redAPPLE
Aug 7, 01:34 AM
It would be cool if Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-Cal.) made a surprise appearance and said - "Hasta la vista, Vista!"
unfortunately, i think, he is a pc guy.
unfortunately, i think, he is a pc guy.
poppe
Sep 1, 01:23 PM
knowing Apple they may put a $1,999 price on it at intro, since they know there will be a mad rush of faithful. Then after a month or two when sales settle, drop the price to $1,899 for the holiday season. Both those prices could be $100 lower, depending on what the base config offers.
Has apple done this before? I'm not trying to make it sound like i'm rude, I really just dont know. I know that when the first MBP's came out they did that silent upgrade in power but I didnt think it was price.
Has apple done this before? I'm not trying to make it sound like i'm rude, I really just dont know. I know that when the first MBP's came out they did that silent upgrade in power but I didnt think it was price.
hyperpasta
Sep 1, 02:37 PM
Mac Mini - low end machine good for offices as a small server or low end word processing workstation.
iMac - All in one consumer machine - no upgradeability
"Mac" - Prosumer gamer machine - some upgradeablity
Mac Pro - Full fledged workstation for those who need all the power they can get.
But I want to see the iMac and "Mac" be equal in power- both available in both consumer to presumer configurations! I also want the Mac mini done away with and replaced with the "Mac" you speak of... it's too small for its own good. The G4 cube should be brought back, this time as a consumer/prosumer machine, replacing the Mac mini.
Basically, Apple needs to snap out of it and realize that there is a market for a headless and integrated machines at EVERY PRICE... I want a prosumer iMac, personally.
iMac - All in one consumer machine - no upgradeability
"Mac" - Prosumer gamer machine - some upgradeablity
Mac Pro - Full fledged workstation for those who need all the power they can get.
But I want to see the iMac and "Mac" be equal in power- both available in both consumer to presumer configurations! I also want the Mac mini done away with and replaced with the "Mac" you speak of... it's too small for its own good. The G4 cube should be brought back, this time as a consumer/prosumer machine, replacing the Mac mini.
Basically, Apple needs to snap out of it and realize that there is a market for a headless and integrated machines at EVERY PRICE... I want a prosumer iMac, personally.
GregA
Aug 24, 09:09 PM
I guess we're diverging from the actual rumour - new Mac Mini real soon.
It'd be cool to see some kinda of upgraded/dedicated graphics, a bigger 7200rpm HD, and 2 firewire ports. Maybe some built in or adapter based outputs for dual dvi? Alot depends on the ammount of vram it will have.I look at the existing Mac Mini, and your wish, and see too many $ signs!.
Perhaps our wishes require a range of options. Mac Media HD vs Mac Media. ;-)
It'd be cool to see some kinda of upgraded/dedicated graphics, a bigger 7200rpm HD, and 2 firewire ports. Maybe some built in or adapter based outputs for dual dvi? Alot depends on the ammount of vram it will have.I look at the existing Mac Mini, and your wish, and see too many $ signs!.
Perhaps our wishes require a range of options. Mac Media HD vs Mac Media. ;-)
jxyama
Apr 6, 11:22 AM
actually, nevermind. i don't care anymore. you are clearly not reading what i've been posting anyway.
paddy
Aug 24, 07:07 PM
Obviously???
the Mac Pro is one thing, but you wont see dual optical drives in an iMac much less a Mini, there's no point 4 the standard consumer market.
I gather that he was joking because of that smiley at the end of the post.
the Mac Pro is one thing, but you wont see dual optical drives in an iMac much less a Mini, there's no point 4 the standard consumer market.
I gather that he was joking because of that smiley at the end of the post.
Multimedia
Aug 30, 12:28 PM
Apple Store Refurbs.
A few days ago all the Mini refurbs disappeared from the Apple Store refurb list. After the Think Secret announcement, not only did they come back, but they added PPC models and a 1.66 Core Duo with 1GB RAM & 100GB HDD. Today, there is only one PPC model listed and that's it. Might be just coincidence, but that's a lot of activity.
Anyone know - Do current models usually disappear right before a speed bump and then reappear at a reduced price when new models are available?SAVE page prices don''t go down when new models appear. They are already reduced from original prices. For example, PowerBook G4's are still at the same price they were last year as are the Quad G5 since February. I wouldn't go for a Solo at Fry's at any price. But if the CD with 1GB RAM and 100GB HD were $599 on the SAVE page, it almost might be a steal if the MacBooks weren't $949. But then you could put a 2.33GHz Merom in there and pray. :)
Oh I see. You buy the Core Solo at Fry's for $499 and then put Merom C2D 2.33GHz in immediately and pray. :) I am hesitant to immediately void a new mini warranty when a 1.83GHz model is soon. A 2.33 Merom will cost over $600 I think. Probably worth waiting for the 1.66GHz DC for $599 next week or so.
