Tmelon
Mar 31, 05:02 PM
The top of it just does not look like it was meant to be a desktop app. makes me think of all the windows software you get how they over do the look of it.
I wonder if they'll give an option to change it. Or they could possibly scrap the new look completely if all of the developers give negative feedback. It personally doesn't bother me, but I do think they could have made it look at least a bit better.
I wonder if they'll give an option to change it. Or they could possibly scrap the new look completely if all of the developers give negative feedback. It personally doesn't bother me, but I do think they could have made it look at least a bit better.
The.316
Nov 27, 08:41 AM
It was my annual Black Friday "Buy a ton of video games" day today. Most of them on sale quite a lot, so it worked out nicely. I got 6 really awesome games for just over $100....
How is Hot Pursuit? Is it open world?
SHIFT was a terrible game.
Ugh, I agree.
How is Hot Pursuit? Is it open world?
SHIFT was a terrible game.
Ugh, I agree.
d70
Jan 12, 10:51 AM
The name Air will collide with Adobe AIR ... couldn't they have chosen a better name like nano and ****? damn it. now every time I search for Adobe AIR I'll get Macbook in the search results.
Mlrollin91
Mar 25, 05:43 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I knew it didnt support mirroring but thats my bad. I have an iPad 2, but i was told at Apple the hdmi cable won't work with iPad 1. Guess they should read up a little bit.
Their retail and tech support folks are not too familiar with it yet. You have to do some reading to catch that. I tried the Digital AV Adapter with my iPad-1 and it worked for playing movies -- only problem is my HDMI TV does not support HDCP which means it registers as an unauthorized device to playback fairplay movies -- this TV was made when TV's were first starting to get 1 HDMI input -- still I think they should fix that since my Apple TV does not have a problem with that television.
Either way, since I have the Apple TV and AirPlay, I can't see using the adapter for that function.
Yeah that's the reason why I returned my cable. My TV is across the entire room. I would need a 15ft HDMI cable for it to work. But this looks pretty awesome.
I knew it didnt support mirroring but thats my bad. I have an iPad 2, but i was told at Apple the hdmi cable won't work with iPad 1. Guess they should read up a little bit.
Their retail and tech support folks are not too familiar with it yet. You have to do some reading to catch that. I tried the Digital AV Adapter with my iPad-1 and it worked for playing movies -- only problem is my HDMI TV does not support HDCP which means it registers as an unauthorized device to playback fairplay movies -- this TV was made when TV's were first starting to get 1 HDMI input -- still I think they should fix that since my Apple TV does not have a problem with that television.
Either way, since I have the Apple TV and AirPlay, I can't see using the adapter for that function.
Yeah that's the reason why I returned my cable. My TV is across the entire room. I would need a 15ft HDMI cable for it to work. But this looks pretty awesome.
moobookpro
Oct 23, 11:05 PM
yes, my macbook pro will not support 64 bit instructions. i was fully aware of that when i bought it.
leopard is confirmed to be 64 bit all the way through -ie the user interface is as well. i do agree that 64 bit GUI applications will surface but you can't say that all 32 bit machines will be massively disadvantaged and become redundant.
what you have implied is that the 64 bit thing will be so massive and make so much of a difference to your computing experience that a 64 bit notebook computer is essential.
btw - the g5 has been out for years. umm wait. it's 64 bit too :rolleyes: where are the MAINSTREAM apps that utilise the 64 bit facility of tiger??
aussie_geek
Considering we are talking about a Pro machine I hope you are not refering to "consumer" when you say "mainstream". If so, then get a clue. Fact of the matter is, 64-bit will improve the experience across the board but specifically it will aid the intended users of this machine most: pros. There is a Pro there for a reason. But I'll bite: I'm pretty sure Final Cut Pro, Aperture, Logic and Photoshop (I could go on, but to help you save face I'll stop here) are all mainstream pro apps and will all definitely benefit from having an OS built to do more than simply accomodate 64-bit, but actually utilize it properly. Not to further strike you down but the only place that 64-bit instructions are possible (at least on the Intel side) is in Unix terminal apps in Tiger at the moment. That would seem to answer your question a bit. I'm pretty sure the people that this machine is targeted towards will appreciate the benefits of 64-bit processing more than I could summarize (and way more than you could refute).
