CmdrLaForge
Sep 1, 01:33 PM
That would be really great. Even so my 20" would look small then :eek:
MCIowaRulz
Apr 21, 01:47 PM
SNIP
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.5 GHz i3 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
SNIP
That is the one I'll be getting. Why an i3 SB and not an i7 SB? I don't see Apple using an i3 in anything
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.5 GHz i3 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
SNIP
That is the one I'll be getting. Why an i3 SB and not an i7 SB? I don't see Apple using an i3 in anything
ipodG8TR
Aug 17, 01:28 PM
The 1st Wave and AltNation channels are some of the biggest drivers for my iTunes purchases actually. "Oh, yeah! I remember that song back in college! [writes note on hand while swerving through traffic]"
Exactly what I do -- listen to Sirius in the car and look at the display whenever I hear a great old song or something new I like. When I get to work, I launch iTunes and add the songs to my shopping cart. Then I purchase when I get home and finish checking out this weeks new releases!
Exactly what I do -- listen to Sirius in the car and look at the display whenever I hear a great old song or something new I like. When I get to work, I launch iTunes and add the songs to my shopping cart. Then I purchase when I get home and finish checking out this weeks new releases!
BlizzardBomb
Aug 29, 09:01 AM
But this IS Apple were talking about lol. Anyway the article doesnt mention which 1.66/1.83 chips they will use.
It says Core Duo. If we were talking about Merom, it would be Core 2 Duo.
It says Core Duo. If we were talking about Merom, it would be Core 2 Duo.
skunk
Mar 27, 01:33 PM
Well some people think that's debatable ;).
It was a trap...:)
It was a trap...:)
jdl8422
Aug 24, 07:53 PM
why is the guy who first posted this rumor buying a bunch of mac minis for a server?
Counterfit
Apr 19, 02:51 AM
Read Apple's own statement and tell me where it says their computers are for everyone: *cough*Macintosh, the computer for the rest of us :D
Unspeaked
Aug 29, 12:34 PM
If the MacBook and Mini stay with core 1 CPUs, sales will grind to a halt.
I don't understand the people who say stuff like this, and HAVE been saying stuff like this for months.
Look - most of the people who buy MacBooks and Minis don't even know what type of CPU they have.
The obsessive 5% of Mac users that live their lives on MacRumors (which, admittedly, I'm a part of) will put off a purchase for months waiting for their dream processor to show up in a Stevenote.
The 95% of Mac users living in the real world go to the Apple Store and buy a computer. They don't know, nor do they care, if some new Intel processor is in the works. Heck, I bet a lot of them don't even know Apple's using Intel chips now.
I have a buddy who just bought a MacBook Pro last week. I told him the Core 2 Duos are imminent, and he didn't care.
You think the kids going to the Apple store with mom and dad, ready to buy a MacBook, are going to run to Best Buy instead to pick up an HP notebook because it has a Core 2 Duo and the MacBook has a Core Duo? I highly doubt it. In fact, it's ridiculous.
They want the MacBook because it looks cool, it's what those trendy ads talk about, it works well with their iPod, etc, etc.
Ask the majority of MacBook and Mini owners where in level of importance they place the rev of Intel processor that's inside their computer and I bet most of them give a blank stare and go, "huh?"
I don't understand the people who say stuff like this, and HAVE been saying stuff like this for months.
Look - most of the people who buy MacBooks and Minis don't even know what type of CPU they have.
The obsessive 5% of Mac users that live their lives on MacRumors (which, admittedly, I'm a part of) will put off a purchase for months waiting for their dream processor to show up in a Stevenote.
The 95% of Mac users living in the real world go to the Apple Store and buy a computer. They don't know, nor do they care, if some new Intel processor is in the works. Heck, I bet a lot of them don't even know Apple's using Intel chips now.
I have a buddy who just bought a MacBook Pro last week. I told him the Core 2 Duos are imminent, and he didn't care.
You think the kids going to the Apple store with mom and dad, ready to buy a MacBook, are going to run to Best Buy instead to pick up an HP notebook because it has a Core 2 Duo and the MacBook has a Core Duo? I highly doubt it. In fact, it's ridiculous.
