Edge100
Sep 1, 02:27 PM
I don't really know about the ideal price difference, but for some people, it wouldn't matter much. If you want a system with a lot of screen space, then you can get two 1920x1200 monitors. Sure, it will cost you, but if you need the space, then you'll go for the 23-inch. Also, to watch movies, a big screen is better than two small ones. It all depends on what you need the computer for...
True enough.
For my work (audio production), dual displays are better, because I can have multiple apps open on the different screens, or place my mixer on one screen and effects/instruments on another.
But I can see people preferring one larger screen to two screens (despite the fact that the two screens give more overall space).
True enough.
For my work (audio production), dual displays are better, because I can have multiple apps open on the different screens, or place my mixer on one screen and effects/instruments on another.
But I can see people preferring one larger screen to two screens (despite the fact that the two screens give more overall space).
macfan70
Nov 29, 03:47 PM
?
.
In regards to the iTV, will Apple maybe release different versions?
1. Just stream and 802.11n Hub Device
2. With HD and EyeTv.
3. Mac Mini/iTv Combo Media Center
Just a thought.
.
In regards to the iTV, will Apple maybe release different versions?
1. Just stream and 802.11n Hub Device
2. With HD and EyeTv.
3. Mac Mini/iTv Combo Media Center
Just a thought.
Eduardo1971
Apr 19, 11:12 AM
Finally! An iMac rumor!!!!
**Bump**
One can't never have enough iMac rumours! What a breath of fresh air.
Please, please, please let the refreshed iMac drop the May 3rd (I *highly* doubt any new iMac's will be released next week).
**Bump**
One can't never have enough iMac rumours! What a breath of fresh air.
Please, please, please let the refreshed iMac drop the May 3rd (I *highly* doubt any new iMac's will be released next week).
Uragon
Apr 21, 12:10 PM
Apple hackers develop better jailbreaks now so they can keep up with the superior system Android has.
There's so much more one can do with Android.
After having every iPhone, I tried Android and I'm so amazed at their great capabilities.
Android is awesome.
That said my Iphone 4 is best as an iPod replacement.
I have the best of both worlds.
YOu sound like an advertiser for Acai Berries Diet.
There's so much more one can do with Android.
After having every iPhone, I tried Android and I'm so amazed at their great capabilities.
Android is awesome.
That said my Iphone 4 is best as an iPod replacement.
I have the best of both worlds.
YOu sound like an advertiser for Acai Berries Diet.
.jpg%3Fm%3D1305391816 "Beautiful Cute Hot Spicy")
DannyBres
Nov 24, 03:46 AM
Not really, The reason I spent the money on Oakleys is because from what I've read and seen, Oakley's are tough and will last you years. But also if I travel and don't wish to wear them I want to put them somewhere where they will not be crushed, or drowned, or broken.
I'm also planning on going into the Coast Guard, So if/when I travel or etc, I want to take great care of my equipment & personal belongings.
I got that size because it was the smallest water proof size, I also plan on getting another pair someday.
When I spend $200.00 on a pair of sunglasses, When they are not on my head, I want them put away.
Sorry why do you need to keep then dry?! I'm sure they will get wet if you are a coast guard! and how much was that case?
My last purchase was...........
http://www.thegoodride.com/images/stories/2011/burton-boots/moto/burton-moto-brown.jpg
I'm also planning on going into the Coast Guard, So if/when I travel or etc, I want to take great care of my equipment & personal belongings.
I got that size because it was the smallest water proof size, I also plan on getting another pair someday.
When I spend $200.00 on a pair of sunglasses, When they are not on my head, I want them put away.
Sorry why do you need to keep then dry?! I'm sure they will get wet if you are a coast guard! and how much was that case?
My last purchase was...........
http://www.thegoodride.com/images/stories/2011/burton-boots/moto/burton-moto-brown.jpg
.jpg "Hot Models Image Gallery")
islanders
Dec 27, 09:35 PM
I�m waiting on buying a HD DVD or BlueRay until the price comes down, so I could see iTV offering a HD alternative, and filling that niche.
Two premium channels cost $20 a month so iTV would sell you the device to steam movies, some broadcast, download like Tivo, so you wouldn�t need a Blueray or HD DVD.
What else could be practical? Of course it will have a hard drive� a cable box DVR has a hard drive.