To answer someone else's question, the current Core 2 Duo processor and accompanying chipset supports EM64T enabling 64-bit processing.
leopard is confirmed to be 64 bit all the way through -ie the user interface is as well. i do agree that 64 bit GUI applications will surface but you can't say that all 32 bit machines will be massively disadvantaged and become redundant.
what you have implied is that the 64 bit thing will be so massive and make so much of a difference to your computing experience that a 64 bit notebook computer is essential.
btw - the g5 has been out for years. umm wait. it's 64 bit too :rolleyes: where are the MAINSTREAM apps that utilise the 64 bit facility of tiger??
aussie_geek
Considering we are talking about a Pro machine I hope you are not refering to "consumer" when you say "mainstream". If so, then get a clue. Fact of the matter is, 64-bit will improve the experience across the board but specifically it will aid the intended users of this machine most: pros. There is a Pro there for a reason. But I'll bite: I'm pretty sure Final Cut Pro, Aperture, Logic and Photoshop (I could go on, but to help you save face I'll stop here) are all mainstream pro apps and will all definitely benefit from having an OS built to do more than simply accomodate 64-bit, but actually utilize it properly. Not to further strike you down but the only place that 64-bit instructions are possible (at least on the Intel side) is in Unix terminal apps in Tiger at the moment. That would seem to answer your question a bit. I'm pretty sure the people that this machine is targeted towards will appreciate the benefits of 64-bit processing more than I could summarize (and way more than you could refute).
To answer someone else's question, the current Core 2 Duo processor and accompanying chipset supports EM64T enabling 64-bit processing.
AidenShaw
Nov 18, 08:50 PM
When Intel multicore processors are used (as in the Mac Pro) which support hardware virtualization, you can run software (such as Parrallels Desktop) that lets your run additional operating systems (such as Windows, Solaris, and Linux) concurrently with OSX at near full native speeds since one or more cores are used for OSX and one is used for each of the virtual operating systems.
The virtualization example is the same as your multiple application example.
Cores are not dedicated to virtual machines - each virtual machine is an application that needs to use CPU power from time to time.
With multi-core, there are more CPUs so that the VM applications can be scheduled at the same time. Just like more standard applications (or application threads) can be scheduled simultaneously.
Assigning processors to specific applications is almost always a bad idea. It is better to let the operating system schedule any thread that needs CPU on any idle CPU in a multi-CPU (multi-core) system.
The virtualization example is the same as your multiple application example.
Cores are not dedicated to virtual machines - each virtual machine is an application that needs to use CPU power from time to time.
With multi-core, there are more CPUs so that the VM applications can be scheduled at the same time. Just like more standard applications (or application threads) can be scheduled simultaneously.
Assigning processors to specific applications is almost always a bad idea. It is better to let the operating system schedule any thread that needs CPU on any idle CPU in a multi-CPU (multi-core) system.
Lollypop
Aug 7, 01:46 AM
Maybe Xcode 3 or something will be heavily promoted.
I know I personally would love better SOAP integration with XCode. We use .NET at work all the time to write web services, and we end up using .NET clients running under parallels on our macs, because keeping the SOAP proxy stub code up-to-date is automatic with .NET....you have to go thru hell with Xcode. I think Apple will fill that gap with the new xcode (there were command line tools in the latest version).
I use to know my development talk, but not having done any coding in a few years my reaction to what you just said was: hu? :D
Obviously we will have the resolution independance in OS X 10.5. Probably some new security and new workgroup/networking enhancements. We probably can all agree one would be networked spotlight, if you are running 10.5 servers, the clients will ask the server to search its spotlight data for the same data the client is searching for, and give a combined response.....its the one thing of OS X Tiger I hated, the inability to search the network with the same ease.
