. Bought this DVD at the gig.
Just got back from seeing him live. Brilliant gig. Bought this DVD at the gig.
netdog
Aug 25, 12:04 PM
Why would updated mac minis be such a high security product. Its nothing revolutionary so why would apple want so much security on the shipping of them? Im hoping for something BIG
Now you're talking. I want my iFon
Now you're talking. I want my iFon
-aggie-
Sep 14, 09:21 AM
Consumer Reports says "we still think the same thing" for the third time and that's first page news? Sounds more like they're fishing for free publicity.
Anyway, when a reviewing organization "doesn't recommend" what I consider the best phone I've ever owned, it sounds more like I shouldn't bother paying attention to that reviewing organization. Their taste just isn't relevant to mine.
This is exactly what I thought when I read the OP. They stated they couldn't recommend the iPhone 4, even if it had bumpers, and now without bumpers they can't recommend it, because it won't have bumpers.
Anyway, when a reviewing organization "doesn't recommend" what I consider the best phone I've ever owned, it sounds more like I shouldn't bother paying attention to that reviewing organization. Their taste just isn't relevant to mine.
This is exactly what I thought when I read the OP. They stated they couldn't recommend the iPhone 4, even if it had bumpers, and now without bumpers they can't recommend it, because it won't have bumpers.
encro
Apr 27, 11:41 AM
I can't be the only one that is sick to death with regards to car analogies. Grrr
FireStar
Oct 20, 03:12 PM
i found one that matches a case that i bought for my iphone a while back!
[tIMG]http://thmb.inkfrog.com/thumbn/cimo/itouch4_dualgel_blue_01.jpg=800[/IMG]
snatched it up for 6 bucks! what a deal. i think i might get black next..
Darn. I thought it wasn't generic for a second. But it still looks nice.
[tIMG]http://thmb.inkfrog.com/thumbn/cimo/itouch4_dualgel_blue_01.jpg=800[/IMG]
snatched it up for 6 bucks! what a deal. i think i might get black next..
Darn. I thought it wasn't generic for a second. But it still looks nice.
jgould
Feb 19, 08:09 PM
Hasn't changed too much this time around:
http://link.trekcubed.com/trekmb_Feb2011_s.jpg (http://link.trekcubed.com/trekmb_Feb2011.jpg)
I like the wall paper... Which Orbiter and where'd ya get it? :)
http://link.trekcubed.com/trekmb_Feb2011_s.jpg (http://link.trekcubed.com/trekmb_Feb2011.jpg)
I like the wall paper... Which Orbiter and where'd ya get it? :)
LethalWolfe
Apr 12, 10:17 PM
You really are worried that Final Cut Pro will not be more complicated than iMovie??!
No, I'm worried that FCP could be dumbed down too much to properly do the job at hand.
Lethal
No, I'm worried that FCP could be dumbed down too much to properly do the job at hand.
Lethal
DavidLeblond
Aug 16, 07:34 AM
Compete with Zune? Seriously? Zune is even on Apple's radar?
Let me get this straight, maybe I'm mistaken. Is this the same Zune that was announced that it will "play music! videos! games! ... wait... no, we changed our minds... no games. And videos? Yeah we can't quite get that to work, it won't do that either. But it plays music! And looks like an iPod... except its a tad on the fugly side...."
Please. Apple already has something to compete with this, its called the iPod. Who needs wireless??
Let me get this straight, maybe I'm mistaken. Is this the same Zune that was announced that it will "play music! videos! games! ... wait... no, we changed our minds... no games. And videos? Yeah we can't quite get that to work, it won't do that either. But it plays music! And looks like an iPod... except its a tad on the fugly side...."
Please. Apple already has something to compete with this, its called the iPod. Who needs wireless??
Lunja
Jan 7, 06:16 PM
Dear Mr Jobs,
All I want for MWSF is a new keyboard, because it's time we had some media buttons. And a paint app so that I don't have to buy Photoshop if I want to doodle something.
Thanks,
Lunja.
All I want for MWSF is a new keyboard, because it's time we had some media buttons. And a paint app so that I don't have to buy Photoshop if I want to doodle something.
