ckodonnell
Sep 1, 01:40 PM
While I agree conroe would be a better choice, Merom is a Core 2 Duo chip as well.
But, how about the processors? Apple needs to have a Core 2 (Conroe not Merom) inside the imac. The imac is not a conventionally size desktop (not as much room inside as a tower) but Apple can not continue to use a laptop processor in the imac. If they do, then how will the Conroe be used in Apple's line up? In a Mac tower? I don't think so. Surely, a 23" iMac could house the Conroe suitably?
But, how about the processors? Apple needs to have a Core 2 (Conroe not Merom) inside the imac. The imac is not a conventionally size desktop (not as much room inside as a tower) but Apple can not continue to use a laptop processor in the imac. If they do, then how will the Conroe be used in Apple's line up? In a Mac tower? I don't think so. Surely, a 23" iMac could house the Conroe suitably?
Clive At Five
Nov 28, 02:15 PM
Because they fear the iPod... and its ecosystem...
This is key for sure. The success of the iPod is directly attributed to its integrated "ecosystem" as you put it. iTS, iTunes, iPod.
Slowly but surely, with movies, photos and games - and MUCH talk of cell phone syncing with iCal, Address Book and iApps - Apple is attempting to tie iLife & OS X into the equation... making it a critical and integral part of that ecosystem.
If people wanted the full iPod experience, they NEEDED iTunes... so they adopted it. In the future, with product XYZ, people will NEED OS X for the full experience... and they will adopt it.
THAT is what MS fears about Apple/iPod. They could give a rat's ass about the portable music/media market. They just want desperately to kill the iPod and what it means for MS's future.
In my opinion, they should've undersold by $50+/unit. At their current rate, they'll never penetrate the market.
-Clive
This is key for sure. The success of the iPod is directly attributed to its integrated "ecosystem" as you put it. iTS, iTunes, iPod.
Slowly but surely, with movies, photos and games - and MUCH talk of cell phone syncing with iCal, Address Book and iApps - Apple is attempting to tie iLife & OS X into the equation... making it a critical and integral part of that ecosystem.
If people wanted the full iPod experience, they NEEDED iTunes... so they adopted it. In the future, with product XYZ, people will NEED OS X for the full experience... and they will adopt it.
THAT is what MS fears about Apple/iPod. They could give a rat's ass about the portable music/media market. They just want desperately to kill the iPod and what it means for MS's future.
In my opinion, they should've undersold by $50+/unit. At their current rate, they'll never penetrate the market.
-Clive
CQd44
Mar 27, 10:54 AM
I don't think touchscreen games/consoles could ever completely replace traditional ones. A separate market, yeah, sure. But button-and-joystick consoles won't be going anywhere anytime soon.
Also, every time LTD posts I have a hard time discerning if he's trolling or not.
Also, every time LTD posts I have a hard time discerning if he's trolling or not.
NathanMuir
Mar 21, 06:13 PM
Perhaps square miles would be a more useful measure. ;)
A simple omission of single word qualifies the person(s) as 'illiterate'?
BFD. :rolleyes:
A simple omission of single word qualifies the person(s) as 'illiterate'?
BFD. :rolleyes:
brepublican
Aug 29, 11:09 AM
If the MacBook and Mini stay with core 1 CPUs, sales will grind to a halt.
True. This alleged upgrade is not enough to make me wanna go for a mini. I'm waiting for Meroms in the iMacs before I even begin to think about upgrading
True. This alleged upgrade is not enough to make me wanna go for a mini. I'm waiting for Meroms in the iMacs before I even begin to think about upgrading
gburnham
Mar 31, 07:48 PM
Safari in fullscreen ignores the cmd+L hotkey for jumping to the address bar. That is a pretty huge bug for me... Pretty much removes my ability to use Safari fullscreen. I'm sure they'll catch that quick.
Also, I don't see an option to always show tabs while in fullscreen mode. They hide unless you mouseover the address bar, which makes tab management in fullscreen a little bit inconvenient. A setting for that would be nice to see added before release!
Finder also seems to occasionally not respond to mouse clicks when it is in the background. I have to activate it from the dock icon before it will respond. That has only happened once or twice though.
That said, everything seems much smoother (not sure about faster, but definitely smoother) and the bugs I have seen have been relatively minor. This should be a pretty awesome OS if I can train myself to use some of the new features/gestures.
Also, I don't see an option to always show tabs while in fullscreen mode. They hide unless you mouseover the address bar, which makes tab management in fullscreen a little bit inconvenient. A setting for that would be nice to see added before release!