I would love easier active directory integration, in windows is very easy, but doing it on a mac is a bit to much! Would like network spotlight without needing 10.5 server, in the home environment I can definately see the use for network search, but definately no 10.5 server!
We may also see a system wide Software Update now, which would really be nice. Letting 3rd party developers update their software with the same system.
Totally agreed, and with that rumored birrent support as well!
I'd also expect major updates to iChat.... probably MSN and Yahoo support, as well as VoIP.
iChat needs a upgrade, the only reason I ever use it is because Aduim doesnt do video!
edit: fixed spelling
I know I personally would love better SOAP integration with XCode. We use .NET at work all the time to write web services, and we end up using .NET clients running under parallels on our macs, because keeping the SOAP proxy stub code up-to-date is automatic with .NET....you have to go thru hell with Xcode. I think Apple will fill that gap with the new xcode (there were command line tools in the latest version).
I use to know my development talk, but not having done any coding in a few years my reaction to what you just said was: hu? :D
Obviously we will have the resolution independance in OS X 10.5. Probably some new security and new workgroup/networking enhancements. We probably can all agree one would be networked spotlight, if you are running 10.5 servers, the clients will ask the server to search its spotlight data for the same data the client is searching for, and give a combined response.....its the one thing of OS X Tiger I hated, the inability to search the network with the same ease.
I would love easier active directory integration, in windows is very easy, but doing it on a mac is a bit to much! Would like network spotlight without needing 10.5 server, in the home environment I can definately see the use for network search, but definately no 10.5 server!
We may also see a system wide Software Update now, which would really be nice. Letting 3rd party developers update their software with the same system.
Totally agreed, and with that rumored birrent support as well!
I'd also expect major updates to iChat.... probably MSN and Yahoo support, as well as VoIP.
iChat needs a upgrade, the only reason I ever use it is because Aduim doesnt do video!
edit: fixed spelling
Alistair.nz
Apr 21, 08:51 PM
Hi, i'm probably pushing my luck by asking this but, i was wondering if anyone knew how long after the U.S. release the rest of the world gets the imac released?
I realise there is no set U.S release date at the moment, but judging from past releases will it be staggered like the iPad 2 or will it be released simultaneously across the world?
Cheers
I realise there is no set U.S release date at the moment, but judging from past releases will it be staggered like the iPad 2 or will it be released simultaneously across the world?
Cheers
ezekielrage_99
Aug 31, 01:02 AM
I can see that dropping the Core Solo happening because for a little extra you can get a Core Duo.
MythicFrost
Mar 26, 03:28 AM
iPad 1 does not support HDMI out, so I'm assuming no, it doesn't work.
Last time I checked, the accessory worked with iPad 1 at 720p.
Last time I checked, the accessory worked with iPad 1 at 720p.
NebulaClash
Sep 14, 10:37 AM
I think it's a fair question to ask as well. Since all phones have this issue to one degree or another, why is it Apple who got singled out? Because they are the mindshare leaders. If you are Greenpeace and you want to get publicity, call out Apple. If you are Consumer Reports and you want headlines, call out Apple.
When the iPhone 5 comes out, I guarantee there will be stories published about signal issues with it. It's now the standard playbook to use against Apple, and the media goes along with it.
I'm a Consumer Reports subscriber, but I know their tech coverage is spotty at best. Sometimes it's laughably wrong. And too many people take their word as gospel instead of just one more useful data point. Heh, it's funny but as this thread is developing I just got a subscriber email from them asking for a $26 donation to them so they can continue to buy the products they test. I'll pay them $26 because I believe in their non-advertiser supported model.
But I wish they would not feed the anti-Apple FUD playbook. Yes, Apple absolutely should be called out for a design flaw, one that they are going to fix, but let's not blow it out of proportion the way it was. And let's not be hypocritical and call out Apple while giving a pass to everyone else with similar issues. That's the problem I'm focusing on.
When the iPhone 5 comes out, I guarantee there will be stories published about signal issues with it. It's now the standard playbook to use against Apple, and the media goes along with it.
