partyBoy
Nov 26, 02:24 AM
^^^^^Could I recommend a case for that?
Come on guys...give the guy a break,stop making fun of him...this is the case he needs.
Come on guys...give the guy a break,stop making fun of him...this is the case he needs.
Umbongo
Mar 25, 04:13 PM
Intel's TDPs are not actual power consumed. So yes, the 130 W scenario still kicks.
Correct, the power consumed is less than any of the TDP ratings.
Like I said, yes it is, but under a certain level of strain you do not want to run it. Also, we are not talking about a DIMM, we are talking about the capacity of RAM per module. It's a safe assumption to assume 20W per each 1GB of RAM. So if a module has 2GBs, then its 40 W. Now you can also say 10W, but 20W is much better for maximum scenarios. If your PSU can handle a maximum scenario it will not be strained.
No you're just overestimating the power required for the GPU and are very wrong about the memory. DDR3 is around 4-5W per DIMM, not 10W-20W per GB.
Correct, the power consumed is less than any of the TDP ratings.
Like I said, yes it is, but under a certain level of strain you do not want to run it. Also, we are not talking about a DIMM, we are talking about the capacity of RAM per module. It's a safe assumption to assume 20W per each 1GB of RAM. So if a module has 2GBs, then its 40 W. Now you can also say 10W, but 20W is much better for maximum scenarios. If your PSU can handle a maximum scenario it will not be strained.
No you're just overestimating the power required for the GPU and are very wrong about the memory. DDR3 is around 4-5W per DIMM, not 10W-20W per GB.
bedifferent
May 3, 11:37 AM
I'm not so sure that is true. I was teaching an elderly person how to drag and drop a file into a folder and the whole drag and drop concept did not seem all that easy to her�.
I once had a client I set up a Windows box for years ago call me frantically in the middle of the night because she couldn't find the "any" key to continue...
I once had a client I set up a Windows box for years ago call me frantically in the middle of the night because she couldn't find the "any" key to continue...
Doctor Q
Nov 29, 05:44 PM
As far as what's wrong with the wifi as currently done, here:
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/zune.ars/4
Actually that entire review is pretty good at covering why the current Zune is really not worth it, and why it has potential. The review complainsThe lameness of this dialogue is matched only by the lameness of Microsoft's decision not to allow retransmission. It's clear why usage rights on protected content need to expire, but why should that prevent users from sharing it with their friends? This is supposed to be viral how, exactly?If they allowed retransmissions, couldn't a pair of Zunes beam it back and forth to prevent ever reaching expiration? If they allowed retransmissions of purchased songs, how might they prevent this trick from being used to keep songs forever? Keeping a record of all previous songs, so it could recognize one it had before, and not permitting those records to be purged? Counting a retransmission as one of your three "plays"? Keeping the original expiration date, even if 2 of the 3 days had already gone by?
Another way to ask this question: If Apple decided to compete head-to-head with this feature, what should they do differently?
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/zune.ars/4
Actually that entire review is pretty good at covering why the current Zune is really not worth it, and why it has potential. The review complainsThe lameness of this dialogue is matched only by the lameness of Microsoft's decision not to allow retransmission. It's clear why usage rights on protected content need to expire, but why should that prevent users from sharing it with their friends? This is supposed to be viral how, exactly?If they allowed retransmissions, couldn't a pair of Zunes beam it back and forth to prevent ever reaching expiration? If they allowed retransmissions of purchased songs, how might they prevent this trick from being used to keep songs forever? Keeping a record of all previous songs, so it could recognize one it had before, and not permitting those records to be purged? Counting a retransmission as one of your three "plays"? Keeping the original expiration date, even if 2 of the 3 days had already gone by?
Another way to ask this question: If Apple decided to compete head-to-head with this feature, what should they do differently?
jaikob
Apr 21, 11:37 AM
Does anyone else really just not care about this? I could care less. It's not like the info is going to end up in China.
m-dogg
Sep 1, 12:19 PM
Hmph...I don't really trust masOSXrumors at all, even if they were correct on a couple things for Leopard, I think those were more just lucky guesses that lots of people were speaking upon prior to WWDC...