Finder also seems to occasionally not respond to mouse clicks when it is in the background. I have to activate it from the dock icon before it will respond. That has only happened once or twice though.
That said, everything seems much smoother (not sure about faster, but definitely smoother) and the bugs I have seen have been relatively minor. This should be a pretty awesome OS if I can train myself to use some of the new features/gestures.
skunk
Mar 31, 01:11 PM
Well regarding defeating the Nazi's and the Axis powers, one can credit the US to turning the tide. When the Nazis like practically conquered everyone in their path and are invading the UK, the Brits had to transfer a lot of technologies they made for the war to the US...where the US industrial might pretty much defined what we know today as "air dominance". Even though the Brits did make a lot of neat weapons (as traditional to their roots), the US was the one who turned those into massive amounts of airplanes, carriers, and sophisticated radars for killing Nazi and Japanese air planes and submarines.
So I mean, without the Brits, the US might not have been able to make all those toys so fast, but without the US, the Brits would have fell. But in retrospect, I feel that the Allies would have won anyway...just that it would have ended with many more atomic bombs dropped all over the place by the US.Probably the most idiotic analysis of WW2 I have ever read. I await with interest to hear where and when the Germans invaded.
So I mean, without the Brits, the US might not have been able to make all those toys so fast, but without the US, the Brits would have fell. But in retrospect, I feel that the Allies would have won anyway...just that it would have ended with many more atomic bombs dropped all over the place by the US.Probably the most idiotic analysis of WW2 I have ever read. I await with interest to hear where and when the Germans invaded.
JRM PowerPod
Aug 7, 05:16 AM
Hahah bloody arrogant Australian.
YOU'RE STILL A COLONY OF SHEEP SHAGGERS! :D
Thats interesting coming from a New Zealander. Very interesting
You have to remember that you are a nation of Australian wannabes
YOU'RE STILL A COLONY OF SHEEP SHAGGERS! :D
Thats interesting coming from a New Zealander. Very interesting
You have to remember that you are a nation of Australian wannabes
medazinol
Nov 29, 04:36 PM
Like everyone else, I've seen the pictures of the back of the iTV (no video in ports) but I'd really like to able to record on this puppy.
I'll still buy one because I have tons of video I'd rather watch on my plasma pulled from my iMac rather than wasting CDs and DVDs. Sorry but my XBOX 360 limitation to WMV streaming via Conenect360 just doesn't cut it...
I'll still buy one because I have tons of video I'd rather watch on my plasma pulled from my iMac rather than wasting CDs and DVDs. Sorry but my XBOX 360 limitation to WMV streaming via Conenect360 just doesn't cut it...
nagromme
Sep 14, 11:57 AM
Consumer Reports is making five mistakes:
1. Not doing full-scale testing of the kind antenna engineers have called them out on. They’ve done informal testing—quick and easy, but not the full useful facts their readers deserve. Yes, that kind of testing would need some really expensive facilities and lots of time. So they should at least point out that their tests are very limited and may be misleading.
2. Not publishing stats on how many users actually lose calls over this. They do surveys all the time—how about one comparing the iPhone 4 to other phones in actual use? (Most of the iPhone 4 antenna complaints seem to come from people who don’t own one!)
3. Criticizing only the iPhone, not other phones, for losing signal when gripped wrong. (Which all phones clearly do. Some more, some less. Many of them tell you right in the manual not to “hold it that way!")
4. Exaggerating the problem. Putting a very rare and minor issue, that affects so few, ahead of so many positives that affect everyone: benefits no other phone can touch. How are their flaws (which no case can fix) vs. the iPhone acceptable? And does CR clearly state that they DO recommend the iPhone for case users—which is a huge (maybe the largest) group of phone users?
5. Standing on their ego (or worrying misguidedly about their reputation) and not refining their position when that is clearly called for. Black-and-white controversial simplicity sells mindshare and magazines. But it doesn’t reflect reality, and CR readers deserve better. CR should be willing to back down when they’ve gone too far. Example: “The iPhone 4’s antenna flaws are rarely an issue and it’s the best smartphone we reviewed. But because we don’t know what each buyer will experience, we are only able to fully recommend the iPhone 4 if you also use a case. Luckily, Apple will continue to supply one free of charge on request, so this antenna issue need not affect your calls nor your wallet."
I only trust CR’s large-scale survey data (they seem to be good at that) not their editorial content. They’ve consitently failed to note Apple’s legitimate strengths over the years (ever see an article helping the everyday buyer choose between OS X and Windows?) but never fail to make something out the negatives. That’s not helping an uninformed reader become informed. And it really does seem like an anti-Apple bias sometimes.