Thanks,
Lunja.
iBorg20181
Oct 24, 12:29 AM
Apple needs to get away from making such a big deal our of small updates (processor change) as Intel will have such things changing more often than motorola or ibm ever did. apple should reserve such announcements and hoopla for major revisions or complete overhauls. based on recent benchmarks there is little performance improvement in these new chips save for the speed bump.
Which is what Apple did with the "silent update" for the iMacs from CD to C2D. Likely what will happen (this coming morning??) with the MBP update to C2D.
Probably save the keynote announcements for truely new products and major upgrades.
Sure beats the "bad old days" of Moto and IBM processors, every 6-18 months.......
iBorg
Which is what Apple did with the "silent update" for the iMacs from CD to C2D. Likely what will happen (this coming morning??) with the MBP update to C2D.
Probably save the keynote announcements for truely new products and major upgrades.
Sure beats the "bad old days" of Moto and IBM processors, every 6-18 months.......
iBorg
bjoplin21
Feb 17, 09:08 PM
Just got my 2009 Mac Pro Quad 2.66 today. It has a 120GB SSD drive and 640GB secondary drive, blu ray player, and 16GB of DDR3 Ram. Sitting next to it is my 2009 17 inch 2.66ghz Core2Duo Macbook Pro which has a 240GB SSD drive and 8GB of RAM.
http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/bjoplin21/DSC00964.jpg
http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/bjoplin21/DSC00972.jpg
http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/bjoplin21/DSC00964.jpg
http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/bjoplin21/DSC00972.jpg
bagelche
Apr 12, 10:28 PM
Wow, looks like the rumours WERE true after all! Apple killed the Pro of Final Cut Pro. That guy who turned the much admired iMovie into garbage has done it again. All they had to do was rewrite the engine with 64 bit support, had proper file handling, rendering titling tools amongst other necessary pro features and keep the same F*&$#@*&& interface as pro users of ANY pro software don't want to re-learn an interface for no reason! It takes YEARS before you really know a software under the hood.
We'll now see FCPx turn into a hit with amateurs and will be completely abandoned by pro users who will all return to avid.
Yawn...'cause if it ain't kludgy, it ain't pro.
We'll now see FCPx turn into a hit with amateurs and will be completely abandoned by pro users who will all return to avid.
Yawn...'cause if it ain't kludgy, it ain't pro.
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.
Chris Bangle
Aug 16, 09:36 AM
I think were well overdue for ipod update...
Is this the longest period of time without and update.
Shuffle is a year and 8 months old,
nano is 11 months,
and the 5g is 10 months.
The thing is that the competition is able to undercut apple prices alot, i found a 2gb toshiba thing on amazon for £69 yesterday. A 2gb nano is £130, and thats alot of money for 2 tiny gigabytes.
Back in the day 4gb cost me £130.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B000ES002Q/026-7871897-8334857?v=glance&n=560798
Is this the longest period of time without and update.
Shuffle is a year and 8 months old,
nano is 11 months,
and the 5g is 10 months.
The thing is that the competition is able to undercut apple prices alot, i found a 2gb toshiba thing on amazon for £69 yesterday. A 2gb nano is £130, and thats alot of money for 2 tiny gigabytes.
Back in the day 4gb cost me £130.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B000ES002Q/026-7871897-8334857?v=glance&n=560798
ghostface147
Mar 24, 01:58 PM
Can it run crysis 2?
Killyp
Aug 7, 06:42 AM
In addition to printing and font management, how bout adding to the list networking access. The way one accesses networks in Windows seems much more straight forward, consistent, clean and intuitive in Windows XP than it does in OS X. That's my oppinion anyway. Maybe that's just me. Anyone else agree???
I agree about the SMB shared volume connection thingy. It should be just like browsing a normal folder. It shouldn't mount it as a drive, unless you ask it to (like a network drive in Windows).
This seems like a much more logical way of doing things...
I agree about the SMB shared volume connection thingy. It should be just like browsing a normal folder. It shouldn't mount it as a drive, unless you ask it to (like a network drive in Windows).
This seems like a much more logical way of doing things...
donfishinghocke
Jan 10, 12:11 PM
My 2010 Evo X. Soo fast, and so fun!
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4711634981_96255bab85_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4712302914_e3b47c2054_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4711634981_96255bab85_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4712302914_e3b47c2054_b.jpg