23" would be sweet though. I love my 20" iMac, so I can only imagine that with 3 more inches to love!
Maybe they'll just bring out the 30" Anniversary iMac with Jobs saying "Did you really think we'd just ignore our 30th this year?" Then again, maybe not.
23" would be sweet though. I love my 20" iMac, so I can only imagine that with 3 more inches to love!
Maybe they'll just bring out the 30" Anniversary iMac with Jobs saying "Did you really think we'd just ignore our 30th this year?" Then again, maybe not.
pixelvandal
Sep 6, 07:48 PM
I can not believe how long it has taken me to finally bother to register here...And it has taken the release of an iMac to do it. I have never wanted an iMac, I've always been a 'pro' user - video editor, shake operator etc. I am still perfectly happy using my G5, plenty of grunt, and to be honest - wasn't really tempted to buy a MacPro, not for a little while anyway.
Then Apple drops the 24" iMac & I'm suddenly thinking, OMG I wan't one of those, in fact i think I will 'retire' my G5 (to a render machine anyway)...then I start reading the same retarded posts about Apple not having a mid sized desktop machine, complaining that they want more hard drive bays, that they 'have' to buy an iMac as a AIO...
For god sake's wake up & smell the roses...buy the iMac, stick your existing monitor on it & have twice the desktop...Apple will never release a mid-sized tower...
Who really wants more internal drives anyway? I have no less than eight external firewire drives, I fill them up so quickly that I wouldn't want to have them internal anyway...so stop complaing and shell out for an external drive - they're much more flexible & with FW800 plenty speedy - even for HD capture.
And do we honestly need to complain about the graphics card again??? Get over it the 7600 is a fine card, after all this is a 'consumer' workstation. If you really want to stick ten drives in your machine, six video cards, 4000Gb of ram - buy a MacPro - it's what they are built for!
I realise that you can never satisfy everyone all the time, but as a loooonnnngggg time Apple user I can honestly say that Apple are providing us with plenty of options, realistically more than ever before.
PS - please stop whinging about your MB & MBP in the iMac thread, I'm sure there's more appropriate venues...
Then Apple drops the 24" iMac & I'm suddenly thinking, OMG I wan't one of those, in fact i think I will 'retire' my G5 (to a render machine anyway)...then I start reading the same retarded posts about Apple not having a mid sized desktop machine, complaining that they want more hard drive bays, that they 'have' to buy an iMac as a AIO...
For god sake's wake up & smell the roses...buy the iMac, stick your existing monitor on it & have twice the desktop...Apple will never release a mid-sized tower...
Who really wants more internal drives anyway? I have no less than eight external firewire drives, I fill them up so quickly that I wouldn't want to have them internal anyway...so stop complaing and shell out for an external drive - they're much more flexible & with FW800 plenty speedy - even for HD capture.
And do we honestly need to complain about the graphics card again??? Get over it the 7600 is a fine card, after all this is a 'consumer' workstation. If you really want to stick ten drives in your machine, six video cards, 4000Gb of ram - buy a MacPro - it's what they are built for!
I realise that you can never satisfy everyone all the time, but as a loooonnnngggg time Apple user I can honestly say that Apple are providing us with plenty of options, realistically more than ever before.
PS - please stop whinging about your MB & MBP in the iMac thread, I'm sure there's more appropriate venues...
izzle22
Aug 16, 09:39 PM
There is NO way in hell Apple will ever release anything in a country other than the USA first. So you can stop getting your hopes up. Apple is an American co. and they will release products here first such as Sony sometimes releases products first in Japan. This is just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Apple's headquarters has begun dispatching its staff to its major markets in Asia, to teach local sales how to demonstrate the new products, the sources noted.
Something about this statement means iPhone and not new iPod. Reason? The MP3 playing phones are selling very very well and Apple will have to break into a market currently dominated by Sony, Toshiba, Samsung and other Asian makers that are producing MP3 playing phones. The current Toshiba models have 2+ GB space for music. My phone can hold 250MB of music (old).
Softbank of Japan (recently bought Vodafone Japan) has been tooting the upcoming technology that they want to present to the market to take a bigger bite out of DoCoMo.
