roland.g
Sep 10, 10:09 PM
I guess there are three types of people in the world:
1. Someone who only wants one screen hooked to a separate small computer that can only hook to one screen.
2. Someone who wants a screen married to the computer with the option of adding only one more.
3. Someone who wants one or more screens hooked to a computer on the floor with room for two dual display video cards.
I have chatted with you, and after originally considering a Mini or iMac, I have ruled out the Mini, and now would either get an iMac or a Mac Pro, however while there is only a $100 difference between (see this thread) what I would get in those 2 machines (and that is before spending more $$ down the road for a 23" ACD), I still feel that the Mac Pro is overkill for me and yet I don't like the iMac AIO, though I would change my mind if it looked like a 23" ACD. The white turns me off. I really only want 1 screen, while I have used 2 I don't really need it. Likewise I like the 30" but have no need for something that big. A 23-24" is perfect for me. I might even wall mount it. And I liked the idea of the Mini, just not the performance. So I find myself saying I will make up my mind soon, but hoping the Mac Pro Jr. shows up before I do. Because I too want to add a second HDD. And I would gladly spend $2,700 - 3,300 for a 2.33 or so Mac Pro Jr, with 2GB RAM 2 250GB HDDs, 256MB VRAM, BT & Airport, BT keyboard & MM, 23" ACD & Applecare after EDU discount.
1. Someone who only wants one screen hooked to a separate small computer that can only hook to one screen.
2. Someone who wants a screen married to the computer with the option of adding only one more.
3. Someone who wants one or more screens hooked to a computer on the floor with room for two dual display video cards.
I have chatted with you, and after originally considering a Mini or iMac, I have ruled out the Mini, and now would either get an iMac or a Mac Pro, however while there is only a $100 difference between (see this thread) what I would get in those 2 machines (and that is before spending more $$ down the road for a 23" ACD), I still feel that the Mac Pro is overkill for me and yet I don't like the iMac AIO, though I would change my mind if it looked like a 23" ACD. The white turns me off. I really only want 1 screen, while I have used 2 I don't really need it. Likewise I like the 30" but have no need for something that big. A 23-24" is perfect for me. I might even wall mount it. And I liked the idea of the Mini, just not the performance. So I find myself saying I will make up my mind soon, but hoping the Mac Pro Jr. shows up before I do. Because I too want to add a second HDD. And I would gladly spend $2,700 - 3,300 for a 2.33 or so Mac Pro Jr, with 2GB RAM 2 250GB HDDs, 256MB VRAM, BT & Airport, BT keyboard & MM, 23" ACD & Applecare after EDU discount.
troop231
Mar 29, 11:18 AM
Bahaha, wow, they should've said that Windows Phone will be completely gone by then, now that's MORE believable! :cool:
midiman
Sep 12, 03:43 PM
You can return ANY apple product for a FULL refund if the product was updated within 10 days of the original purchase date!! Or you can get money back if the price was lowered!
Only on UNOPENED product. If you've opened it, you gotta pony up 10% restocking fee, if you bought from apple. They will refund money if there is a price drop in that timeframe, though.
Only on UNOPENED product. If you've opened it, you gotta pony up 10% restocking fee, if you bought from apple. They will refund money if there is a price drop in that timeframe, though.
AppleScruff1
Apr 19, 10:53 AM
Apple will probably sue them for responding.
azentropy
Apr 19, 08:11 AM
Did anyone expect Samsung to say, "Yep, you got us."?
Steve121178
Apr 20, 11:03 AM
Indeed. You couldn't dumb down that statement if you tried.
Go hang at dailykos.com. Macrumors appears to be above your pay-grade.
How is the coffee?
Go hang at dailykos.com. Macrumors appears to be above your pay-grade.
How is the coffee?
TC400
Apr 30, 02:11 PM
Isn't this iMac design from fall of 2009? That's less than two years.
I seen it as more of a mid model refresh.
TECHNICALLY been the same since 2008.
I seen it as more of a mid model refresh.
TECHNICALLY been the same since 2008.
Onimusha370
Apr 30, 02:10 PM
can't wait till people start geekbenching these things, and we get the comments of... 'WOW, THIS THING BEATS MY 2010 MAC PRO'.
gonna be very exciting indeed!
gonna be very exciting indeed!
cmaier
Nov 17, 06:53 PM
Because the iPhone doesn't have a copyright.
it has a trademark. also see my previous post, and the linked tweet - apple frequently rejects apps for containing representations of iPhones (including hand drawn images that are not copyright by Apple). That's the point.
it has a trademark. also see my previous post, and the linked tweet - apple frequently rejects apps for containing representations of iPhones (including hand drawn images that are not copyright by Apple). That's the point.
