craigdawg
Mar 20, 07:51 PM
yes, this is true. but apple is not in the business to sell more computers. apple is in the business to turn profits.
tiffany's would sell more diamond rings if they cut the price in half.
BMW would sell more cars if they cut the price by 30%.
...but so what?
Exactly. Apple will stay in business as long as it's profitable; it's that simple.
It doesn't bother me that Apple has low single-digit marketshare and it doesn't necessarily bother Apple as long as they continue to make money.
And I don't know if a $500 - $600 loss leader Mac would guarantee an increase in desktop marketshare. (This is different to me than the loss leader that ITMS is). The only effect it would have would be to decrease profits.
tiffany's would sell more diamond rings if they cut the price in half.
BMW would sell more cars if they cut the price by 30%.
...but so what?
Exactly. Apple will stay in business as long as it's profitable; it's that simple.
It doesn't bother me that Apple has low single-digit marketshare and it doesn't necessarily bother Apple as long as they continue to make money.
And I don't know if a $500 - $600 loss leader Mac would guarantee an increase in desktop marketshare. (This is different to me than the loss leader that ITMS is). The only effect it would have would be to decrease profits.
dernhelm
Jan 2, 04:26 AM
Personally speaking I can't get excited about software. An OS is an OS windows, OSX I don't care as long as it works (OK advantage Apple but if MS did the job I would use it) Ilife come on, surely something not as dull as free software no one uses.
Please let it be new stuff you can hold.
Expect both. Steve will spend some time on OS/X, because he promised us all last time he would. But he'll also spend some time on iTV, and there will definitely be some other device. There always is... :)
Please let it be new stuff you can hold.
Expect both. Steve will spend some time on OS/X, because he promised us all last time he would. But he'll also spend some time on iTV, and there will definitely be some other device. There always is... :)
catracho
Mar 24, 08:27 PM
Do you think that the support of these 5xxxx cards could mean the return of the 24" iMac?
Too many cards for only 2 models (21" and 27")....
Too many cards for only 2 models (21" and 27")....
guez
Sep 7, 02:52 PM
I have been a Mac user since 1986. I'm not a superuser or a gamer, but the one thing I have learned is to avoid models with too much built-in obsolescence (e.g. my old firewire-less, low-resolution clamshell iBook and the late-model CD-burner-less white iBook G3 that replaced it, not to mention the Powerbook 150 [agh!], Mac Classic [aaagggh!], etc.). Except for the lack of built-in DVD capability, the lampshade 700 MHZ G4 iMac has been a great investment.
So here is my question. Are the $599 mini and $999 iMac going to become obsolete much faster than the $1199 iMac? Do the dedicated video RAM and Core 2 Duo (iMacs) make much of difference? I already have an external DVD burner and plan to buy 2GB RAM.
So here is my question. Are the $599 mini and $999 iMac going to become obsolete much faster than the $1199 iMac? Do the dedicated video RAM and Core 2 Duo (iMacs) make much of difference? I already have an external DVD burner and plan to buy 2GB RAM.
Mousse
Feb 23, 11:43 AM
So when will automakers sell a compact pickup with a 2 liter diesel in the US? I want a diesel pick up. But I don't want a behemoth that requires a ladder to enter and hogs 2/3 of a 2 car garage.:p
I prefer diesel in a work truck for three reasons: torque, torque and torque.
I prefer diesel in a work truck for three reasons: torque, torque and torque.
MagnusVonMagnum
Sep 14, 04:16 PM
Consumer Reports says "we still think the same thing" for the third time and that's first page news? Sounds more like they're fishing for free publicity.
Anyway, when a reviewing organization "doesn't recommend" what I consider the best phone I've ever owned, it sounds more like I shouldn't bother paying attention to that reviewing organization. Their taste just isn't relevant to mine.
My personal opinion is that you and anyone else like you on here that thinks it's NOT a good idea for Consumer Reports to look out for the best interests of the CONSUMER instead of Apple's bottom line doesn't deserve the time of day, in my humble opinion. You seem to believe that Consumer Reports should simply be an automatic blessing to Apple's profits as if they were acting solely on advertising dollars (like a certain magazine called "Stereo Review" used to do all the time) and shouldn't inform their readers of potential problems. All I can say is THANK GOD that YOU don't work for them!!!! :p
Consumer reports gave a fair and HONEST report on the iPhone giving its highest score based on its merits but gave an honest reason WHY they could not recommend it and let the consumer decide for themselves if they want to take the risk. In short, they are doing their job properly.
So I'll reiterate AGAIN that I do not comprehend how someone like yourself could find fault with that line of reasoning other than to admit that you are a Steve Jobs drone. :rolleyes:
Anyway, when a reviewing organization "doesn't recommend" what I consider the best phone I've ever owned, it sounds more like I shouldn't bother paying attention to that reviewing organization. Their taste just isn't relevant to mine.