There should be a lot of churn in that secton of the SAVE page listings. IE more will come back every few days as the overstock and demos come in for inspection and then offerings. Do you remember what the price was for the 1.66GHz CD 1GB RAM 100GB HD? Will be interesting to see how much that config will cost when the new models ship. :)Is this all Fry's stores, or just the one you're referring to. If it's store-wide, I might actually have to make a trip down to my local Burbank Fry's store after work tonight. :)Check you LA Times insert or copy of it online. Or phone them first. Sometimes offerings up here aren't made down there and vice versa.
A few days ago all the Mini refurbs disappeared from the Apple Store refurb list. After the Think Secret announcement, not only did they come back, but they added PPC models and a 1.66 Core Duo with 1GB RAM & 100GB HDD. Today, there is only one PPC model listed and that's it. Might be just coincidence, but that's a lot of activity.
Anyone know - Do current models usually disappear right before a speed bump and then reappear at a reduced price when new models are available?SAVE page prices don''t go down when new models appear. They are already reduced from original prices. For example, PowerBook G4's are still at the same price they were last year as are the Quad G5 since February. I wouldn't go for a Solo at Fry's at any price. But if the CD with 1GB RAM and 100GB HD were $599 on the SAVE page, it almost might be a steal if the MacBooks weren't $949. But then you could put a 2.33GHz Merom in there and pray. :)
Oh I see. You buy the Core Solo at Fry's for $499 and then put Merom C2D 2.33GHz in immediately and pray. :) I am hesitant to immediately void a new mini warranty when a 1.83GHz model is soon. A 2.33 Merom will cost over $600 I think. Probably worth waiting for the 1.66GHz DC for $599 next week or so.
There should be a lot of churn in that secton of the SAVE page listings. IE more will come back every few days as the overstock and demos come in for inspection and then offerings. Do you remember what the price was for the 1.66GHz CD 1GB RAM 100GB HD? Will be interesting to see how much that config will cost when the new models ship. :)Is this all Fry's stores, or just the one you're referring to. If it's store-wide, I might actually have to make a trip down to my local Burbank Fry's store after work tonight. :)Check you LA Times insert or copy of it online. Or phone them first. Sometimes offerings up here aren't made down there and vice versa.
Edge100
Sep 1, 02:21 PM
Really? I heard that you can connect and external monitor using a hack software for dual screen support . But it does not support the cinema displays.
I hope I am wrong.:)
You are wrong.
I hope I am wrong.:)
You are wrong.
danielwsmithee
Nov 27, 03:09 PM
I'm sorry, why is their target audience dwindling?It all comes down to how much extra you are willing to pay for the increased monitor specification. Most will pay 20% very few will pay 75%.
Full of Win
Mar 22, 05:20 PM
Just curious, Why?
1. Bluetooth car audio systems
2. Bluetooth headphones
3. Bluetooth speakers.
The iPod is primarly an audio device, Bluetooth is a common audio transmission method. What more is there to say?
1. Bluetooth car audio systems
2. Bluetooth headphones
3. Bluetooth speakers.
The iPod is primarly an audio device, Bluetooth is a common audio transmission method. What more is there to say?
tortoise
Sep 7, 02:17 AM
Now that iMac is Core 2 Duo, the Academic $899 17" iMac is a mini killer config.
Except that I want to use my 24" monitor...
Except that I want to use my 24" monitor...
peapody
Nov 23, 05:49 PM
Hmm. Do you know the total on all of the posts? :p
What do you think of it? If it seems good, and if they release one for the iPT, then I might get one.
ASK and you shall receive!!
28,530 posts!! see original post!!
What do you think of it? If it seems good, and if they release one for the iPT, then I might get one.
ASK and you shall receive!!
28,530 posts!! see original post!!
-AG-
Apr 12, 08:36 PM
Its a room FULL of video industry specialists.
You would think that ONE of them would be able to do a live video stream.
You would think that ONE of them would be able to do a live video stream.
(marc)
Mar 19, 05:18 PM
It's just the last time I remember a UN action it was 98% US in Iraq.
Not UN backed. afaik, at least.
Not UN backed. afaik, at least.
stcanard
Nov 30, 10:47 AM
Another way to ask this question: If Apple decided to compete head-to-head with this feature, what should they do differently?
Here's the funny thing, I can tell you a feature is poorly thought out, even if I can't necessarily tell you how to solve it :) The fact that we don't have an answer is probably a good start on why the iPod doesn't already do it.
First thing I can say is this: Dump the idea of restrictions on non-DRM'd songs. If "the guy with guitar" wants to beam you his own song he should be allowed to decide that you can keep it as long as you want and send it to as many people as you want.
This goes back to the root of the problem with these devices and online stores: The record labels aren't worried about piracy, they're worried about all the guys on the street being able to bypass them by advertising virally then selling their own burned CDs. Sure it's only one or two now people now, but then it starts to grow, and some band ends up hitting it big and getting radio play, then everybody starts doing it, and then gradually the RIAA loses their money train.