I'm a Consumer Reports subscriber, but I know their tech coverage is spotty at best. Sometimes it's laughably wrong. And too many people take their word as gospel instead of just one more useful data point. Heh, it's funny but as this thread is developing I just got a subscriber email from them asking for a $26 donation to them so they can continue to buy the products they test. I'll pay them $26 because I believe in their non-advertiser supported model.
But I wish they would not feed the anti-Apple FUD playbook. Yes, Apple absolutely should be called out for a design flaw, one that they are going to fix, but let's not blow it out of proportion the way it was. And let's not be hypocritical and call out Apple while giving a pass to everyone else with similar issues. That's the problem I'm focusing on.
gorgeousninja
Apr 2, 07:58 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.
just because you have no idea what you're talking about doesn't mean you need to show that ignorance to everyone else...
Fix those issues, Apple, and then I will "believe" enough to get an iPad 2.
just because you have no idea what you're talking about doesn't mean you need to show that ignorance to everyone else...
twoodcc
Dec 21, 11:27 PM
well i finally got 2 million now. i started this thread on 10/4/2009. today is 11/26/2009. so what is that, 53 days? considering how long it took for me to get to 1 million to begin with, i'm pretty happy with that
well today (12.22.09) i hit 3 million. so that was only like 27 days for the last million. i'm happy with that. just gotta keep it going
also, congrats to lyzardking for 5 million points also!
well today (12.22.09) i hit 3 million. so that was only like 27 days for the last million. i'm happy with that. just gotta keep it going
also, congrats to lyzardking for 5 million points also!
gldfsh419
Jan 1, 07:39 PM
So let's say that Steve announces iLife 07 and a release date for Leopard...
If I buy a new MacBook Pro on January 10, is it possible that either of those items might be a free "upgrade" or add-on once they're available? I'm trying to remember how that's worked in the past, but I just can't recall.
Can anyone help me out?
If I buy a new MacBook Pro on January 10, is it possible that either of those items might be a free "upgrade" or add-on once they're available? I'm trying to remember how that's worked in the past, but I just can't recall.
Can anyone help me out?
kjr39
Oct 23, 06:52 AM
Sigh.
Okay fine, I guess I'll buy one of these new fancy MBP with a C2D processor instead of continuing to wait for the 12" G5 PB...
Okay fine, I guess I'll buy one of these new fancy MBP with a C2D processor instead of continuing to wait for the 12" G5 PB...
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
antster94
Mar 19, 05:52 PM
I like how you spelt Libya wrong.
ddrueckhammer
Jul 18, 09:48 AM
This might get me to drop Netflix if it
1. Is $3.99 or less for downloads (the cost of a new Blockbuster rental).
2. Movies are at least DVD quality.
3. Can be played via a Mac Mini or Airport Express AV hooked up to my TV.
I would like to see bittorrent technology used to help cut the bandwidth costs for Apple and a queue system which automatically downloads the next movie in your queue and then deletes it at a specified time after you have played it. I will support this because if it works out then Apple will have the leverage to put $9.99 to keep movies on the store and I can still buy what I want for under $15 total after the rental.
As for people not wanting to store large videos on their hard drives, it is the 21st century. I have 1/2 Terrabyte of storage in external hard drives. So do many others and that's alot of storage for DVD quality films. I just read an article the other day about some disk format that is being developed at Harvard that will hold 50Tb! Storage isn't an issue and I can see many people having media servers instead of DVD/CD collections in their homes in the future.
1. Is $3.99 or less for downloads (the cost of a new Blockbuster rental).
2. Movies are at least DVD quality.
3. Can be played via a Mac Mini or Airport Express AV hooked up to my TV.
I would like to see bittorrent technology used to help cut the bandwidth costs for Apple and a queue system which automatically downloads the next movie in your queue and then deletes it at a specified time after you have played it. I will support this because if it works out then Apple will have the leverage to put $9.99 to keep movies on the store and I can still buy what I want for under $15 total after the rental.
As for people not wanting to store large videos on their hard drives, it is the 21st century. I have 1/2 Terrabyte of storage in external hard drives. So do many others and that's alot of storage for DVD quality films. I just read an article the other day about some disk format that is being developed at Harvard that will hold 50Tb! Storage isn't an issue and I can see many people having media servers instead of DVD/CD collections in their homes in the future.
