Mechcozmo
Jan 10, 09:41 PM
I told you all !!!! $499 headless Mac - here it comes and marketshare will grow...welcome back Apple !!
Sigh... Apple is already back.... and we don't need this petition any longer... and the mini mac has been in development for a long time (1 year plus) so the petition didn't do anything with it.
39 signers in this period of time means it failed, BTW. :rolleyes:
Sigh... Apple is already back.... and we don't need this petition any longer... and the mini mac has been in development for a long time (1 year plus) so the petition didn't do anything with it.
39 signers in this period of time means it failed, BTW. :rolleyes:
gkarris
Nov 29, 09:26 AM
I think that 17" is great - they've got'em already with the iMac. Prices to need to drop with the market. They'll still be more as the monitors are of better quality. IMHO:
17" - $399
20" - $599
23" - $899
30" - $1899
Bring back a $499 Mac Mini and a basic mouse and you have an inexpensive system!
(Maybe Apple could make a special "bundle" for $899?)
17" - $399
20" - $599
23" - $899
30" - $1899
Bring back a $499 Mac Mini and a basic mouse and you have an inexpensive system!
(Maybe Apple could make a special "bundle" for $899?)
X2468
Apr 2, 07:20 PM
Urgh, new iCal really is horrible.
Yes, it's designed to simplify and bring the computers down to the level of basic consumer electronics items. That way Apple will sell even more. All they seem to care about these days is having media events, and announcements where they spend their time bragging about how many they've sold.
Yes, it's designed to simplify and bring the computers down to the level of basic consumer electronics items. That way Apple will sell even more. All they seem to care about these days is having media events, and announcements where they spend their time bragging about how many they've sold.
Krovem
Feb 6, 12:02 AM
2002 Audi A4. 18th birthday present
That looks pretty sick. I was looking at Audi a4 or a6 (02-05), and infinity g35 sedan.
That looks pretty sick. I was looking at Audi a4 or a6 (02-05), and infinity g35 sedan.
EagerDragon
Nov 16, 12:53 PM
Previous question: How hard could it be to take advangate of the multi-cores.
The first thing is that it depends on what you are starting with. If you have zero code out there, you can come up with a nice design for your program that takes advantage of as many cores as you throw at it. If on the other hand you have large chunks of legacy code that was written in the time of single cores, it may be close to a re-write to fully take advantage of the hardware. In some cases it will be easier in some cases to throw the old code away.
But some of it is imagination, if you can look at a problem and the solution you orginaly came up with, and using your imagination look at the problem at hand in inovative ways, parts of the programs could be re-written to take advantage of the hardware and other parts can be left alone (for the short term). This is an incremental step, you gain X% in one area and little to nothing in another area. The key is to determine what your program spends most of it time doing and re-write/re-design that section of the code for the biggest short-term gains.
I remeber working in assembler and selecting the correct combination of instructions based on their function and the number of CPU cycles it took to execute each instruction. Sometimes a set of 12 instructions was faster than a different set of 8 instructions in accomplishing the same result. Use your imagination and look at the problem from a different angle. If your brain only sees a number of serialized steps, you won't be able to come up with anything that takes advange of the hardware.
What you start with (old code) and your imagination can get you there quicker or slower.
Short answer: It depends.
The first thing is that it depends on what you are starting with. If you have zero code out there, you can come up with a nice design for your program that takes advantage of as many cores as you throw at it. If on the other hand you have large chunks of legacy code that was written in the time of single cores, it may be close to a re-write to fully take advantage of the hardware. In some cases it will be easier in some cases to throw the old code away.
But some of it is imagination, if you can look at a problem and the solution you orginaly came up with, and using your imagination look at the problem at hand in inovative ways, parts of the programs could be re-written to take advantage of the hardware and other parts can be left alone (for the short term). This is an incremental step, you gain X% in one area and little to nothing in another area. The key is to determine what your program spends most of it time doing and re-write/re-design that section of the code for the biggest short-term gains.