There was a rumore a few months back that the iPhone would be released first in Japan and then other places. Reason? iPod sales are falling as more Japanese want to have just one item to do phone and music. If the iPhone can do all the functions of a nano and a phone, you bet it would be a huge hit in Japan. Therefore Apple would have to dispatch lots of tech people to help get it understood not to Apple staff (like all of us...it would be a no brainer of a product) but to Softbank staff (mostly young minimally educated girls in cute uniforms).
Apple's headquarters has begun dispatching its staff to its major markets in Asia, to teach local sales how to demonstrate the new products, the sources noted.
Something about this statement means iPhone and not new iPod. Reason? The MP3 playing phones are selling very very well and Apple will have to break into a market currently dominated by Sony, Toshiba, Samsung and other Asian makers that are producing MP3 playing phones. The current Toshiba models have 2+ GB space for music. My phone can hold 250MB of music (old).
Softbank of Japan (recently bought Vodafone Japan) has been tooting the upcoming technology that they want to present to the market to take a bigger bite out of DoCoMo.
There was a rumore a few months back that the iPhone would be released first in Japan and then other places. Reason? iPod sales are falling as more Japanese want to have just one item to do phone and music. If the iPhone can do all the functions of a nano and a phone, you bet it would be a huge hit in Japan. Therefore Apple would have to dispatch lots of tech people to help get it understood not to Apple staff (like all of us...it would be a no brainer of a product) but to Softbank staff (mostly young minimally educated girls in cute uniforms).
SactoGuy18
Apr 16, 09:41 PM
While I know how to drive a car with a manual shifter, here's a BIG problem nowadays: the quality of the shifter has really gone downhill in recent years. http://www.en.kolobok.us/smiles/big_standart/negative.gif
Unless you're driving a BMW, Honda or Porsche, gear shifters on modern cars either are too "notchy" or overly-vague in terms of finding a gear, and the result is not very pleasant, especially in city driving.
Besides, automatics and dual-clutch gearboxes--thanks to modern computer controls--have gotten really good in recent years. This is especially true with automatics that sport six to eight forward gears, which allows for a lot smoother automatic shifts between gears during acceleration. I've test-driven a 2011 US-market Hyundai Elantra saloon with Hyundai's own six-speed automatic and note how smooth the shifts are even during hard acceleration.
Unless you're driving a BMW, Honda or Porsche, gear shifters on modern cars either are too "notchy" or overly-vague in terms of finding a gear, and the result is not very pleasant, especially in city driving.
Besides, automatics and dual-clutch gearboxes--thanks to modern computer controls--have gotten really good in recent years. This is especially true with automatics that sport six to eight forward gears, which allows for a lot smoother automatic shifts between gears during acceleration. I've test-driven a 2011 US-market Hyundai Elantra saloon with Hyundai's own six-speed automatic and note how smooth the shifts are even during hard acceleration.
PBF
Apr 3, 02:37 AM
- can press ctrl+up again to close Mission Control, doesnt work with ctrl-down for Expos� app windows though
That's because the 'control' button acts like a four-finger gesture. Same applies to ctrl+left arrow and ctrl+right arrow.
That's because the 'control' button acts like a four-finger gesture. Same applies to ctrl+left arrow and ctrl+right arrow.
MistaBungle
Mar 30, 09:11 PM
Full screens apps now have a transition-drop down menubar rather than one that covers up the top of the application now.
Umbongo
Mar 25, 11:40 AM
The PSU on the Mac Pro is rated for 980 W of power, but for simplicity sake let's say 1 kW. Now, factor in the Super drive, Ethernet, Airport, at least 1 HDD and peripheral docks/cards you are looking at ~100 W. Take into account a 20 W per 1GB of memory (assume 6GB) and you've got ~120 W more. So far ~ 220 W more.
DDR3 DIMMs don't consume anything like 20W each. More like 20W for the whole 6 DIMMs you are talking about.
The 6970 uses around 190W at peak load from the reviews I've seen. People already have working 6970s, GTX 480s and GTX 580s on all models of Mac Pros - under windows, but that makes no difference. The power supply is enough to run these cards.