That is precisely what auto manufacturers do. They send a letter to every owner, and fix the problem, whether or not the owner has reported it.
And that kind of preventive mass action makes sense for a product that holds peoples’ lives in its hands every moment of use.
It’s absurd to suggest that Apple should “fix” a problem as though it were widespread, when it’s not. Fixing it when it IS a problem is all that is necessary. And then let the non-iPhone users continue to moan about how bad Apple is treating us contented iPhone users :D They believe a blog wildfire over actual user experience—or at least they enjoy fanning the wildfire?
1. Not doing full-scale testing of the kind antenna engineers have called them out on. They’ve done informal testing—quick and easy, but not the full useful facts their readers deserve. Yes, that kind of testing would need some really expensive facilities and lots of time. So they should at least point out that their tests are very limited and may be misleading.
2. Not publishing stats on how many users actually lose calls over this. They do surveys all the time—how about one comparing the iPhone 4 to other phones in actual use? (Most of the iPhone 4 antenna complaints seem to come from people who don’t own one!)
3. Criticizing only the iPhone, not other phones, for losing signal when gripped wrong. (Which all phones clearly do. Some more, some less. Many of them tell you right in the manual not to “hold it that way!")
4. Exaggerating the problem. Putting a very rare and minor issue, that affects so few, ahead of so many positives that affect everyone: benefits no other phone can touch. How are their flaws (which no case can fix) vs. the iPhone acceptable? And does CR clearly state that they DO recommend the iPhone for case users—which is a huge (maybe the largest) group of phone users?
5. Standing on their ego (or worrying misguidedly about their reputation) and not refining their position when that is clearly called for. Black-and-white controversial simplicity sells mindshare and magazines. But it doesn’t reflect reality, and CR readers deserve better. CR should be willing to back down when they’ve gone too far. Example: “The iPhone 4’s antenna flaws are rarely an issue and it’s the best smartphone we reviewed. But because we don’t know what each buyer will experience, we are only able to fully recommend the iPhone 4 if you also use a case. Luckily, Apple will continue to supply one free of charge on request, so this antenna issue need not affect your calls nor your wallet."
I only trust CR’s large-scale survey data (they seem to be good at that) not their editorial content. They’ve consitently failed to note Apple’s legitimate strengths over the years (ever see an article helping the everyday buyer choose between OS X and Windows?) but never fail to make something out the negatives. That’s not helping an uninformed reader become informed. And it really does seem like an anti-Apple bias sometimes.
That is precisely what auto manufacturers do. They send a letter to every owner, and fix the problem, whether or not the owner has reported it.
And that kind of preventive mass action makes sense for a product that holds peoples’ lives in its hands every moment of use.
It’s absurd to suggest that Apple should “fix” a problem as though it were widespread, when it’s not. Fixing it when it IS a problem is all that is necessary. And then let the non-iPhone users continue to moan about how bad Apple is treating us contented iPhone users :D They believe a blog wildfire over actual user experience—or at least they enjoy fanning the wildfire?
ezekielrage_99
Jul 14, 06:55 AM
If Apple introduces Blu Ray products will it be standard high end (Mac Pro, MacBook Pro) or BTO?
Porchland
Sep 8, 03:30 PM
We'll I guess you guys are right about getting a new streaming airport... looks like the wait time is back up from 24hours to 1-3 WEEKS WEEEEHOOOOOO!!!!!
Airport Express still shows available within 24 hours, so looks like Extreme is getting updated but Express is not.
Airport Express still shows available within 24 hours, so looks like Extreme is getting updated but Express is not.
kadajawi
Sep 7, 05:56 AM
"Sin City was 40 million, Renaissance 14 million �, A Scanner Darkly 8.5 millions"
These were cheaper because they relied on digital effects to make a visual impression, rather than a couple hundred tons of actual explosives blowing up a genuine Boieng 747 as you might have in a Hollywood blockbuster.
Good to see you mentioned 2046. Great movie ^^ Wong Kar-Wai is awesome.
Right, but there were tons of artists working on the overpainting of A Scanner Darkly. And they don't blow up 747 anymore... they did such things with Tora! Tora! Tora! and other old movies, but today there is a lot of CGI involved. Remember Batman Begins and how proud they were that the car scene was without any CGI?
Initial D had a tiny budget compared to The Fast and the Furious I and II, yet it had great car scenes with lots of drifting and a nice story. I thought it was by far superior to the Fast ... movies, and it's far more stylish. But it had the Infernal Affairs directors, so that's pretty obvious.