I remeber working in assembler and selecting the correct combination of instructions based on their function and the number of CPU cycles it took to execute each instruction. Sometimes a set of 12 instructions was faster than a different set of 8 instructions in accomplishing the same result. Use your imagination and look at the problem from a different angle. If your brain only sees a number of serialized steps, you won't be able to come up with anything that takes advange of the hardware.
What you start with (old code) and your imagination can get you there quicker or slower.
Short answer: It depends.
Foxer
Mar 19, 03:41 PM
this is exactley why marketshare has dwindled for Mac, they tell you its our way ( powermac) or if you dont submit then we will cripple the Hell out of the othermacs and leave you wanting, so the worlds says screw you Apple and buys a PC with everything they want in it and makes do with a OS that is less then perfect. This is why Apples new computer sales went to 1.7% of all new sales. Apple is a dictator mini monopoly.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Apple's biggest problem is that most of those in market aren't even aware of the Mac option, or if they are they suspect that you can't get on the internet, or use Word files, or things like that. I know this, because I was one of them only two years ago. I'm not an idiot, I was just never presented with the Mac option. Had I not wandered into the new Apple Store at the mall while waiting for my wife I may never had.
Thus, most people never get to the point of saying, "These computers aren't expandable." It is hard for people on a Mac web board to understand the average computer user, but I will site my parents. They want internet, they want to mess with music and e-mail, maybe some photo printing. Every Mac on the market can do all of this perfectly, no need to worry about expansion. Apple has to find a way to inform the public - and slipping another PowerBook onto some TV show ain't the answer, I never noticed them until I became a Mac head. I have to sit through a Dell commercial every 10 seconds, why am I not sitting through an Apple commercial - and NOT and iPod commercial. They are advertising the only product that doesn't need additional pub.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Apple's biggest problem is that most of those in market aren't even aware of the Mac option, or if they are they suspect that you can't get on the internet, or use Word files, or things like that. I know this, because I was one of them only two years ago. I'm not an idiot, I was just never presented with the Mac option. Had I not wandered into the new Apple Store at the mall while waiting for my wife I may never had.
Thus, most people never get to the point of saying, "These computers aren't expandable." It is hard for people on a Mac web board to understand the average computer user, but I will site my parents. They want internet, they want to mess with music and e-mail, maybe some photo printing. Every Mac on the market can do all of this perfectly, no need to worry about expansion. Apple has to find a way to inform the public - and slipping another PowerBook onto some TV show ain't the answer, I never noticed them until I became a Mac head. I have to sit through a Dell commercial every 10 seconds, why am I not sitting through an Apple commercial - and NOT and iPod commercial. They are advertising the only product that doesn't need additional pub.
Evangelion
Jul 14, 07:26 AM
It'll take a while before B-spec becomes too slow for web surfing ;)
But there are lots of people who use the wireless for more than just web-surfing. Hell, WLAN is used at my workplace quite extensively in place of wired ethernet. That was the whole point of my comment. I (among others) use network-connectivity (wired or otherwise) for other things besides web-surfing
As to just web-surfing.... In the time of few years my internet-connection has moved from 512KB to 8MB. I could go to 12 or 24MB right now. The speed-increase has been FAST.
But there are lots of people who use the wireless for more than just web-surfing. Hell, WLAN is used at my workplace quite extensively in place of wired ethernet. That was the whole point of my comment. I (among others) use network-connectivity (wired or otherwise) for other things besides web-surfing
As to just web-surfing.... In the time of few years my internet-connection has moved from 512KB to 8MB. I could go to 12 or 24MB right now. The speed-increase has been FAST.
AvSRoCkCO1067
Jul 13, 11:33 PM
Will I be able to get a reasonably priced apple laptop with merom, 802.11n, blueray burner, possibly HD, and leopard (or whatever 10.6 is called) in late 2007 or early 2008?