If it also has the ability to surf the web and run a word processor, handle video from DVR and digital camera, I�ll get one�
That is if the price is about $500.
Some unanswered questions are where are they going to get the bandwidth to do all this? You will have to have a cable subscription, perhaps just a basic subscription, but even then bandwidth is limited.
They will need their own satellite, if they really want to compete. But that would make them iDish? hmmm
This could be very interesting. I have often wondered why all the cable companies and satellite companies are within $5 pricing difference of each other? Is this the rock bottom competitive price so they can break even or are these prices fixed?
I would love to get rid of so many commercials. I�m paying $78 a month for basic digital subscription and have to use a DVR to record programs so I can zap though the commercials.
Obviously I don�t know what the limitiatoins are here for an iCast or iDish, and anticipate something like a TiVo that can surf the web, upload video, and download HD.
Two premium channels cost $20 a month so iTV would sell you the device to steam movies, some broadcast, download like Tivo, so you wouldn�t need a Blueray or HD DVD.
What else could be practical? Of course it will have a hard drive� a cable box DVR has a hard drive.
If it also has the ability to surf the web and run a word processor, handle video from DVR and digital camera, I�ll get one�
That is if the price is about $500.
Some unanswered questions are where are they going to get the bandwidth to do all this? You will have to have a cable subscription, perhaps just a basic subscription, but even then bandwidth is limited.
They will need their own satellite, if they really want to compete. But that would make them iDish? hmmm
This could be very interesting. I have often wondered why all the cable companies and satellite companies are within $5 pricing difference of each other? Is this the rock bottom competitive price so they can break even or are these prices fixed?
I would love to get rid of so many commercials. I�m paying $78 a month for basic digital subscription and have to use a DVR to record programs so I can zap though the commercials.
Obviously I don�t know what the limitiatoins are here for an iCast or iDish, and anticipate something like a TiVo that can surf the web, upload video, and download HD.
ErikGrim
Apr 6, 08:50 AM
Yes, I do!
For me, TextEdit and Preview crash on launch. I suspected Dropbox 1.1.13 but killing Dropbox didn't 'cure' the crashes.
Not getting any of these at all.
For me, TextEdit and Preview crash on launch. I suspected Dropbox 1.1.13 but killing Dropbox didn't 'cure' the crashes.
Not getting any of these at all.
Kranchammer
Mar 24, 01:42 PM
Meh, yes and no. For their integrated desktops (iMac)...pws and space are certainly an issue (especially since it doesn't have an accessibly PCI E slot for heavens sake. Now for MP's on the other hand...I dont think it would be an issue: accessible PCI E slots + ample chassis space + stock PWS capable of handling an HD 5870 or Crossfired 5770's. A 6970 shouldnt be a problem.
anyways(no snarkiness implied)...who said crossfire wasnt supported? The MacPro CAN be configured with 2x5770's.
There may be space in the Macbook Pros for a non-mobile video card, but the impact to battery life would be way beyond what I think Apple would tolerate.
anyways(no snarkiness implied)...who said crossfire wasnt supported? The MacPro CAN be configured with 2x5770's.
There may be space in the Macbook Pros for a non-mobile video card, but the impact to battery life would be way beyond what I think Apple would tolerate.
Linito
Sep 6, 09:30 AM
Poop. And I was hoping for a $100 price drop.
nude Hot Models Wallpapers
indian model wallpapers
Hot celebrity and model
Victoria Secret Models Hot
Models Wallpapers
Hot Wallpapers, Hot Model
Saree Models
Hot Wallpapers, Hot Models
Super Hot Lingerie Models
cute sexy,hot,model,asian girl
gmcalpin
Jun 22, 05:25 PM
but a replacement of keyboard and mice don't think so...
I didn't say anything about replacing a keyboard and/or mouse. I'm talking about supplementing it. (You could probably replace the mouse with it, though. Lots of people are familiar with trackpads and love them. Why not?)
I already have a Wacom Cintiq in front of my keyboard. That's where most people would keep something like this.
I didn't say anything about replacing a keyboard and/or mouse. I'm talking about supplementing it. (You could probably replace the mouse with it, though. Lots of people are familiar with trackpads and love them. Why not?)
I already have a Wacom Cintiq in front of my keyboard. That's where most people would keep something like this.