My personal opinion is that you and anyone else like you on here that thinks it's NOT a good idea for Consumer Reports to look out for the best interests of the CONSUMER instead of Apple's bottom line doesn't deserve the time of day, in my humble opinion. You seem to believe that Consumer Reports should simply be an automatic blessing to Apple's profits as if they were acting solely on advertising dollars (like a certain magazine called "Stereo Review" used to do all the time) and shouldn't inform their readers of potential problems. All I can say is THANK GOD that YOU don't work for them!!!! :p
Consumer reports gave a fair and HONEST report on the iPhone giving its highest score based on its merits but gave an honest reason WHY they could not recommend it and let the consumer decide for themselves if they want to take the risk. In short, they are doing their job properly.
So I'll reiterate AGAIN that I do not comprehend how someone like yourself could find fault with that line of reasoning other than to admit that you are a Steve Jobs drone. :rolleyes:
dime21
Apr 20, 09:26 PM
sorry no longer the case for most of that.
Manuals now cost more to buy than autos due to fewer of them being built so supply is lower.
No really cheaper to maintain. Hell manuals can go 200+k with out the tranny or the engine needing to be pulled. Manuals sorry you have to pull one of those items ever 100k miles to replace the clutch. That eats up the saving so at best it is a break even in that department.
Tranny might last longer but that is about it. Still has to be pulled ever 100k to replace clutch. Hell an auto tranny will out last the car any how so a non issue.
Power wise yes auto is going to eat a little more of the power off the engine but really not much less than the manuals eat due to modern hydrolics and more physical locking together of the engine and tranny.
Fuel economy. Sorry no longer the case. High way the get the same due to the fact that the tranny of both are physically locked to with the engine so no gain there. City mileage Autos can and often times do get better MPG even more so with the modern CVT. CVT for the extra gear ratios and on top of that you have computer controlled shifting that can time it quicker and faster and at better points for MPG than any human can.
Even Autos now have 5-7 gears so that gain is even lost from the manuals. They have the same number of gears pretty much standard now.
Now control. I will give you that. but that is about it.
sorry, but wherever you got your information, it is not correct. fwiw, my last car, a vw passat, i sold with 312k miles on it. i bought it new at the dealer. still had the original clutch. your 100k replacement claim is bogus.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
Manuals now cost more to buy than autos due to fewer of them being built so supply is lower.
No really cheaper to maintain. Hell manuals can go 200+k with out the tranny or the engine needing to be pulled. Manuals sorry you have to pull one of those items ever 100k miles to replace the clutch. That eats up the saving so at best it is a break even in that department.
Tranny might last longer but that is about it. Still has to be pulled ever 100k to replace clutch. Hell an auto tranny will out last the car any how so a non issue.
Power wise yes auto is going to eat a little more of the power off the engine but really not much less than the manuals eat due to modern hydrolics and more physical locking together of the engine and tranny.
Fuel economy. Sorry no longer the case. High way the get the same due to the fact that the tranny of both are physically locked to with the engine so no gain there. City mileage Autos can and often times do get better MPG even more so with the modern CVT. CVT for the extra gear ratios and on top of that you have computer controlled shifting that can time it quicker and faster and at better points for MPG than any human can.
Even Autos now have 5-7 gears so that gain is even lost from the manuals. They have the same number of gears pretty much standard now.
Now control. I will give you that. but that is about it.
sorry, but wherever you got your information, it is not correct. fwiw, my last car, a vw passat, i sold with 312k miles on it. i bought it new at the dealer. still had the original clutch. your 100k replacement claim is bogus.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
ZipZap
May 3, 04:48 AM
It seems like any time there's even a slight implication of any software being tuned to be easier to use, there's a barrage of negative comments lamenting how it's been "watered down."
What's with all this baseless elitism?
(Over uninstalling an app! Such a trite matter)
I see lots of people saying they'll stick with their version, or that it's the end of whatever paradigm they had before... why? Because it's what... "harder to use?" Who is that going to impress?
Not just for Lion, but this is exactly what happened with FCPX.
Which direction would the evolution of software go? Harder? Of course not...
I really wonder what the reasoning behind all this negativity is...
I dont think this is elitism...
Perhaps we can just say that Lion will offer a new level of refinement for a Mac OS.
Lets hope the iOS uninstall is implemented as a real uninstall...otherwise what's the point.
What's with all this baseless elitism?
(Over uninstalling an app! Such a trite matter)
I see lots of people saying they'll stick with their version, or that it's the end of whatever paradigm they had before... why? Because it's what... "harder to use?" Who is that going to impress?