They want the MacBook because it looks cool, it's what those trendy ads talk about, it works well with their iPod, etc, etc.
Ask the majority of MacBook and Mini owners where in level of importance they place the rev of Intel processor that's inside their computer and I bet most of them give a blank stare and go, "huh?"
imnotatfault
Aug 19, 07:50 AM
PSP interface is so cumbersome, though. Just have a laptop.
APPLENEWBIE
Aug 29, 05:02 PM
(Agreed. They need to get that bottom end of the price range covered so that there are options for everyone including students.)
Yes indeed. As noted above, the mac mini is a great gateway drug. It allows people to get in and experiment cheaply. That is what happened in my case. If the entry point were near $1k, I might not have switched.
Yes indeed. As noted above, the mac mini is a great gateway drug. It allows people to get in and experiment cheaply. That is what happened in my case. If the entry point were near $1k, I might not have switched.
Greebazoid
Oct 23, 08:34 AM
Am I alone in wishing there was more effort in getting universal binaries of MS Office, photoshop and all the other stuff that slows even the fastest Mac down rather than all the effort spent in playing the Speculation Game?
Yeah, probably I am.
(I love my MBPro)
Yeah, probably I am.
(I love my MBPro)
speedythecat
Oct 6, 01:23 PM
Thanks. That looks like a great case there too!
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...
LOLaMac
Mar 25, 06:38 PM
I recall some of the naysayers around here not even a year ago stating that such a device would never be suitable for gaming. And here we are. With HD output to your TV.
Vision, people. Vision.
I can hook it up to my TV and play in 1080, but....why would I want to? I watched the video on YouTube, and compared to Gran Turismo 5, F1 DiRT 2 and the upcoming Shift 2, etc, this game looks like crap. And I get to play it with no wheel or even a gamepad? Thanks, but no thanks.
Vision, people. Vision.
I can hook it up to my TV and play in 1080, but....why would I want to? I watched the video on YouTube, and compared to Gran Turismo 5, F1 DiRT 2 and the upcoming Shift 2, etc, this game looks like crap. And I get to play it with no wheel or even a gamepad? Thanks, but no thanks.
PBF
Apr 2, 11:40 PM
Actually, I'm talking about JUST the content within the window, and only Safari Fullscreen Mode can do it. I'll post a pic...
Ah, I see. Thanks for clarifying. That's new. By the way, it works from both left and right sides. Neat.
:)
Ah, I see. Thanks for clarifying. That's new. By the way, it works from both left and right sides. Neat.
:)
Blue Velvet
Mar 22, 12:23 PM
lol no, look at my previous post.
Wasn't sure, so had to ask. :)
It's such a weird notion, that people can choose their sexual orientation. But then, I don't believe that's what many really believe when they say it... instead, I get the vibe that what they mean to say is 'why can't you just closet yourself and act straight?'.
Wasn't sure, so had to ask. :)
It's such a weird notion, that people can choose their sexual orientation. But then, I don't believe that's what many really believe when they say it... instead, I get the vibe that what they mean to say is 'why can't you just closet yourself and act straight?'.
pyroza
Nov 24, 10:52 PM
In-N-Out Double Double (ketchup and mustard, no spread, no tomato, grilled onions), well done fries, and a neapolitan shake. Om nom nom :D
Play Ultimate
Sep 1, 03:00 PM
Apple used to have all-in-ones, consumer towers, pro towers, etc. Remember the PowerMac 6400? Too many products is too confusing for the consumer. If that means that a couple of people can't get the exact configuration they want, so be it.
Many of the people on this thread are too new to remember the Performa fiascos of the early 90's. More than anything, Steve simplified the computer product line into 4 distinct quadrants. The only aberration to this is the Mac Mini.
re: The iMac being more powerful than the Pro Laptop. IMO, this is a non-issue. Their respective markets are different. If somebody needs laptop, they need a laptop. And the relative processing capability of the iMac will not necesarily change that individuals mind. The true iMac and MacBook Pro competition comes from Dell,HP, etc. Apple's job is to make computers that are competitive to the marketplace and, I feel, they would be ecstatic regardless of which APPLE computer you bought.