PlipPlop
Apr 28, 05:31 PM
Then Microsoft will surge to the top again when they release Windows 8 and a new version of Office.
MacRumors
Jul 14, 09:14 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
DailyTech reports (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3228) that the Non-Disclosure for performance benchmarks on Intel's upcoming Intel Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme processors was lifted today. The new processors, code named Conroe, are the desktop versions of the Core Duo processors which currently reside in Apple's MacBook, MacBook Pro and iMac computers.
Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme processors have a plethora of new features including Intel Wide Dynamic Execution, Intel Smart Memory Access, Intel Advanced Smart Cache and Intel Advanced Digital Media Boost.
The Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme could make their Mac debut in Apple's PowerMac computers which are rumored to be released on August 7th 2006 at the World Wide Developers Conference.
Intel is expected to start shipping the new processors on July 23rd with an official announcement on July 27th. The Core 2 Duo will have clock speeds of 1.86GHz, 2.13GHz, 2.4GHz and 2.67GHz while the Core 2 Extreme will clock in at 2.93GHz. All share a 1066MHz front side bus with between 2-4MB of L2 cache. Pricing for the chips range from $183 to $999 per chip.
As mentioned above, a number of benchmarks of the new chips have been released today, with DailyTech providing a roundup (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3319) of many reviews.
DailyTech reports (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3228) that the Non-Disclosure for performance benchmarks on Intel's upcoming Intel Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme processors was lifted today. The new processors, code named Conroe, are the desktop versions of the Core Duo processors which currently reside in Apple's MacBook, MacBook Pro and iMac computers.
Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme processors have a plethora of new features including Intel Wide Dynamic Execution, Intel Smart Memory Access, Intel Advanced Smart Cache and Intel Advanced Digital Media Boost.
The Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme could make their Mac debut in Apple's PowerMac computers which are rumored to be released on August 7th 2006 at the World Wide Developers Conference.
Intel is expected to start shipping the new processors on July 23rd with an official announcement on July 27th. The Core 2 Duo will have clock speeds of 1.86GHz, 2.13GHz, 2.4GHz and 2.67GHz while the Core 2 Extreme will clock in at 2.93GHz. All share a 1066MHz front side bus with between 2-4MB of L2 cache. Pricing for the chips range from $183 to $999 per chip.
As mentioned above, a number of benchmarks of the new chips have been released today, with DailyTech providing a roundup (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3319) of many reviews.
seek3r
May 4, 08:33 AM
Personally I'm a huge fan of daisy chaining. Less devices, less cables, less clutter. You just attach each device to the next.
What is it you have an aversion to?
What if I need to pull a drive somewhere in the chain but I'm still accessing a device farther along the chain? Daisy chaining is a *massive* pain for anyone who deals with external devices that aren't permanently, or at least semi-permanently, hooked up to a single machine!
What is it you have an aversion to?
What if I need to pull a drive somewhere in the chain but I'm still accessing a device farther along the chain? Daisy chaining is a *massive* pain for anyone who deals with external devices that aren't permanently, or at least semi-permanently, hooked up to a single machine!
SMacDuff
Apr 25, 02:55 PM
That is exactly what I envision for the next Mac Book Pro. Take a MacBook Air make it just thick enough to handle an additional 2.5" Hard Drive, dedicated graphics, and a high performance processor. Ditch the optical drive, make SSD+HD the standard configuration.
This!
Please do not make a MBP line with carbon fiber (sooo 2008!). It looked ok then but now I'm just sick of it. I truly believe Apple has other plans for their Liquidmetal purchase, my guess is for future battery tech as described a few months ago. The optical drive is finished. All signs point to Apple getting rid of it and the sooner they do so, the better. The only foreseeable problem with the OP's suggestion is cost. Given the MB Air's price point, what happens to the prices in the MBP line?
This!
Please do not make a MBP line with carbon fiber (sooo 2008!). It looked ok then but now I'm just sick of it. I truly believe Apple has other plans for their Liquidmetal purchase, my guess is for future battery tech as described a few months ago. The optical drive is finished. All signs point to Apple getting rid of it and the sooner they do so, the better. The only foreseeable problem with the OP's suggestion is cost. Given the MB Air's price point, what happens to the prices in the MBP line?
rajid
Mar 23, 06:14 PM
show me the law that says it'l illegal to notify other drivers of a cop checking speeds, or to notify the position of a DUI check point.