Well you know you'll get merom and leopard by that timeframe. Personally, I believe you'll get 802.11n and a blueray option as well - and with a blueray option should come HD as well.
Well you know you'll get merom and leopard by that timeframe. Personally, I believe you'll get 802.11n and a blueray option as well - and with a blueray option should come HD as well.
Earendil
Nov 28, 10:36 AM
Well, you just made my point better than me.
PS, that isn't hard :rolleyes:
I just noticed that you are the same person I just (imho) shredded in two different posts above. Care to make a stand against anything I said as a direct response to your points? Or are you just gonna feed off someone else and reiterate yourself again?
PS, that isn't hard :rolleyes:
I just noticed that you are the same person I just (imho) shredded in two different posts above. Care to make a stand against anything I said as a direct response to your points? Or are you just gonna feed off someone else and reiterate yourself again?
miloblithe
Aug 31, 12:20 PM
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-08-31/#5869
What about this ? :)
Makes me hope that they bring back three levels:
$499 Core Duo 1.66, 60/80GB HD, Combo drive
$599 1.66, 100GB HD, Super Drive
$699 1.83, 100GB/120GB, Super Drive
What about this ? :)
Makes me hope that they bring back three levels:
$499 Core Duo 1.66, 60/80GB HD, Combo drive
$599 1.66, 100GB HD, Super Drive
$699 1.83, 100GB/120GB, Super Drive
nagromme
Jun 22, 12:30 PM
iOS and Mac OS will merge. Very slowly over the years. Eventually, I see OS X dying out and becoming a comapatibility mode like Classic, as iOS (which is still OS X at heart anyway) becomes the mainstream OS. But this will take a LONG time.
As that happens, I expect Apple desktops will evolve into flat screens that lie on the surface in front of you—maybe slanted a bit, but not vertical (though they could tilt up for passive movie viewing). This sounds great to me! I can imagine Photoshop etc. with a whole new UI, and a future iOS adapted to big screens by allowing multiple apps on-screen at once. (And keyboards will probably be standard—these are production machines used for mass content creation, and with a need for shortcuts. But mice will be optional, since only “old” Mac software will use them.)
These machines will be like pro/prosumer versions of the iPad, used for totally different purposes. Eventually. 5 years? Will they even be called Macs? (I suspect they will be—and fair enough, if they have an OS X compatibility mode.)
In the meantime, I don’t see conventional iMacs with touchscreens. Touch on a vertical surface is a harmless gimmick at best (ask HP). And they give you Popeye Arm Syndrome!
http://myexercise4fitness.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/popeye.jpg
That leaked desktop touchpad, though, sounds great—I hope it ships!
As that happens, I expect Apple desktops will evolve into flat screens that lie on the surface in front of you—maybe slanted a bit, but not vertical (though they could tilt up for passive movie viewing). This sounds great to me! I can imagine Photoshop etc. with a whole new UI, and a future iOS adapted to big screens by allowing multiple apps on-screen at once. (And keyboards will probably be standard—these are production machines used for mass content creation, and with a need for shortcuts. But mice will be optional, since only “old” Mac software will use them.)
These machines will be like pro/prosumer versions of the iPad, used for totally different purposes. Eventually. 5 years? Will they even be called Macs? (I suspect they will be—and fair enough, if they have an OS X compatibility mode.)
In the meantime, I don’t see conventional iMacs with touchscreens. Touch on a vertical surface is a harmless gimmick at best (ask HP). And they give you Popeye Arm Syndrome!
http://myexercise4fitness.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/popeye.jpg
That leaked desktop touchpad, though, sounds great—I hope it ships!
aswitcher
Jan 11, 05:58 PM
I really don't think Apple will come out with external optical drives... That is just too... complicated.
<Sarcasm> Yeah...makes the development of the iPhone look easy... </Sarcasm>
First time I've seen USB called complicated :).
I see what you mean from a design standpoint though, inelegant might be a better word. But it just makes too much sense not to do it. I hardly EVER use my optical drive. Why am I carrying it everywhere I go?
