UnreaL
Sep 7, 03:07 PM
I have been a Mac user since 1986. I'm not a superuser or a gamer, but the one thing I have learned is to avoid models with too much built-in obsolescence (e.g. my old firewire-less, low-resolution clamshell iBook and the late-model CD-burner-less white iBook G3 that replaced it, not to mention the Powerbook 150 [agh!], Mac Classic [aaagggh!], etc.). Except for the lack of built-in DVD capability, the lampshade 700 MHZ G4 iMac has been a great investment.
So here is my question. Are the $599 mini and $999 iMac going to become obsolete much faster than the $1199 iMac? Do the dedicated video RAM and Core 2 Duo (iMacs) make much of difference? I already have an external DVD burner and plan to buy 2GB RAM.
Actually the move to Intel has opened Apple to fast depreciation - and that isnt going away.
Many here seem to 'bitch' that Mac is now in competition with the PC in the hardware stakes and sadly that damages your resale value however the benefits are immense, I am sure Apple will be able to secure lower unit costs aswell as faster processors and newer technology. Its great for apple and for us buying, just bad if you sell hardware before it looses all value completely. It also means we will see these refreshes more often and so we will be buying more up to date hardware which as a PC user is great...
To me the move to intel has made Mac a viable option, especially given Bootcamp.
So here is my question. Are the $599 mini and $999 iMac going to become obsolete much faster than the $1199 iMac? Do the dedicated video RAM and Core 2 Duo (iMacs) make much of difference? I already have an external DVD burner and plan to buy 2GB RAM.
Actually the move to Intel has opened Apple to fast depreciation - and that isnt going away.
Many here seem to 'bitch' that Mac is now in competition with the PC in the hardware stakes and sadly that damages your resale value however the benefits are immense, I am sure Apple will be able to secure lower unit costs aswell as faster processors and newer technology. Its great for apple and for us buying, just bad if you sell hardware before it looses all value completely. It also means we will see these refreshes more often and so we will be buying more up to date hardware which as a PC user is great...
To me the move to intel has made Mac a viable option, especially given Bootcamp.
brepublican
Aug 7, 07:58 AM
When apple releases new products are they normally ready to ship that day? Hopefully they won't need to charge my card right away until they ship it at a later date...I have no money but am still gonna buy a new expensive mac pro.... :confused:
:eek:
I have no money either. Thats why I'm just going to watch, get goose bumps and feel all warm and fuzzy inside :D
:eek:
I have no money either. Thats why I'm just going to watch, get goose bumps and feel all warm and fuzzy inside :D
gorgeousninja
Apr 3, 08:18 AM
...but all the Apple apologists...so quick to jump to Apple's defense...say that there is no such problem. :D
You are dead on correct. Many people do not want to endure the wait for a new one if they return it...Many are waiting to see if Apple can resolve the issue in a future production batch. What good is exchanging if the new one is going to have the same, or worse, problem
I love Apple products but I am always entertained by the rabid zeal of the delusional Apple apologists who insist the company can do no wrong...OR...they simply ignore the common, and obvious, flaws in the Apple product they buy, trying to convince themselves that they have the only "good" one...which on some subconscious level they need to tell themselves so they can believe they are "special" somehow.
Last year during those frenzied few weeks of the iPhone4 'Antena-gate' there were literally hundreds of people like you saying that the iPhone was flawed, and that Apple were about to collapse.
The thing was, like you, the majority of posters didn't even have the product that they were moaning about, but were instead just regurgitating posts and working themselves into an unjustifiable rage.
So, until we hear from people that not only have experienced problems but also have not had Apple do something about it, then your comments will continue to be irritatingly meaningless.
You are dead on correct. Many people do not want to endure the wait for a new one if they return it...Many are waiting to see if Apple can resolve the issue in a future production batch. What good is exchanging if the new one is going to have the same, or worse, problem
I love Apple products but I am always entertained by the rabid zeal of the delusional Apple apologists who insist the company can do no wrong...OR...they simply ignore the common, and obvious, flaws in the Apple product they buy, trying to convince themselves that they have the only "good" one...which on some subconscious level they need to tell themselves so they can believe they are "special" somehow.