Anyway they still don't work in OS X on the Mac Pro, despite all these news stories: http://forum.netkas.org/index.php/topic,804.0.html
DDR3 DIMMs don't consume anything like 20W each. More like 20W for the whole 6 DIMMs you are talking about.
The 6970 uses around 190W at peak load from the reviews I've seen. People already have working 6970s, GTX 480s and GTX 580s on all models of Mac Pros - under windows, but that makes no difference. The power supply is enough to run these cards.
Anyway they still don't work in OS X on the Mac Pro, despite all these news stories: http://forum.netkas.org/index.php/topic,804.0.html
MrFrankly
Oct 23, 08:12 AM
I always by my portables in America.
Don't you end up spending so much money on tax when you enter the UK again that it isn't really worth it?
Don't you end up spending so much money on tax when you enter the UK again that it isn't really worth it?
Silentwave
Aug 6, 10:12 PM
I hope this one is as fun and entertaining as MWSF 06 was, what with Paul otellini coming out in the intel bunny rabbit suit and delivering the chip so to speak :rolleyes:
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
MasonH
Apr 2, 10:38 PM
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
Every unit I've seen (admittedly only 3 friends but every one in the store) has had it. You won't notice it under bright lights... hence the "none of my office co-workers have it" or "nobody in band class" replies but if you ever watch any movies on it and have the black bars you WILL notice it. Any dark backdrop from any game or wallpaper will show it.
I've seen some with very little and some with a horrible amount of bleeding.
Best thing would be to go to the "using your iPad" forum here and see the dozen's of pics that fully show the problem.
If yours doesn't look like this or if you never have a dark pic or app on it... great!
But don't claim the issue doesn't exist... Apple's own forum has a monster thread about it and the thread here at MacRumors is HUGE :(
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
Every unit I've seen (admittedly only 3 friends but every one in the store) has had it. You won't notice it under bright lights... hence the "none of my office co-workers have it" or "nobody in band class" replies but if you ever watch any movies on it and have the black bars you WILL notice it. Any dark backdrop from any game or wallpaper will show it.
I've seen some with very little and some with a horrible amount of bleeding.
Best thing would be to go to the "using your iPad" forum here and see the dozen's of pics that fully show the problem.
If yours doesn't look like this or if you never have a dark pic or app on it... great!
But don't claim the issue doesn't exist... Apple's own forum has a monster thread about it and the thread here at MacRumors is HUGE :(
extenet
Apr 1, 02:12 PM
About this Mac or System Profiler? Refreshed About this Mac was already present in DP1. Post some screenshots.
Whoops! You were right. I assumed that when you click on more info... from about this mac it took you to system profiler like in previous OS. Didn't notice this system information app in DP1, pretty sweet :)
Whoops! You were right. I assumed that when you click on more info... from about this mac it took you to system profiler like in previous OS. Didn't notice this system information app in DP1, pretty sweet :)
ImNoSuperMan
Sep 6, 03:49 PM
It may have been introduced then, but that wasn't the last time it was refreshed . See here (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/05/20060516092750.shtml) which is actually on May 16th.
Well if you consider a minor speed bump as a refresh. In that case MBP was refreshed within 4 months of it`s launch and now it`s been 4 months since that refresh too. So MBP still is due for a refresh even if we go by your theory of refresh timings.
I know the sept 12 event might only concentrate on Movie store and maybe a new iPod. But in case MBP is not redesigned I guess they`ll do a silent upgrade within a couple of weeks.
Well if you consider a minor speed bump as a refresh. In that case MBP was refreshed within 4 months of it`s launch and now it`s been 4 months since that refresh too. So MBP still is due for a refresh even if we go by your theory of refresh timings.
I know the sept 12 event might only concentrate on Movie store and maybe a new iPod. But in case MBP is not redesigned I guess they`ll do a silent upgrade within a couple of weeks.
moneyman118
Jun 22, 11:55 AM
Could be what the magic track pad was developed for?!?
hyperpasta
Jul 18, 02:03 PM
Rentals are stupid...what if something comes up and I can't watch my movie within the alotted time? I'm just screwed, then?