Actually I REALLY hopes its both USB and FW. FW will allow me to toss my OS disk in and force my disk driveless Mac to boot from it in FW mode.
while your argument is valid, those lines never had a PRO vs. non-PRO line like the notebook segment does. While it is possible that they may go aluminum across the board (makes sense with the aluminum features of the iphone and imac) they still need a way to differentiate their PRO line other than name badging and integrated graphics. this also doesn't take into effect the added cost of the aluminum materials that would cause a non-PRO line increase in cost. so i think this might debunk an all aluminum line.
Differences will be like they do now:
Name/Badging
Pro has real graphics card
Screen size
Physical size (this time with Pro being smaller)
Pro has backlit keyboard
Pro is faster
New differences I see even through the all Alu design:
Pro is smaller
Pro has FW800 and maybe HDMI
Pro has a touch screen or a touch trackpad
Pro has no keyboard but a massive touch pad - although thats got big issues
Pro has more memory
And they could even do coloured alu (aka iPod like) for MBs and neked Alu for Pro machines
<Sarcasm> Yeah...makes the development of the iPhone look easy... </Sarcasm>
First time I've seen USB called complicated :).
I see what you mean from a design standpoint though, inelegant might be a better word. But it just makes too much sense not to do it. I hardly EVER use my optical drive. Why am I carrying it everywhere I go?
Actually I REALLY hopes its both USB and FW. FW will allow me to toss my OS disk in and force my disk driveless Mac to boot from it in FW mode.
while your argument is valid, those lines never had a PRO vs. non-PRO line like the notebook segment does. While it is possible that they may go aluminum across the board (makes sense with the aluminum features of the iphone and imac) they still need a way to differentiate their PRO line other than name badging and integrated graphics. this also doesn't take into effect the added cost of the aluminum materials that would cause a non-PRO line increase in cost. so i think this might debunk an all aluminum line.
Differences will be like they do now:
Name/Badging
Pro has real graphics card
Screen size
Physical size (this time with Pro being smaller)
Pro has backlit keyboard
Pro is faster
New differences I see even through the all Alu design:
Pro is smaller
Pro has FW800 and maybe HDMI
Pro has a touch screen or a touch trackpad
Pro has no keyboard but a massive touch pad - although thats got big issues
Pro has more memory
And they could even do coloured alu (aka iPod like) for MBs and neked Alu for Pro machines
charlituna
Apr 2, 09:31 PM
I'll "believe" when they fix the currently unresolved and widespread quality control issues...light bleed on virtually every unit and blemishes, dents and scratches on units straight out of the box.
Fix those issues, Apple, and then I will "believe" enough to get an iPad 2.
Virtually every unit huh.
Well I have seen tons of postings all over about 'I got the new ipad' with no mention of said problems.
I bought one opening weekend for home use and one last week for work with nada. All nine of the cast on my current gig have problem less iPad 2s, plus the office has gotten close to 100 units all with no issues.
Perhaps by 'virtually every' you mean 'not even one percent of what has been sold' because that is probably the real number
Fix those issues, Apple, and then I will "believe" enough to get an iPad 2.
Virtually every unit huh.
Well I have seen tons of postings all over about 'I got the new ipad' with no mention of said problems.
I bought one opening weekend for home use and one last week for work with nada. All nine of the cast on my current gig have problem less iPad 2s, plus the office has gotten close to 100 units all with no issues.
Perhaps by 'virtually every' you mean 'not even one percent of what has been sold' because that is probably the real number
mjteix
Mar 25, 11:11 AM
Nop... consider.
2x CPUs 130W rated. So thats 260W, right there. However, no CPU consumes the rated, so it's give or take ~260W.
The cpus used in the dual-cpu MP are 80-95W parts (top is the 95W Xeon X5670 right now), so it's give or take ~190W.
Only the single cpu MP uses a 130W part (Xeon W3500/3600 series).