Last year during those frenzied few weeks of the iPhone4 'Antena-gate' there were literally hundreds of people like you saying that the iPhone was flawed, and that Apple were about to collapse.
The thing was, like you, the majority of posters didn't even have the product that they were moaning about, but were instead just regurgitating posts and working themselves into an unjustifiable rage.
So, until we hear from people that not only have experienced problems but also have not had Apple do something about it, then your comments will continue to be irritatingly meaningless.
lordonuthin
May 8, 08:08 PM
also, congrats to whiterabbit for 15 million points!
Thanks, I hope this will be my best month yet, we shall see...
Thanks, I hope this will be my best month yet, we shall see...
bketchum
Sep 1, 12:19 PM
Originally Posted by BlizzardBomb
I'm wondering if Apple would kill off the 17" if they did introduce a 23". I'm pretty sure now that the manufacturing cost difference between 17" and 20" is quite small.
I highly doubt they would killl it off. I think they'd drop the price on it which would make it even more desirable for standard consumers with a budget. Sort of a, why get the mini when I could just pay a bit more for the iMac 17" kind of thing.
And the 17-inch iMac has an important educational role, taking the place of the eMac.
I'm wondering if Apple would kill off the 17" if they did introduce a 23". I'm pretty sure now that the manufacturing cost difference between 17" and 20" is quite small.
I highly doubt they would killl it off. I think they'd drop the price on it which would make it even more desirable for standard consumers with a budget. Sort of a, why get the mini when I could just pay a bit more for the iMac 17" kind of thing.
And the 17-inch iMac has an important educational role, taking the place of the eMac.
SplinterCell
Nov 28, 12:33 PM
Heh.
Suck it, Microsoft :cool:
I watched a television show on the history of video games a couple of weeks ago. I forget what channel it was on...History or Discovery or something like that, but I specifically remember them saying that Microsoft lost a lot of money on the xbox, but that they didn't care...they just wanted to get their foot in the door.
I think it was this show:
http://games.ign.com/articles/744/744878p1.html
Just last week I was watching Larry King interview Bill Gates & one the topics was the first gen xbox & Bill Gates said they broke even on the xbox but still considered it a success because they had a good position in the market.
Suck it, Microsoft :cool:
I watched a television show on the history of video games a couple of weeks ago. I forget what channel it was on...History or Discovery or something like that, but I specifically remember them saying that Microsoft lost a lot of money on the xbox, but that they didn't care...they just wanted to get their foot in the door.
I think it was this show:
http://games.ign.com/articles/744/744878p1.html
Just last week I was watching Larry King interview Bill Gates & one the topics was the first gen xbox & Bill Gates said they broke even on the xbox but still considered it a success because they had a good position in the market.
Reventon
Nov 24, 12:42 PM
Gran Turismo 5: Collector's Edition (PSN: copenmind, if you wanna race :D ).
mogzieee
Jan 5, 04:16 PM
My car (well, when I finally pass my test) is below, the blue Nissan Micra on the far left. Not a very impressive car at all by any means, but it was seen on Top Gear a few years back (http://i53.tinypic.com/33mv0yb.png) when the boys made their electric car and took it to Oxford.
http://i54.tinypic.com/99hvma.jpg
http://i54.tinypic.com/99hvma.jpg
~Shard~
Nov 27, 01:27 PM
Digitimes does not have the best track record, so I would take this report with a grain of salt. I think a 17" display would be nice to see and that it would definitely be appealing to Mac mini owners, however I would be concerned most about the price point. 17" displays are becoming cheaper and cheaper and if Apple puts too much of a premium on this, I don't think sales will be very swift.