I think big budget today means the studios think it appeals to the masses. They will try to put in a star not for the acting talent or because the star fits in the role best, but because of the name and the promo. They movie will be made for the mainstream, so there will be a bit of a love story, some action scenes, or just some obscene humor. Maybe a remake. And don't experiment. Shouldn't be intellectually challenging. Boring!
Yeah, Wong Kar-Wai is awesome, though I prefer his Chungking Express. Dunno how the budget was on that one, but I'd guess pretty much non existant.
These were cheaper because they relied on digital effects to make a visual impression, rather than a couple hundred tons of actual explosives blowing up a genuine Boieng 747 as you might have in a Hollywood blockbuster.
Good to see you mentioned 2046. Great movie ^^ Wong Kar-Wai is awesome.
Right, but there were tons of artists working on the overpainting of A Scanner Darkly. And they don't blow up 747 anymore... they did such things with Tora! Tora! Tora! and other old movies, but today there is a lot of CGI involved. Remember Batman Begins and how proud they were that the car scene was without any CGI?
Initial D had a tiny budget compared to The Fast and the Furious I and II, yet it had great car scenes with lots of drifting and a nice story. I thought it was by far superior to the Fast ... movies, and it's far more stylish. But it had the Infernal Affairs directors, so that's pretty obvious.
I think big budget today means the studios think it appeals to the masses. They will try to put in a star not for the acting talent or because the star fits in the role best, but because of the name and the promo. They movie will be made for the mainstream, so there will be a bit of a love story, some action scenes, or just some obscene humor. Maybe a remake. And don't experiment. Shouldn't be intellectually challenging. Boring!
Yeah, Wong Kar-Wai is awesome, though I prefer his Chungking Express. Dunno how the budget was on that one, but I'd guess pretty much non existant.
plinden
Jul 19, 03:53 PM
Other than recently, how often have Mac sales been in the million+ a quarter? Didn't 2002 or something only see that many shipped the entire year?
No - according to http://www.pegasus3d.com/total_share.html Mac sales have been above 3 million since 1998. But it looks like Apple's on track for > 5 million in the highest sales figures ever.
Where are all you "Apple is doomed" sayers now?:p :D
Apples sells ~4 Million Macs per quater. That's ~16 Mio a year. Given a 4 Year Life time that's "only" ~64 Mio Mac's installed, maybe more. That should be enough to keep developers happy.
No, please re-read the figures - it's 1.327 million Macs for the last quarter.
No - according to http://www.pegasus3d.com/total_share.html Mac sales have been above 3 million since 1998. But it looks like Apple's on track for > 5 million in the highest sales figures ever.
Where are all you "Apple is doomed" sayers now?:p :D
Apples sells ~4 Million Macs per quater. That's ~16 Mio a year. Given a 4 Year Life time that's "only" ~64 Mio Mac's installed, maybe more. That should be enough to keep developers happy.
No, please re-read the figures - it's 1.327 million Macs for the last quarter.
TheBobcat
Nov 27, 01:27 PM
Maybe Apple just needs to lower its monitor prices to sane levels as opposed to the ridiculous prices that they currently stand at. Justify them all you want, if Apple really wants to push its monitors, those prices need to come down. They might have flew 3 years ago, but enough is enough.
I just got a 22-inch LCD for $370 (US), and it's not a piece. Quite frankly, I can't really tell the difference. Plus it has better adjustments and I/O. It doesn't have the Apple look, and it only has 1050 horizontal lines of res but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me.
I just got a 22-inch LCD for $370 (US), and it's not a piece. Quite frankly, I can't really tell the difference. Plus it has better adjustments and I/O. It doesn't have the Apple look, and it only has 1050 horizontal lines of res but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me.
09iMac=Fail
Mar 27, 08:44 PM
I assume that's what you meant. Because we've seen touchscreen devices advance by leaps and bounds since June 2007. In two years' time it will very likely be an entirely new ballgame with such devices being a dominant force in tech, including gaming.
This little demo is just barely scratching the surface.
Saying that touch screen devices will be the dominant force in gaming in 2 years is a bold statement. I'd love to see them advance that much in 2 years, but I have a hard time seeing them being superior to traditional systems.
LTD, do you own a PS3 or other similar system? We all know you don't own a 360. :) Just curious if you are much of a gamer or not. And no, gaming on cell phones or similar devices is not what I'm talking about.
This little demo is just barely scratching the surface.
Saying that touch screen devices will be the dominant force in gaming in 2 years is a bold statement. I'd love to see them advance that much in 2 years, but I have a hard time seeing them being superior to traditional systems.