So it's either 130W, 160W or 190W for the cpus in a MP.
2x CPUs 130W rated. So thats 260W, right there. However, no CPU consumes the rated, so it's give or take ~260W.
The cpus used in the dual-cpu MP are 80-95W parts (top is the 95W Xeon X5670 right now), so it's give or take ~190W.
Only the single cpu MP uses a 130W part (Xeon W3500/3600 series).
So it's either 130W, 160W or 190W for the cpus in a MP.
ldkaplan
Jan 4, 03:27 PM
For a word processor, I'm using Open Office...I'm pretty happy with it except that it uses X11.
Maybe Apple will announce an Aqua port of Open Office that comes installed on all new products...that would be sweet. They'd have to rip out the power point tool to not canibalize Keynote.
For the rumor on the thin mb and mbp, I'll be damn pissed. I just got my mb because it was updated in November. If they do an upgrade that fast, I'll be really pissed off.
What's wrong with a MacBook and:
a) Pages
or
b) MS Word (yuck... but ymmv)
or
c) Framemaker in Boot Camp
?
Agreed, the world of word processing isn't overrun with great apps. Times change, and word processing just isn't sexy any more... even though there are plenty of theses and books and magazine articles still being written.
(I notice that MS are preparing to give away updates to Office 2007 - and Vista - to anyone that got Office pre-installed on their PC. Talk about abusing their monopoly... No struggling WP developer can hope to survive against those sort of tactics.)
With a bit of luck Pages 3.0 will be along next week. Hardly a keynote showstopper, but props to Apple for getting into that market at all. Pages is cute.
If you specifically need the long-doc and publishing features of Framemaker, then it's Windows time. Sad but true. Take it up with Adobe.
Maybe Apple will announce an Aqua port of Open Office that comes installed on all new products...that would be sweet. They'd have to rip out the power point tool to not canibalize Keynote.
For the rumor on the thin mb and mbp, I'll be damn pissed. I just got my mb because it was updated in November. If they do an upgrade that fast, I'll be really pissed off.
What's wrong with a MacBook and:
a) Pages
or
b) MS Word (yuck... but ymmv)
or
c) Framemaker in Boot Camp
?
Agreed, the world of word processing isn't overrun with great apps. Times change, and word processing just isn't sexy any more... even though there are plenty of theses and books and magazine articles still being written.
(I notice that MS are preparing to give away updates to Office 2007 - and Vista - to anyone that got Office pre-installed on their PC. Talk about abusing their monopoly... No struggling WP developer can hope to survive against those sort of tactics.)
With a bit of luck Pages 3.0 will be along next week. Hardly a keynote showstopper, but props to Apple for getting into that market at all. Pages is cute.
If you specifically need the long-doc and publishing features of Framemaker, then it's Windows time. Sad but true. Take it up with Adobe.
Stella
Jun 22, 01:13 PM
Sounds OK - run the apps on your apple mobile as your desktop.
As long as iOS didn't replace OSX.... many people would be pissed if desktop apps were controlled by Apple.
As long as iOS didn't replace OSX.... many people would be pissed if desktop apps were controlled by Apple.
AFPoster
Mar 22, 12:50 PM
Nope. Not everyone. I am quite happy where I am… thanks.
Quite frankly after a few visits I am happy never to return to the Land of the super-sized, home of the intolerant.
HAHA, if I lived in Europe I wouldn't want to leave that place, not to say that's where you are, but Europe is great. Not everyone is true, but a big understatement thus the millions of illegal immigrants and people constantly being killed trying to get here. Ahem, Mexico for one.
Quite frankly after a few visits I am happy never to return to the Land of the super-sized, home of the intolerant.
HAHA, if I lived in Europe I wouldn't want to leave that place, not to say that's where you are, but Europe is great. Not everyone is true, but a big understatement thus the millions of illegal immigrants and people constantly being killed trying to get here. Ahem, Mexico for one.