Daveoc64
Mar 23, 07:13 PM
As far as I know there's three rules that have to be followed when designing an iOS app.
1. No porn
2. no flash
3. it has to be approved.
I really dont' think that's too much to ask.... especially since Apple has complete ownership of the app store. Nbody's forcing you to get their procuts... If you dont' like it, buy an Android phone.
That wouldn't be too much to ask, but there are dozens of other restrictions.
1. No porn
2. no flash
3. it has to be approved.
I really dont' think that's too much to ask.... especially since Apple has complete ownership of the app store. Nbody's forcing you to get their procuts... If you dont' like it, buy an Android phone.
That wouldn't be too much to ask, but there are dozens of other restrictions.
bigpics
Mar 24, 02:27 PM
My problem ... is that then you've been set up for the next decrease in quality, and the one after that, and the one after that. Eventually you're buying 128,000 bps tracks and making fun of "audiophiles" who can tell the difference, and then one of the true triumphs of 20th Century technology—really good audio reproduction—is lost.
Video that can't be told from the real thing is never going to happen in my lifetime, but with sound we were there—and then threw it away!
All of what you said! Especially the part quoted -and the true nut of it that I took the liberty of bolding. The "dumbing down" of our ears continues apace.
And I forgot to mention things like what (even "HD") radio stations are doing to the signal - e.g., compressing nearly all popular music to a 20 db maximum dynamic range, and in some cases even speeding up the play (while "correcting" for frequency), allowing a better fit with their commercial breaks.
Video that can't be told from the real thing is never going to happen in my lifetime, but with sound we were there—and then threw it away!
All of what you said! Especially the part quoted -and the true nut of it that I took the liberty of bolding. The "dumbing down" of our ears continues apace.
And I forgot to mention things like what (even "HD") radio stations are doing to the signal - e.g., compressing nearly all popular music to a 20 db maximum dynamic range, and in some cases even speeding up the play (while "correcting" for frequency), allowing a better fit with their commercial breaks.
Apple OC
Mar 19, 03:45 PM
Is it me, or does war seem kind of rediculous now. :cool:
I mean, I understand the need for "non occupational forces", but this is getting kind of rediculous. It almost seems like it's almost a capitalist motive to demonstrate weapons for sale at every opportunity. :D
I am a bit suprised the Mods let you start such an Anti-American thread title ..."U.S. will use Lybia as aerial target practice"
This is not about the USA ... this is about the UN Security Council deciding to stop a Dictator like Gaddafi from forcing his will on the people of Lybia.
The USA is only one of 10 countries that approved this decision.
Those with knowledge of this situation will agree that sometimes people need protection from thugs like Gaddafi who tell his people "there will be no mercy" and fire weapons upon them for the sole reason of staying in power.
where many others in this thread just want to chirp more "Ridiculous" Anti-American crap.
I mean, I understand the need for "non occupational forces", but this is getting kind of rediculous. It almost seems like it's almost a capitalist motive to demonstrate weapons for sale at every opportunity. :D
I am a bit suprised the Mods let you start such an Anti-American thread title ..."U.S. will use Lybia as aerial target practice"
This is not about the USA ... this is about the UN Security Council deciding to stop a Dictator like Gaddafi from forcing his will on the people of Lybia.
The USA is only one of 10 countries that approved this decision.
Those with knowledge of this situation will agree that sometimes people need protection from thugs like Gaddafi who tell his people "there will be no mercy" and fire weapons upon them for the sole reason of staying in power.
where many others in this thread just want to chirp more "Ridiculous" Anti-American crap.
NebulaClash
Sep 15, 09:38 AM
Not all auto recalls are for safety issues. The point is Apple DID NOT FIX the issue with the new iPhone's they are selling, again something automobile manufactures are expected to do regardless of it is a safety issue or not. It doesn't matter how many or few people have the issue, the issue exists and they did not issue a permanent, non-interactive and satisfactory fix for CR's to recommend the product.