Actually, other online movie rental services serve up "frozen" movies. You can keep a frozen movie for a month without it expiring. To watch it, you must "thaw" the movie. Then it expires a week later. In this way, you can download a movie when convenient and watch when convenient... not much pressure at all. Simply thaw the movie when you're ready to watch.
The only way I see this being announced at WWDC is if it ties in with Leopard's rumored BitTorrent feature. However, this doesn't make much sense, since what will Tiger/Panther/Windows users do to get movies?
Actually, other online movie rental services serve up "frozen" movies. You can keep a frozen movie for a month without it expiring. To watch it, you must "thaw" the movie. Then it expires a week later. In this way, you can download a movie when convenient and watch when convenient... not much pressure at all. Simply thaw the movie when you're ready to watch.
The only way I see this being announced at WWDC is if it ties in with Leopard's rumored BitTorrent feature. However, this doesn't make much sense, since what will Tiger/Panther/Windows users do to get movies?
evilgEEk
Sep 9, 09:04 PM
Can you put them side by side and run some comparisons?
Since I'm home for the evening and didn't see your post until now, I can't give you any specific side-by-side tests, but I can give you a rough estimate of the speeds.
Overall, the Dual G5 is faster, not by a landslide by any means, but it is faster. Of course the G5 has 1.5 gigs of RAM vs. the mini's 512K, and the G5 has a 1Ghz BUS speed vs. the 667Mhz of the mini. If I were to slap in 2 gigs of RAM in to the mini then I'm sure I would see a little more performance, but I think the G5 would still be faster.
But the mini is still very zippy, no beachballs or waiting on Apps, very fast and clean for average use. Now if I were to do some Photoshop or, say, FCP comparisons, I'm sure the G5 would clean up in those areas.
I'm really happy with the purchase though, it's perfect for what I need it to do.
Oh, I installed Windows XP via BootCamp and after having to burn an illegal copy of my legal disc (the retail disc was bad) I got it running with no problems. I must say, this mini is the fastest Windows machine I've ever had.
Since I'm home for the evening and didn't see your post until now, I can't give you any specific side-by-side tests, but I can give you a rough estimate of the speeds.
Overall, the Dual G5 is faster, not by a landslide by any means, but it is faster. Of course the G5 has 1.5 gigs of RAM vs. the mini's 512K, and the G5 has a 1Ghz BUS speed vs. the 667Mhz of the mini. If I were to slap in 2 gigs of RAM in to the mini then I'm sure I would see a little more performance, but I think the G5 would still be faster.
But the mini is still very zippy, no beachballs or waiting on Apps, very fast and clean for average use. Now if I were to do some Photoshop or, say, FCP comparisons, I'm sure the G5 would clean up in those areas.
I'm really happy with the purchase though, it's perfect for what I need it to do.
Oh, I installed Windows XP via BootCamp and after having to burn an illegal copy of my legal disc (the retail disc was bad) I got it running with no problems. I must say, this mini is the fastest Windows machine I've ever had.
jxyama
Mar 19, 05:20 PM
please dont put words in my mouth, for around $1500 i would like a G5 2.0 and a ati 9600xp or better. for $1700 give me a 9800.
sorry, no offense meant.
i think for your needs, it would be really nice if apple could somehow establish a small, niche (but still profittable) section of product lineup for people who are knowledgeable and willing to put together their own custom macs...
sorry, no offense meant.
i think for your needs, it would be really nice if apple could somehow establish a small, niche (but still profittable) section of product lineup for people who are knowledgeable and willing to put together their own custom macs...
BornAgainMac
Nov 15, 09:19 AM
I wonder how Handbrake, iDVD encoding, or Quicktime encoding will take advantage of the extra cores?
CaoCao
Mar 23, 12:19 AM
lots, Bluetooth, WIFI (for internet radio), design..
Here's my classic mockup
http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=277273&stc=1&thumb=1&d=1300734199
This is sexy. Having an iPod as a command centre utilizing airplay would return the iPod to being badass.
Here's my classic mockup
http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=277273&stc=1&thumb=1&d=1300734199
This is sexy. Having an iPod as a command centre utilizing airplay would return the iPod to being badass.
No comments:
Post a Comment