Multimedia
Sep 1, 01:33 PM
Says who? AppleInsider is now confirming this story. They have been dead-on accurate all year. Read 'em and weep (I'd like to see Conroe instead of Merom, but it ain't happenin').If iMacs don't get Conroe inside that is going to be SO WEAK. The Power GAP between all Macs and the Mac Pro would be so wide you could drive a truck through it. Makes no sense to me for Conroe to not go into something. Right now that's only iMac. Market for Conroe headless Mac has got to be huge. :confused: :eek: :(
2.33GHz is the top of Merom folks. How can that be the best Apple can offer non Mac Pro customers? Seems rediculous. There has got to be a home for Conroe Processors in iMacs or a new mid-tower.
2.33GHz is the top of Merom folks. How can that be the best Apple can offer non Mac Pro customers? Seems rediculous. There has got to be a home for Conroe Processors in iMacs or a new mid-tower.
kultschar
Mar 26, 09:43 AM
Would seem a good next step is to empower the ATV with this kind of processing power, while allowing the use of iphones/touches/ipads as controllers. Imaging HUDs and virtual controllers - or Garageband Hero?
Maybe you wouldn't have full length epic saga games (or maybe you would via streaming), but for $99 + $5-$10 a game, you have a serious competitor to traditional consoles.
Yup - this is surely the way the ATV is going to go or get the tech good enough to allow airplay thru the iPad for gaming, imagine not poss with the delay / lag currently
Maybe you wouldn't have full length epic saga games (or maybe you would via streaming), but for $99 + $5-$10 a game, you have a serious competitor to traditional consoles.
Yup - this is surely the way the ATV is going to go or get the tech good enough to allow airplay thru the iPad for gaming, imagine not poss with the delay / lag currently
TangoCharlie
Sep 1, 12:05 PM
I couldn't disagree with you more.
This size represents the iMac that can display Full resolution 1080p HD content. If they introduce this and then eventually throw a Blu-ray in there they've got the killer combination. Front Row is already setup to be a home-theatre replacement. I mean come on, it's basically an HDTV...it's 1080p, it's got a remote, and it's got front row... This will sell like crack... Digital crack...
I think you're absolutely right!! They need to stick in a couple of digial tuners in it too tho.....
This size represents the iMac that can display Full resolution 1080p HD content. If they introduce this and then eventually throw a Blu-ray in there they've got the killer combination. Front Row is already setup to be a home-theatre replacement. I mean come on, it's basically an HDTV...it's 1080p, it's got a remote, and it's got front row... This will sell like crack... Digital crack...
I think you're absolutely right!! They need to stick in a couple of digial tuners in it too tho.....
Braz0s
Mar 22, 10:22 PM
Haven't read all the comments so plz excuse if mentioned...
Plz put a mono switch on it like the new Nano. My wife is a Rubella baby so she's totally deaf in one ear. That mono switch really helped.
And it's software only - it should have always been there!
Plz put a mono switch on it like the new Nano. My wife is a Rubella baby so she's totally deaf in one ear. That mono switch really helped.
And it's software only - it should have always been there!
vastoholic
Feb 17, 11:19 PM
My new traveling set up. Just picked up my 13" MBP while I'm away at a military school in Utah because my 16GB iPhone/iPad combo just wasn't cutting it for long periods of time.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5099/5455441070_4133d8690e_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5099/5455441070_4133d8690e_b.jpg
LethalWolfe
Apr 5, 01:57 PM
What are you talking about? iTMS not generating profit? Geez, check your facts!
You are the one in need of fact checking. Jobs has said in a number of interviews that iTMS will generate enough money to basically break even. iTMS is there to sell iPods, not to make a profit.
Lethal
You are the one in need of fact checking. Jobs has said in a number of interviews that iTMS will generate enough money to basically break even. iTMS is there to sell iPods, not to make a profit.
Lethal
gkarris
Nov 27, 09:04 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
No comments:
Post a Comment