Maybe it's not illegal everywhere. I was always taught that it was illegal, for example, to flash your lights to oncoming traffic in order to warn of a speed trap. I grew up in North Carolina. Maybe it's only illegal there.
As for notifying of the position of a DUI check, maybe it's not illegal, but perhaps it should be? If it's not illegal, then these programs are doing wrong, so why pull them?
I simply maintain that pulling the programs will simply mean that people will share the information via some other method, and I even made a prediction of the method they will use. It would actually surprise me if it's not already in use that way.
Maybe it's not illegal everywhere. I was always taught that it was illegal, for example, to flash your lights to oncoming traffic in order to warn of a speed trap. I grew up in North Carolina. Maybe it's only illegal there.
As for notifying of the position of a DUI check, maybe it's not illegal, but perhaps it should be? If it's not illegal, then these programs are doing wrong, so why pull them?
I simply maintain that pulling the programs will simply mean that people will share the information via some other method, and I even made a prediction of the method they will use. It would actually surprise me if it's not already in use that way.
Yvan256
Sep 14, 11:42 AM
Any chance we'll see an Apple widescreen H.264/AAC camcorder there? And how about an iPod dock connector/cable to use an iPod for storage to keep the costs down (and sell more iPods)?
vouder17
Sep 15, 05:31 PM
I don't really see this happening, if apple is going to take the risk of entering this competitive market, I see them doing it with a very innovative 'new' product.
Passante
Sep 19, 03:07 PM
Probably not quite as long as you might think. Less than 3x longer for 720p or 1080i, <6x longer for 1080p.
B
but his download time was 6 hours... so 3X would be, well... a long time.
B
but his download time was 6 hours... so 3X would be, well... a long time.
EagerBatucada
Apr 25, 06:03 PM
Suppose it is liquid metal? How do you suppose the currently 0.50 stock LQMT (Liquid Metal Technologies) will react?
Anonymous Freak
Sep 19, 10:33 PM
I wonder if these people are buying one to "test it out" or are buying multiple movies.
Well, I bought one "to test it out" (as I've done with each iT[nee M]S intro.)
But I also bought a couple TV shows that I had wanted before, but didn't want at 320x240. The 640x480 version of the Babylon 5 Pilot looks just as good as my DVD copy. (And it's nice, because it's the as-originally-aired version, not the TNT give-plot-away-early edit.) The CG looks a little worse, but that's because it was worse. (They re-did some of the CG for the TNT version.)
Well, I bought one "to test it out" (as I've done with each iT[nee M]S intro.)
But I also bought a couple TV shows that I had wanted before, but didn't want at 320x240. The 640x480 version of the Babylon 5 Pilot looks just as good as my DVD copy. (And it's nice, because it's the as-originally-aired version, not the TNT give-plot-away-early edit.) The CG looks a little worse, but that's because it was worse. (They re-did some of the CG for the TNT version.)
MacRumors
Oct 27, 07:43 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Environmental activist group Greenpeace was ejected from London's Mac Expo yesterday, after various other exhibitors complained about the group's activities at the show.
The group had purchased a small both with contract terms to only hand out leaflets within their assigned area and to not take photographs at other stands. The Register got in touch with MacExpo marketing director Matt Denton (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/26/greepeace_ejected_from_mac_expo/print.html) who said "It was a valid stand with a valid message... they breached their contract."
Greenpeace does not deny having passed out fliers beyond their booth (http://weblog.greenpeace.org/makingwaves/archives/2006/10/we_love_our_macs_but_mac_expo.html), but insists that the reaction was "over the top" in a statement to MacRumors. Greenpeace is vowing to return to the expo tomorrow to continue their 'Green my Apple (http://www.greenmyapple.org)' campaign.
Greenpeace recently rated Apple the 4th worst tech company in their guide to greener electronics (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060829114739.shtml).
Environmental activist group Greenpeace was ejected from London's Mac Expo yesterday, after various other exhibitors complained about the group's activities at the show.
The group had purchased a small both with contract terms to only hand out leaflets within their assigned area and to not take photographs at other stands. The Register got in touch with MacExpo marketing director Matt Denton (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/26/greepeace_ejected_from_mac_expo/print.html) who said "It was a valid stand with a valid message... they breached their contract."