Many of the people on this thread are too new to remember the Performa fiascos of the early 90's. More than anything, Steve simplified the computer product line into 4 distinct quadrants. The only aberration to this is the Mac Mini.
re: The iMac being more powerful than the Pro Laptop. IMO, this is a non-issue. Their respective markets are different. If somebody needs laptop, they need a laptop. And the relative processing capability of the iMac will not necesarily change that individuals mind. The true iMac and MacBook Pro competition comes from Dell,HP, etc. Apple's job is to make computers that are competitive to the marketplace and, I feel, they would be ecstatic regardless of which APPLE computer you bought.
N10248
Mar 24, 01:35 PM
But for something like the MBA, where your options are a C2D or iX CPU, and a GPU that's runs like it's 2+ years old, vs a new GPU and a newish CPU, I'll choose AMD over Intel any day of the week.
Unless Apple gets clever and uses ThunderBolt for connecting external graphics cards, after all it is a PCI-E based connector.
Edit: Travis beat me by moments
Unless Apple gets clever and uses ThunderBolt for connecting external graphics cards, after all it is a PCI-E based connector.
Edit: Travis beat me by moments
daneoni
Nov 25, 12:03 AM
Couldn't care less about the movie to be honest, but to avoid being nagged as anti-social(i am)...
Cougarcat
Apr 12, 08:42 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.
From what I understand that was Steve Job's doing. The guy made a separate simple movie app, and Jobs liked it so much he decided to make it the new iMovie.
From what I understand that was Steve Job's doing. The guy made a separate simple movie app, and Jobs liked it so much he decided to make it the new iMovie.
CrimeS
Apr 2, 10:47 PM
A really good representation of what Apple is striving to do in the "post PC" era. It's not about tech specs anymore (although those are still important things). Rather, Apple is leading in the innovation of consumer experience, which perhaps, is more essential to a product's success than simply its size, memory, screen resolution, etc. The future leaders of technology will be the ones that entice their customers through the brilliance and personal connections made with their products.
Engadget wrote a great article (http://t.co/xb4JTbZ) about this a while back, in case you're interested.
And if you're not interested, maybe you'll prefer this link instead (http://t.co/rhxOLSm). :)
Thank you for your comment! You hit the nail right on the head. Most people don't understand that simple idea.
Apple is all about the "experience."
My little nephews and nieces know how to work iPad without anyone showing them how to do it and their 2, 3, and 5 year olds.
You can have the fastest, biggest cpus and cameras but what really matters is how easy the product is to use and the experience you get from it.
Engadget wrote a great article (http://t.co/xb4JTbZ) about this a while back, in case you're interested.
And if you're not interested, maybe you'll prefer this link instead (http://t.co/rhxOLSm). :)
Thank you for your comment! You hit the nail right on the head. Most people don't understand that simple idea.
Apple is all about the "experience."
My little nephews and nieces know how to work iPad without anyone showing them how to do it and their 2, 3, and 5 year olds.
You can have the fastest, biggest cpus and cameras but what really matters is how easy the product is to use and the experience you get from it.
Flowbee
Sep 6, 06:18 PM
Yes. I want rentals. I almost never want to see the same movie again, so I won't want to store it.
Rentals are what I would use. At a sufficiently low price, of course. $2 for close to DVD quality would be OK. (I'm less picky about rental quality than purchase quality.)
I'm with you on that one. A decent rental download or on-demand service is the only thing that will get me to give up Netflix. I'm just not buying any more movies. In fact, I'm currently selling my DVD collection (http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZdz-2000QQhtZ-1).
Rentals are what I would use. At a sufficiently low price, of course. $2 for close to DVD quality would be OK. (I'm less picky about rental quality than purchase quality.)
I'm with you on that one. A decent rental download or on-demand service is the only thing that will get me to give up Netflix. I'm just not buying any more movies. In fact, I'm currently selling my DVD collection (http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZdz-2000QQhtZ-1).
critter13
Mar 25, 05:01 PM
I think this is a glimpse of what will be achievable with AirPlay technology. visible controls on the device, and maps like in this case, with the gameplay pushed to big screen thru :apple:tv2
No comments:
Post a Comment