Of course perhaps Apple is releasing this display to complement the upcoming handheld Mac with docking station... :cool:
Of course perhaps Apple is releasing this display to complement the upcoming handheld Mac with docking station... :cool:
lordonuthin
Jan 6, 10:43 PM
mc68k
i'll be at 8 digits, not too bad. but it's really just a #. things might be changing for me for the worse WU-wise temporarily
We can't keep this pace up all the time, I will probably be forced to do the same in the summer.
great news! glad we are passing some teams!
congrats! yeah my numbers might be down a lil also in the next couple of weeks it's looking like
Hopefully we can pass another team in about 30 days or so, we'll see if we can pick up some steam from new folders.
i'll be at 8 digits, not too bad. but it's really just a #. things might be changing for me for the worse WU-wise temporarily
We can't keep this pace up all the time, I will probably be forced to do the same in the summer.
great news! glad we are passing some teams!
congrats! yeah my numbers might be down a lil also in the next couple of weeks it's looking like
Hopefully we can pass another team in about 30 days or so, we'll see if we can pick up some steam from new folders.
cleanup
Nov 23, 10:06 PM
http://att.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=261567&stc=1&d=1290568599
X-rays and casting. It counts as a purchase.
Psht. I can get that up here for free.
X-rays and casting. It counts as a purchase.
Psht. I can get that up here for free.
Agaetis Byrjun
Feb 21, 05:30 PM
It's finally all finished. Put the Craftsman tool chest in this weekend. It mostly hold cable and repair tools for guitars.
The white box on the front right leg of the desk is actually a Belkin remote. I've wired the desk so that when I hit that switch the 3 displays, audio monitors and all USB controllers will turn on.
I hate wires showing so I went to great lengths to hide them.
The white box on the front right leg of the desk is actually a Belkin remote. I've wired the desk so that when I hit that switch the 3 displays, audio monitors and all USB controllers will turn on.
I hate wires showing so I went to great lengths to hide them.
kainjow
Jul 19, 08:55 PM
Uh, I don't see how anyone can really use Netflix seriously.
With Netflix, you can't just say, "Let's watch a movie tonight." You have to plan ahead your movie schedule. Netflix will die once iTMS comes alone. It's all about instant instant instant.
I've used Movielink twice so far (Windows only), so I have some "experience" with online movie rentals. Let me tell you, it works well. And if Movielink works well for me, I'm sure iTMS will make it 10x better.
I'm pretty psyched about iTMS rentals. If Apple does it, I'll be using it all the time. It will once and for all remove the problem with Blockbuster/Netflix/etc where often the movie you want isn't available (i.e. new releases).
Also, Movielink allows you to watch the movie after only a few minutes of it loading (just like streaming), so you don't have to wait for the entire thing to download. It works pretty nice (besides the fact that you have to use it on Windows).
With Netflix, you can't just say, "Let's watch a movie tonight." You have to plan ahead your movie schedule. Netflix will die once iTMS comes alone. It's all about instant instant instant.
I've used Movielink twice so far (Windows only), so I have some "experience" with online movie rentals. Let me tell you, it works well. And if Movielink works well for me, I'm sure iTMS will make it 10x better.
I'm pretty psyched about iTMS rentals. If Apple does it, I'll be using it all the time. It will once and for all remove the problem with Blockbuster/Netflix/etc where often the movie you want isn't available (i.e. new releases).
Also, Movielink allows you to watch the movie after only a few minutes of it loading (just like streaming), so you don't have to wait for the entire thing to download. It works pretty nice (besides the fact that you have to use it on Windows).
mdntcallr
Jul 19, 05:06 PM
very cool. happy apple is financially doing great.
now if only they would come out with the new macbook pro with cooler features and the merom faster processor.
now if only they would come out with the new macbook pro with cooler features and the merom faster processor.
qualleyiv
Nov 15, 10:30 AM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
OK, I'm hardly a programmer (PHP doesn't really count) but that's the exact same description that I've heard applied to the description of what it takes to vectorize a program (i.e. make it Alti-Vec optimized) [that and the process of making loops that can be unrolled]. So I've got to ask, is there some difference between those two concepts? If not, it sure seems like we would have a lot more multi-core enabled apps out there already...