LTD, do you own a PS3 or other similar system? We all know you don't own a 360. :) Just curious if you are much of a gamer or not. And no, gaming on cell phones or similar devices is not what I'm talking about.
Kiwi Jones
Mar 24, 03:21 PM
So, this doesn't mean it would be possible to upgrade a 2010 15" MBP's GPU from the INTEL HD graphics to anything different does it??
This INTEL HD sucks really bad...
This INTEL HD sucks really bad...
PharmD
Aug 6, 09:04 PM
Well, they weren't kidding about Tiger being "long before Longhorn". I'm excited to see what they have cooking. Thankfully I'll be at work until 6 EST so I can come home, boot up MR and read all about it.
toddybody
Mar 24, 01:15 PM
Even then though...I dont think this means anything special for non-MacPro owners. Everything else gets the mGPU treatment:(
Irishman
Apr 20, 07:32 AM
I'm sure it's been done to death, but I spent some time actually thinking about realistic-ish speculations of what the new line could look like. I think they're going to get rid of one SKU ( the step up 27" without the quad i7), because it's kind of redundant, and for the $100 price difference, I can't imagine anyone NOT spending the extra modey to get the quad core). The only spec that is more of a wishful thinking piece is the inclusion of the HD6800M 1GB card in the 27" quad i7. THAT would be a beast!
Common Upgrades
1. Thunderbolt port
2. HDMI out
3. Sandybridge
Now, here's the model breakdown:
21.5" (1920x1080) display
2.8 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
500 GB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1199.99
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.2 GHz i5 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.2 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 5870 (512MB)
HDMI out
$1699.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.5 GHz quad i7 processor
8 GB RAM
2 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 6970 (1 GB)
HDMI out
$1999.99
Common Upgrades
1. Thunderbolt port
2. HDMI out
3. Sandybridge
Now, here's the model breakdown:
21.5" (1920x1080) display
2.8 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
500 GB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1199.99
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.2 GHz i5 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.2 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 5870 (512MB)
HDMI out
$1699.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.5 GHz quad i7 processor
8 GB RAM
2 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 6970 (1 GB)
HDMI out
$1999.99
econgeek
Apr 12, 09:19 PM
I love the adoption of iMovies people detection and shot detection features... this is great.... rolling shutter fixing is a feature adobe previewed but typical for apple they do it on import, rather than as an "effect" you can add.
B. Hunter
Apr 12, 10:51 PM
Well?????????
I wonder if the next FCE will cost $99.00 now.
Or
is FCP X the new FCE?
Jeeebers! FCP X is the Glee version of video editing.
Yep times are changing.
I wonder if the next FCE will cost $99.00 now.
Or
is FCP X the new FCE?
Jeeebers! FCP X is the Glee version of video editing.
Yep times are changing.
KevanDual2.5
Sep 6, 08:56 AM
Maybe i am alone on this one....
I think the 24" iMac G5 is the beginning of the end of the G5 iMac. We all watched as the outstanding G4 iMac grew from a 15" to a 17" and finally to 20". While the stunning design remained the same, the 20" just didn't look as good as the 2 previous models. The proportions were wrong and it looked top-heavy.
I am sitting in front of an original 23" Apple Display (plastic rather than aluminium). The new iMac cannot be much smaller than it. I firmly believe that the 24" will be, and should be, as big as it gets. I just hope that heat doesn't become a problem with the Core 2 Duo chips else the G5 iMac may have to evolve into a new enclosure.
Anyone else have thoughts similar?
I think the 24" iMac G5 is the beginning of the end of the G5 iMac. We all watched as the outstanding G4 iMac grew from a 15" to a 17" and finally to 20". While the stunning design remained the same, the 20" just didn't look as good as the 2 previous models. The proportions were wrong and it looked top-heavy.
I am sitting in front of an original 23" Apple Display (plastic rather than aluminium). The new iMac cannot be much smaller than it. I firmly believe that the 24" will be, and should be, as big as it gets. I just hope that heat doesn't become a problem with the Core 2 Duo chips else the G5 iMac may have to evolve into a new enclosure.
Anyone else have thoughts similar?
x86isslow
Nov 29, 02:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by longofest View Post
Actually, I was thinking they were working on a car
oh hell yeah, the iCar? Couldn't be iDrive - that's already a BMW thing
Apple to design a car?
http://www.theapplecollection.com/Collection/various/sponsorcourse.jpg
Originally Posted by longofest View Post
Actually, I was thinking they were working on a car
oh hell yeah, the iCar? Couldn't be iDrive - that's already a BMW thing
Apple to design a car?
http://www.theapplecollection.com/Collection/various/sponsorcourse.jpg