Greenpeace does not deny having passed out fliers beyond their booth (http://weblog.greenpeace.org/makingwaves/archives/2006/10/we_love_our_macs_but_mac_expo.html), but insists that the reaction was "over the top" in a statement to MacRumors. Greenpeace is vowing to return to the expo tomorrow to continue their 'Green my Apple (http://www.greenmyapple.org)' campaign.
Greenpeace recently rated Apple the 4th worst tech company in their guide to greener electronics (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060829114739.shtml).
stol
Apr 11, 09:36 AM
Ever heard of Home Sharing?
Well, thank you, I've heard of Home Sharing. I use it myself on my desktop and laptop. I was referring to an one-click streaming solution like Airtunes. More like "click there to stream music to my mac which is connected to my sound system" than "go to preferences, enable sharing; now wait while I browse your shared library".
So, Airport Expresses are luxury but other WiFi routers onto which an Airplay hack could be installed are not luxury?
You can rightfully slam Apple for not including Airplay into the Time Capsule and Airport Extreme but that is about it.
I think you got it completely wrong here. How is my WiFi router which was given to me for free by my internet provider a luxury? Who talked about hacking my router? How could possibly a common router provide me with audio output?
And of course Apple is getting greedy by not adding Airtunes to other wireless solutions they sell. One more reason to skip them altogether and go for a hack or other software solution. Once again, don't get me wrong, I love Apple and their products, I but there are some use cases where they just don't care or have completely other interests.
To stream between computers, you only need iTunes and Home Sharing, which is, btw, free. And you now welcome/wish for a third-party hack to stream music and then in the same breath say that installing even bonafide software like the free Airfoil Speakers or iTunes is out of the question. What is it, you could convince your friends to install a third-party hack on their computers but not iTunes or Airfoil?
Once again, my words are misinterpreted or you just don't understand.
I just wish to stream to my mac which is connected to my sound system from other Airtunes capable devices. That involves a hack only on my part and nothing at all to be done on other computers or iOS devices. Call me cheap, but that would be convenient to me and my friends.
And as I said before, I can see myself buying an Airport Express (although I would prefer the Airport Extreme, if it had an audio output) for a computer-less streaming setup, but for my current setup - which I think is the most common one - and budget I will opt for a tricky hack.
To sum up, all I want is a Banana-TV equivalent but just for audio. It looks like it's just a matter of time.
Well, thank you, I've heard of Home Sharing. I use it myself on my desktop and laptop. I was referring to an one-click streaming solution like Airtunes. More like "click there to stream music to my mac which is connected to my sound system" than "go to preferences, enable sharing; now wait while I browse your shared library".
So, Airport Expresses are luxury but other WiFi routers onto which an Airplay hack could be installed are not luxury?
You can rightfully slam Apple for not including Airplay into the Time Capsule and Airport Extreme but that is about it.
I think you got it completely wrong here. How is my WiFi router which was given to me for free by my internet provider a luxury? Who talked about hacking my router? How could possibly a common router provide me with audio output?
And of course Apple is getting greedy by not adding Airtunes to other wireless solutions they sell. One more reason to skip them altogether and go for a hack or other software solution. Once again, don't get me wrong, I love Apple and their products, I but there are some use cases where they just don't care or have completely other interests.
To stream between computers, you only need iTunes and Home Sharing, which is, btw, free. And you now welcome/wish for a third-party hack to stream music and then in the same breath say that installing even bonafide software like the free Airfoil Speakers or iTunes is out of the question. What is it, you could convince your friends to install a third-party hack on their computers but not iTunes or Airfoil?
Once again, my words are misinterpreted or you just don't understand.
I just wish to stream to my mac which is connected to my sound system from other Airtunes capable devices. That involves a hack only on my part and nothing at all to be done on other computers or iOS devices. Call me cheap, but that would be convenient to me and my friends.
And as I said before, I can see myself buying an Airport Express (although I would prefer the Airport Extreme, if it had an audio output) for a computer-less streaming setup, but for my current setup - which I think is the most common one - and budget I will opt for a tricky hack.
To sum up, all I want is a Banana-TV equivalent but just for audio. It looks like it's just a matter of time.
floam
Aug 28, 06:26 PM
.
jjhny
Mar 23, 05:07 PM
Sorry man, but if it saves 1 life from drunk driving...it's the right thing to do.
I was waiting for the "if it saves one life argument" - that spurious argument is why we are losing all individual freedoms in the US and the world.
Approximately 42,000 people dies in car accidents a year. If you outlaw cars you will save 42,000 lives. Isn't that worth it? Not just 1 - 42,000!
In fact, we could make society like a prison, and then we will all be safe.