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
OK, I'm hardly a programmer (PHP doesn't really count) but that's the exact same description that I've heard applied to the description of what it takes to vectorize a program (i.e. make it Alti-Vec optimized) [that and the process of making loops that can be unrolled]. So I've got to ask, is there some difference between those two concepts? If not, it sure seems like we would have a lot more multi-core enabled apps out there already...
chrono1081
Apr 12, 10:02 PM
No, but having features like face detection does suggest that it's a 'consumer' orientated product.
Personally, I don't mind. As long as all the old multitrack features are still available (and the price significantly drops, to say, $50-$300,) then I intend to buy it.
Not necessarily. They added this to Aperture and at first I was skeptical but its actually very useful and lets me enter metadata easily and search easily. Its not perfect obviously but it takes a lot of extra work out.
Personally, I don't mind. As long as all the old multitrack features are still available (and the price significantly drops, to say, $50-$300,) then I intend to buy it.
Not necessarily. They added this to Aperture and at first I was skeptical but its actually very useful and lets me enter metadata easily and search easily. Its not perfect obviously but it takes a lot of extra work out.
quagmire
Mar 1, 01:34 PM
that the US car makers still sells trucks, pickups etc. without diesel options is simply a complete lack of any common sense. diesel engines are practically made to be perfect for pulling and towing in commercial vehicles
for it's south american Amarok pick up VW simply took the 2.0 I4 TDI from the golf/jetta and set up the engine slightly different in regards to the power/torque band and ends up with an engine which was very likely cheaper to develop, cheaper to build had less weight and still achieves 400nm of torque
GM had the 4.5 liter Duramax in development for their half-ton trucks, but the economy and their situation canned that. Ford also was working on a baby Powerstroke and Cummins was working on a baby I-6 for Dodge. But, those as well have been canned.
for it's south american Amarok pick up VW simply took the 2.0 I4 TDI from the golf/jetta and set up the engine slightly different in regards to the power/torque band and ends up with an engine which was very likely cheaper to develop, cheaper to build had less weight and still achieves 400nm of torque
GM had the 4.5 liter Duramax in development for their half-ton trucks, but the economy and their situation canned that. Ford also was working on a baby Powerstroke and Cummins was working on a baby I-6 for Dodge. But, those as well have been canned.
Mexbearpig
Nov 23, 03:03 PM
Bought a $15 iTunes gift card for my cousins birthday today.
http://www.giftcardsonlinecentral.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/Silhouette-15-iTunes-Gift-Card.jpg
http://www.giftcardsonlinecentral.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/Silhouette-15-iTunes-Gift-Card.jpg
aquajet
Sep 6, 09:22 AM
The latest pathetic Mac Mini upgrade continues to highlight the idiocy of the decision to build a cheap 'switcher' computer using expensive notebook parts.
Sometimes it's about form over function. This is nothing new for Apple.
Sometimes it's about form over function. This is nothing new for Apple.
islanders
Dec 27, 09:35 PM
I�m waiting on buying a HD DVD or BlueRay until the price comes down, so I could see iTV offering a HD alternative, and filling that niche.
Two premium channels cost $20 a month so iTV would sell you the device to steam movies, some broadcast, download like Tivo, so you wouldn�t need a Blueray or HD DVD.
What else could be practical? Of course it will have a hard drive� a cable box DVR has a hard drive.
If it also has the ability to surf the web and run a word processor, handle video from DVR and digital camera, I�ll get one�
That is if the price is about $500.
Some unanswered questions are where are they going to get the bandwidth to do all this? You will have to have a cable subscription, perhaps just a basic subscription, but even then bandwidth is limited.
They will need their own satellite, if they really want to compete. But that would make them iDish? hmmm
This could be very interesting. I have often wondered why all the cable companies and satellite companies are within $5 pricing difference of each other? Is this the rock bottom competitive price so they can break even or are these prices fixed?
I would love to get rid of so many commercials. I�m paying $78 a month for basic digital subscription and have to use a DVR to record programs so I can zap though the commercials.