I have the issue as the signal in my area from AT&T sucks. I'm fine with using a case as I planned on using one anyway. But if someone in my area wanted an iPhone 4 and does like or want a case, then I wouldn't recommend it to them.
And I would recommend the iPhone 4 to everyone I know, almost all of whom use a case no matter what phone they have.
Let's drop the car analogy, it's causing more trouble than my point is worth. Apple did not fix the issue YET, but they said they would. What would you have them do in the meantime? What would CR have them do? No doubt a product recall which would be silly overkill. Apple's solution is simple, free, and easy.
I have the issue as the signal in my area from AT&T sucks. I'm fine with using a case as I planned on using one anyway. But if someone in my area wanted an iPhone 4 and does like or want a case, then I wouldn't recommend it to them.
And I would recommend the iPhone 4 to everyone I know, almost all of whom use a case no matter what phone they have.
Let's drop the car analogy, it's causing more trouble than my point is worth. Apple did not fix the issue YET, but they said they would. What would you have them do in the meantime? What would CR have them do? No doubt a product recall which would be silly overkill. Apple's solution is simple, free, and easy.
Travis Bickle
Mar 24, 01:34 PM
Probably a daft question but i'll ask anyhows so forgive my techie noobness!
With the advent of thunderbolt and its high bandwidth, will it possible for a gfx card to be sited externally in some kind of cradle and be used as the main gfx card or wouldn't the internal "plumbing" allow it to happen ?
/noob mode off
;)
With the advent of thunderbolt and its high bandwidth, will it possible for a gfx card to be sited externally in some kind of cradle and be used as the main gfx card or wouldn't the internal "plumbing" allow it to happen ?
/noob mode off
;)
DStaal
Sep 7, 11:34 AM
On the rental vs. purchase argument...
I'm not going to touch which one is 'better' for videos at the moment. I have opinions, but nevermind.
Let's work on the technolocial aspects for a moment, shall we?
Rental requires working DRM. Period. Absolutely. Otherwise there is no way for it to be just rental: you have the file, you can watch it whenever.
Purchase doesn't. You get the file, you can use forever, because you own it.
There is no unbreakable DRM scheme. It doesn't exist today, it probably never will. This is because you, the consumer, are required to be able to decrypt the files sometimes but not others. Which means you have all the info needed to decrypt it. Which means, sooner or later, that someone will figure out how to access that info when they want to, not when the software wants to.
So, Apple requiring a purchase model is just recognizing the limitations of the technology. They have nothing they can 'take back' at the end of a rental period, and it is no cheaper (it's actually more expensive) for them to rent something to you.
There is an apparent temporary advantage to the rental model to the movie studios, since they can charge you multiple times for the same movie. It costs Apple just as much to 'rent' you a movie or sell it to you, so Apple has no advantage, and you get the same file either way.
If you don't want to keep it, just throw it out. Same difference. The rest is pricing games.
I'm not going to touch which one is 'better' for videos at the moment. I have opinions, but nevermind.
Let's work on the technolocial aspects for a moment, shall we?
Rental requires working DRM. Period. Absolutely. Otherwise there is no way for it to be just rental: you have the file, you can watch it whenever.
Purchase doesn't. You get the file, you can use forever, because you own it.
There is no unbreakable DRM scheme. It doesn't exist today, it probably never will. This is because you, the consumer, are required to be able to decrypt the files sometimes but not others. Which means you have all the info needed to decrypt it. Which means, sooner or later, that someone will figure out how to access that info when they want to, not when the software wants to.
So, Apple requiring a purchase model is just recognizing the limitations of the technology. They have nothing they can 'take back' at the end of a rental period, and it is no cheaper (it's actually more expensive) for them to rent something to you.
There is an apparent temporary advantage to the rental model to the movie studios, since they can charge you multiple times for the same movie. It costs Apple just as much to 'rent' you a movie or sell it to you, so Apple has no advantage, and you get the same file either way.
If you don't want to keep it, just throw it out. Same difference. The rest is pricing games.