Chundles
Jul 18, 08:33 AM
Yeah, and I'm not going to buy another new car until the auto manufacturers match the deal I can get with a coat hanger, screwdriver, and pair of pliers. :rolleyes:
If you're good with the pliers you won't need the screwdriver.
If you're good with the pliers you won't need the screwdriver.
rmbrown09
Mar 31, 12:30 PM
Can anyone comment on under the hood performance improvements? CPU and RAM usage at idle?
Preview 1 raped my Air
Preview 1 raped my Air
charlituna
Apr 2, 09:31 PM
I'll "believe" when they fix the currently unresolved and widespread quality control issues...light bleed on virtually every unit and blemishes, dents and scratches on units straight out of the box.
Fix those issues, Apple, and then I will "believe" enough to get an iPad 2.
Virtually every unit huh.
Well I have seen tons of postings all over about 'I got the new ipad' with no mention of said problems.
I bought one opening weekend for home use and one last week for work with nada. All nine of the cast on my current gig have problem less iPad 2s, plus the office has gotten close to 100 units all with no issues.
Perhaps by 'virtually every' you mean 'not even one percent of what has been sold' because that is probably the real number
Fix those issues, Apple, and then I will "believe" enough to get an iPad 2.
Virtually every unit huh.
Well I have seen tons of postings all over about 'I got the new ipad' with no mention of said problems.
I bought one opening weekend for home use and one last week for work with nada. All nine of the cast on my current gig have problem less iPad 2s, plus the office has gotten close to 100 units all with no issues.
Perhaps by 'virtually every' you mean 'not even one percent of what has been sold' because that is probably the real number
MarkMS
Mar 30, 09:17 PM
Don't know about you guys, but this new iCal is killing me. Just doesn't look right. :confused:
dr Dunkel
May 3, 03:06 AM
I just wish they could make open programs stay at the bar for easy access and that there would be a delete option in the right-click menu.
lilcosco08
Mar 25, 09:57 PM
Good luck performing multi-touch and gestures with buttons and joysticks. :rolleyes:
/facepalm
/facepalm
Benjy91
Mar 25, 03:55 PM
The Future of video games?
In the future, your controller will cost �400, require a 10ft HDMI cable, a �25 adapter, and have the graphics of a PS2.
In the future, your controller will cost �400, require a 10ft HDMI cable, a �25 adapter, and have the graphics of a PS2.
Porchland
Jul 19, 08:54 AM
I've watched every movie I own at least 15x, and most of them many more than that. I for one won't rent from itunes, I'd rather not is all. If they make money off of it, more power to them
I think rental is probably a bigger market, but there are plenty of people like you that want to keep the movie forever. I would like to see Apple come up with a dual model that allows you to rent a movie for 48 hours that will play on all platforms or buy the movie outright.
The PPV model for $4 a pop seems to make more sense for iTunes than the Netflix model of so many movies at a time.
I think rental is probably a bigger market, but there are plenty of people like you that want to keep the movie forever. I would like to see Apple come up with a dual model that allows you to rent a movie for 48 hours that will play on all platforms or buy the movie outright.
The PPV model for $4 a pop seems to make more sense for iTunes than the Netflix model of so many movies at a time.
wordoflife
Feb 17, 09:51 PM
Wow those are some really big speakers you have there! :eek:
Aniej
Dec 3, 03:52 AM
one thing i was wondering about the iTV is: why hasn't it got an iPod dock on top of it?!
I mean I get what you are saying, but it doesn't seem like it would be very useful for two reasons. 1. By the very nature of how iTV works, you have a Mac somewhere else in the house and therefore have a tiny, hidden out of the way docking station right there. 2. iTV should either slip seemlesly into your aray of tv components and look elegant. Slapping an ipod on it makes it look like just another charging dock station and not nearly as sleek as the houaing it is in now.
I mean I get what you are saying, but it doesn't seem like it would be very useful for two reasons. 1. By the very nature of how iTV works, you have a Mac somewhere else in the house and therefore have a tiny, hidden out of the way docking station right there. 2. iTV should either slip seemlesly into your aray of tv components and look elegant. Slapping an ipod on it makes it look like just another charging dock station and not nearly as sleek as the houaing it is in now.
jettredmont
Apr 12, 09:55 PM
Also the guy who took a nice iMovie and made it unusable. I hope he doesn't fsck up FCP. Even iMovie had background rendering until he stripped it out.