Obviously I don�t know what the limitiatoins are here for an iCast or iDish, and anticipate something like a TiVo that can surf the web, upload video, and download HD.
Two premium channels cost $20 a month so iTV would sell you the device to steam movies, some broadcast, download like Tivo, so you wouldn�t need a Blueray or HD DVD.
What else could be practical? Of course it will have a hard drive� a cable box DVR has a hard drive.
If it also has the ability to surf the web and run a word processor, handle video from DVR and digital camera, I�ll get one�
That is if the price is about $500.
Some unanswered questions are where are they going to get the bandwidth to do all this? You will have to have a cable subscription, perhaps just a basic subscription, but even then bandwidth is limited.
They will need their own satellite, if they really want to compete. But that would make them iDish? hmmm
This could be very interesting. I have often wondered why all the cable companies and satellite companies are within $5 pricing difference of each other? Is this the rock bottom competitive price so they can break even or are these prices fixed?
I would love to get rid of so many commercials. I�m paying $78 a month for basic digital subscription and have to use a DVR to record programs so I can zap though the commercials.
Obviously I don�t know what the limitiatoins are here for an iCast or iDish, and anticipate something like a TiVo that can surf the web, upload video, and download HD.
cube
Mar 25, 11:40 AM
Because the Sandy Bridge IGP was not designed to do any sort of GPGPU work, point blank. We will have to wait for Ivy Bridge(next major release from Intel after Sandy Bridge) for GPGPU/OpenCL support on Intel's IGP.
The SB documentation says it supports Compute Shader 4, a subset of the DirectX 11 level Compute Shader 5.
What that means in terms of OpenCL, I don't know.
Intel said they'll continue to evaluate OpenCL during 2011.
The SB documentation says it supports Compute Shader 4, a subset of the DirectX 11 level Compute Shader 5.
What that means in terms of OpenCL, I don't know.
Intel said they'll continue to evaluate OpenCL during 2011.
heehee
Nov 24, 03:11 PM
It's not really a purchase, but I'll be flying in a Falcon 7x to HK. That's how I roll. :p
jettredmont
Apr 12, 10:25 PM
This all started just because I said I hope Final Cut doesn't turn into iMovie. Somehow that turned into iMovie is pro and Final Cut is the Model T of editing.
No, no one said iMovie was Pro. You said you didn't want FCP to take the same "backward step" iMovie did. The hue and cry here is that, where we stand now, iMovie is a far more capable editor than iMovie HD ever was, and has room to grow where iMovieHD did not. It was NOT a step backwards.
Your rebuttal has been that iMovie is not pro, but that's obvious. iMovie HD was not pro (and was significantly less capable than iMovie today is in terms of precision editing, audio work, etc).
For my hobby work (NOT pro), I went from a die-hard Final Cut Pro user (I worked for Apple and got a hell of a discount on FCStudio) to an iMovie user with the past two revs of iMovie. I tried and simply could not use iMovie HD for what I wanted to do. I hit some barriers with iMovie today, but nothing like the crap that iMovie HD and before gave me.
No, no one said iMovie was Pro. You said you didn't want FCP to take the same "backward step" iMovie did. The hue and cry here is that, where we stand now, iMovie is a far more capable editor than iMovie HD ever was, and has room to grow where iMovieHD did not. It was NOT a step backwards.
Your rebuttal has been that iMovie is not pro, but that's obvious. iMovie HD was not pro (and was significantly less capable than iMovie today is in terms of precision editing, audio work, etc).
For my hobby work (NOT pro), I went from a die-hard Final Cut Pro user (I worked for Apple and got a hell of a discount on FCStudio) to an iMovie user with the past two revs of iMovie. I tried and simply could not use iMovie HD for what I wanted to do. I hit some barriers with iMovie today, but nothing like the crap that iMovie HD and before gave me.
Lurchdubious
Nov 24, 11:13 AM
Finally ordered a programmer for my truck!
http://images.bizrate.com/resize?sq=250&uid=1880993794
http://images.bizrate.com/resize?sq=250&uid=1880993794
No comments:
Post a Comment