Although in prisons, which has guards and fences, murders still occur, drugs get in, etc. The whole safety argument is a false argument. I feel we have made a wrong turn in this culture and by people thinking we can legislate a perfect world, we are, in fact, making a living hell.
I was waiting for the "if it saves one life argument" - that spurious argument is why we are losing all individual freedoms in the US and the world.
Approximately 42,000 people dies in car accidents a year. If you outlaw cars you will save 42,000 lives. Isn't that worth it? Not just 1 - 42,000!
In fact, we could make society like a prison, and then we will all be safe.
Although in prisons, which has guards and fences, murders still occur, drugs get in, etc. The whole safety argument is a false argument. I feel we have made a wrong turn in this culture and by people thinking we can legislate a perfect world, we are, in fact, making a living hell.
peharri
Sep 18, 09:00 AM
You are right. I make a call. i expect to pay for it. i dont expect the person im calling to get billed for the damn call.
The other way of looking at it is that the mobile user has made a technology choice. They shouldn't expect other people to pay for their technology choice. A system where each person pays to connect to the network and decides how they want to pay for that is inherently fairer, even if it makes it harder for people to choose to subsidize the systems of others.
(Remember too that in the majority of cases, most US users have a fixed bill because of the high number of bundled minutes coupled with the huge unmetered portions of their bills. It's not the case that we get billed for the incoming call in the majority of cases. If it's made at peak time, from a different network, then yeah, we'll use bundled minutes, but most of us end up with large amounts of bundled minutes free at the end of the month despite this. And you never have to accept an incoming call.)
and. as for pricing. yes, vodafone have a 1c/sec flat rate on calls. but. i pay $79/month and at the end of the my account has a automatic refund (of sorts) applied, so anything up to $500 in calls/txt/etc is included in the $79.
That doesn't sound like a bad plan, that's unusually good outside of the US from what I've researched, though most of my research has been limited to the UK.
i DO use my mobile for most calls. i use my landline maybe once a week, because it has a better speakerphone if im using it for a long time.
If I were back in Britain, I couldn't substitute a cellphone for a landline because of the incoming calls issue. It's simply not fair to my family or friends to make them pay through the nose to contact me. I might use one for the bulk of my outgoing calls, but for incoming calls, it wouldn't be right.
An ideal compromise, in my view, would be for the operators to provide two numbers on every phone, a caller pays and a mobile party pays (with the latter being treated as ordinary airtime, or unmetered according to a fixed monthly charge), but alas I don't think the operators would ever do something that could potentially undermine their interconnect revenues like that.
Neither solution is perfect. The US seems better at the moment because of the emphasis on unmetered usage. At least unmetered incoming calls are an option here. But the downside is the lack of a practical PAYG system.
The other way of looking at it is that the mobile user has made a technology choice. They shouldn't expect other people to pay for their technology choice. A system where each person pays to connect to the network and decides how they want to pay for that is inherently fairer, even if it makes it harder for people to choose to subsidize the systems of others.
(Remember too that in the majority of cases, most US users have a fixed bill because of the high number of bundled minutes coupled with the huge unmetered portions of their bills. It's not the case that we get billed for the incoming call in the majority of cases. If it's made at peak time, from a different network, then yeah, we'll use bundled minutes, but most of us end up with large amounts of bundled minutes free at the end of the month despite this. And you never have to accept an incoming call.)
and. as for pricing. yes, vodafone have a 1c/sec flat rate on calls. but. i pay $79/month and at the end of the my account has a automatic refund (of sorts) applied, so anything up to $500 in calls/txt/etc is included in the $79.
That doesn't sound like a bad plan, that's unusually good outside of the US from what I've researched, though most of my research has been limited to the UK.
i DO use my mobile for most calls. i use my landline maybe once a week, because it has a better speakerphone if im using it for a long time.
If I were back in Britain, I couldn't substitute a cellphone for a landline because of the incoming calls issue. It's simply not fair to my family or friends to make them pay through the nose to contact me. I might use one for the bulk of my outgoing calls, but for incoming calls, it wouldn't be right.
An ideal compromise, in my view, would be for the operators to provide two numbers on every phone, a caller pays and a mobile party pays (with the latter being treated as ordinary airtime, or unmetered according to a fixed monthly charge), but alas I don't think the operators would ever do something that could potentially undermine their interconnect revenues like that.
Neither solution is perfect. The US seems better at the moment because of the emphasis on unmetered usage. At least unmetered incoming calls are an option here. But the downside is the lack of a practical PAYG system.