Have you used iMovie recently? In the last two releases it has moved forward by leaps and bounds (and I'm fairly certain it does background rendering of everything...) Your criticism was true of the oriinal new iMovie, but since then they've been re-adding the features on the streamlined chassis and it is a rather nice program now.
Have you used iMovie recently? In the last two releases it has moved forward by leaps and bounds (and I'm fairly certain it does background rendering of everything...) Your criticism was true of the oriinal new iMovie, but since then they've been re-adding the features on the streamlined chassis and it is a rather nice program now.
ericmooreart
Nov 28, 03:13 PM
Friend of mine at work bought the Zune. First thing that hit me was the "poop" brown color - uck. It had a rubbery feel (guess it won't slip from your hands) like the protectors you can get for the ipod. Was hard to get in and out of my back pocket due to the coating and brick thickness.
I like that it played your videos landscape, though navagation became tricky.
For all its bells and whistles I wouldn't buy it. Design matters. If it didn't i'd still be using my anti skip cd- mp3 player. I own a nano and have had every generation ipod except the first and the zune seems like the 1st generation ipod in respect to design and clunkiness. Microsoft should stick with the xbox
I like that it played your videos landscape, though navagation became tricky.
For all its bells and whistles I wouldn't buy it. Design matters. If it didn't i'd still be using my anti skip cd- mp3 player. I own a nano and have had every generation ipod except the first and the zune seems like the 1st generation ipod in respect to design and clunkiness. Microsoft should stick with the xbox
gkarris
Nov 27, 09:04 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.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
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.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
atad6
Aug 29, 11:16 AM
This is exactly what I predicted would happen when Apple went Intel. Now that Macs can be compared component for component with Wintel machines and new hardware is coming out every month, everyone is worked up about keeping up with latest thing at the best possible price and getting increasingly frustrated with Apple's unwillingness to create a product line with 10000 different machines that each compete with dollar for dollar and component for component with every other machine on the market. Meanwhile, we have people talking about $299 machines with DVD burners (AND Windows? I'd like to see THAT!).
If you're so concerned about keeping up with the Jones, just buy a Dell, already.
I find this amusing as well, all these complaints about how apple is too slow, has outdated hardware, etc etc. Now suddenly that apple's have comparable hardware suddenly they have to follow the same upgrade path as the rest of pc manufactures so they're not obsolete. Remember the g4 powerbooks? They were not only completely underpowered compared to its pc counterparts but also still ridiculously overpriced for what they were performance wise. That can be seen considering the current macbook pros have been proven to be 5x faster in some areas. Now that merom is coming out with a marginal (compared to the g4 to intel transition) 10-15% performance increase many people are complaining that the current yonah processors are just too slow. I just find this amusing considering people bought the underpowered overpriced powerbooks for so long. Apple just has a different business model, whether it is always executed properly is up for debate. They just have different priorities. Who knows when apple will put out the next revision of macbooks but if you're worring about it from a performance perspective you should probably consider buying a pc.
EDIT:
Of course I could be completely wrong and with the whole intel transition apple could put out rapid upgrades to its lines just like the rest of the pc world. I was just going with history, just because apple uses intel chips doesn't mean they'll adopt them like the other companies.
If you're so concerned about keeping up with the Jones, just buy a Dell, already.
I find this amusing as well, all these complaints about how apple is too slow, has outdated hardware, etc etc. Now suddenly that apple's have comparable hardware suddenly they have to follow the same upgrade path as the rest of pc manufactures so they're not obsolete. Remember the g4 powerbooks? They were not only completely underpowered compared to its pc counterparts but also still ridiculously overpriced for what they were performance wise. That can be seen considering the current macbook pros have been proven to be 5x faster in some areas. Now that merom is coming out with a marginal (compared to the g4 to intel transition) 10-15% performance increase many people are complaining that the current yonah processors are just too slow. I just find this amusing considering people bought the underpowered overpriced powerbooks for so long. Apple just has a different business model, whether it is always executed properly is up for debate. They just have different priorities. Who knows when apple will put out the next revision of macbooks but if you're worring about it from a performance perspective you should probably consider buying a pc.
EDIT:
Of course I could be completely wrong and with the whole intel transition apple could put out rapid upgrades to its lines just like the rest of the pc world. I was just going with history, just because apple uses intel chips doesn't mean they'll adopt them like the other companies.