Here's the funny thing, I can tell you a feature is poorly thought out, even if I can't necessarily tell you how to solve it :) The fact that we don't have an answer is probably a good start on why the iPod doesn't already do it.
First thing I can say is this: Dump the idea of restrictions on non-DRM'd songs. If "the guy with guitar" wants to beam you his own song he should be allowed to decide that you can keep it as long as you want and send it to as many people as you want.
This goes back to the root of the problem with these devices and online stores: The record labels aren't worried about piracy, they're worried about all the guys on the street being able to bypass them by advertising virally then selling their own burned CDs. Sure it's only one or two now people now, but then it starts to grow, and some band ends up hitting it big and getting radio play, then everybody starts doing it, and then gradually the RIAA loses their money train.
Thunderbird
May 2, 08:13 PM
Haha so many mad fanboys. " APL Y U RUIN MY OSX"
.
LOL...All your apps are belong to us!
This is dumb...but then, since when is Apple about intuitiveness, consistency and ergonomic efficiency?
.
LOL...All your apps are belong to us!
This is dumb...but then, since when is Apple about intuitiveness, consistency and ergonomic efficiency?
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
MacPhyle
Aug 19, 11:29 PM
Regardless of what Bluetooth will be meant for on the iPod -- Sirius, transmission to Bluetooth headphones, or just syncing with Bluetooth Macs -- what I'm looking forward to is a bigger screen. I think Bluetooth is a logical step since iMacs now have Bluetooth built in, but I don't expect iPods to go Bluetooth until at least 2 more major upgrades. First the larger screen, then Bluetooth, maybe. I am just crossing my fingers that when Apple does put Bluetooth in iPods, they don't eliminate other means of connectivity. Keep iPods compatible with non-Bluetooth Macs, Apple, please!
hellomoto4
Mar 30, 11:30 PM
Urgh, new iCal really is horrible.
prady16
Oct 23, 09:38 AM
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/intelcoreduo.html
That no longer exists. Go to the mbp page and click the core duo icon, and I get a page not found.
This will probably change by the time anyone verifies it. :rolleyes:
This has been so for a loooong time now. Probably over a month.
The correct link is: http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/intel.html
I guess the webmaster is just sleeping on the job!
Or is too busy preparing new pages for the *redesigned* MBP! :D
Edit: Oops deputy_doofy beat me to it!
That no longer exists. Go to the mbp page and click the core duo icon, and I get a page not found.
This will probably change by the time anyone verifies it. :rolleyes:
This has been so for a loooong time now. Probably over a month.
The correct link is: http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/intel.html
I guess the webmaster is just sleeping on the job!
Or is too busy preparing new pages for the *redesigned* MBP! :D
Edit: Oops deputy_doofy beat me to it!
mefck
Apr 26, 02:57 PM
And for all the non-legal "experts" out there.
Windows can be trademarked because while it is a generic term, it is not a generic term that describes the product or service.
If "Windows" was a window company, it could not be trademarked because it is a generic terms that describes the product or service.
A huge difference.
Windows can be trademarked because while it is a generic term, it is not a generic term that describes the product or service.
If "Windows" was a window company, it could not be trademarked because it is a generic terms that describes the product or service.
A huge difference.
SheriffParker
Jan 10, 09:24 PM
can some body put as link to like a pic of a zoone
http://images.google.com/
http://images.google.com/
bedifferent
May 2, 05:00 PM
…or hold down the "Option" key and click away…
I've been using this - AppCleaner (http://www.freemacsoft.net/)
Better one, CleanMyMac (http://macpaw.com/)
Manage Plugins/Extensions, intelligent uninstaller, automatic device cleanup, cache cleaner, logs cleaner, language cleaner, remove unneeded binary files (PowerPC code mostly, shrinks app sizes and improves launch time), searches and removes leftover files from removed apps not cleaned by CleanMyMac, quick erase, clean out app system junk to improve performance, empty trash from app's that have self-contained trash bins (such as iPhoto), and a lot more. Great app (god I sound like a commercial! lol)
I've been using this - AppCleaner (http://www.freemacsoft.net/)
Better one, CleanMyMac (http://macpaw.com/)
Manage Plugins/Extensions, intelligent uninstaller, automatic device cleanup, cache cleaner, logs cleaner, language cleaner, remove unneeded binary files (PowerPC code mostly, shrinks app sizes and improves launch time), searches and removes leftover files from removed apps not cleaned by CleanMyMac, quick erase, clean out app system junk to improve performance, empty trash from app's that have self-contained trash bins (such as iPhoto), and a lot more. Great app (god I sound like a commercial! lol)
Tonsko
Jan 6, 05:36 PM
Heh. I used to use 98/99 until about a year ago. Fuel is just too expensive now. I know my golf's ECU adjusts the timing automatically depending on what octane level the fuel is. It shouldn't really matter.