Not just for Lion, but this is exactly what happened with FCPX.
Which direction would the evolution of software go? Harder? Of course not...
I really wonder what the reasoning behind all this negativity is...
I dont think this is elitism...
Perhaps we can just say that Lion will offer a new level of refinement for a Mac OS.
Lets hope the iOS uninstall is implemented as a real uninstall...otherwise what's the point.
DeSnousa
Apr 16, 11:24 PM
We need a 6 digit thread :p
I have in 2 weeks folded what took me nearly a year to do on my iBook G4. I should be at 100k soon which is very exciting for me. Who else is trying to achieve a 6 digit score :cool:
I have in 2 weeks folded what took me nearly a year to do on my iBook G4. I should be at 100k soon which is very exciting for me. Who else is trying to achieve a 6 digit score :cool:
shrimpdesign
Aug 7, 12:03 AM
I predict the Mac Pro, Xserve and a kick-ass preview of Leopard.
And I dobt any consumer items will be introduced (iPod, iTablet, iPhone) .. but they can surprise me if they want!
And I dobt any consumer items will be introduced (iPod, iTablet, iPhone) .. but they can surprise me if they want!
Trauma1
Apr 21, 04:56 PM
Why would Apple release an iMac refresh a couple of months before a new OS debuts?
Because they did it with Snow Leopard and the MacBook, MacBook Pro, and MacBook Air in the summer of 2009.
Because they did it with Snow Leopard and the MacBook, MacBook Pro, and MacBook Air in the summer of 2009.
netdog
Aug 29, 01:09 PM
Think Secret say no Merom in the Mini so you guys believe it?
It makes little sense to continue with the Yonah.
I am suspect of this rumour.
It makes little sense to continue with the Yonah.
I am suspect of this rumour.
peharri
Aug 19, 08:24 AM
You step into your car. The bluetooth receiver in your dashboard automatically detects the presence of your iPod. The finger controls on the steering wheel switch from controlling radio stations to stepping through playlists etc. It "just works". No cables. No need to even take the iPod out of your pocket or bag.
That's why I want wireless. Well, one of the reasons.
Of course, the bluetooth feature's great and all, but it's the 802.11g support I love using. I walk into the office, and suddenly the playlists of all of my collegues who run iTunes appears on screen. Another collegue has his own wireless iPod, and his playlists appear too. It's just like iTunes's shared playlist feature, only it's on my iPod too. It's nice enough having everyone's iTunes playlists in iTunes, but this really takes it to a dimension where it becomes truly useful.
That's why I want wireless, well, one of the reasons.
But, you know, I have my own music tastes, and there are only two or three fellow classical music fans in the office. I could listen to the radio, but only the NPR station here does classical, and that's only part of the time. Still, there are a bunch of netradio classical radio stations, so I can expose myself to even more sources, and I'm not limited by the relatively conservative selection of my collegues and friends. I go to the root menu, Radio Stations -> Favorites -> Classical 24, and now I'm receiving streamed audio from across the country.
That's another reason why I want wireless.
To all of you saying "I can't see why anyone would want wireless", I can't see why you wouldn't want wireless. Small scale sharing. Automatic integration with music systems. Net radio. What's not to love? And for what, a couple of dollars in chips, some improved firmware, and probably the same amount of battery life (given you'll not be running the hard drive)?
That's why I want wireless. Well, one of the reasons.
Of course, the bluetooth feature's great and all, but it's the 802.11g support I love using. I walk into the office, and suddenly the playlists of all of my collegues who run iTunes appears on screen. Another collegue has his own wireless iPod, and his playlists appear too. It's just like iTunes's shared playlist feature, only it's on my iPod too. It's nice enough having everyone's iTunes playlists in iTunes, but this really takes it to a dimension where it becomes truly useful.
That's why I want wireless, well, one of the reasons.
But, you know, I have my own music tastes, and there are only two or three fellow classical music fans in the office. I could listen to the radio, but only the NPR station here does classical, and that's only part of the time. Still, there are a bunch of netradio classical radio stations, so I can expose myself to even more sources, and I'm not limited by the relatively conservative selection of my collegues and friends. I go to the root menu, Radio Stations -> Favorites -> Classical 24, and now I'm receiving streamed audio from across the country.
That's another reason why I want wireless.
To all of you saying "I can't see why anyone would want wireless", I can't see why you wouldn't want wireless. Small scale sharing. Automatic integration with music systems. Net radio. What's not to love? And for what, a couple of dollars in chips, some improved firmware, and probably the same amount of battery life (given you'll not be running the hard drive)?
ingenious
Apr 15, 11:01 AM
It's just time for us to be mature adults and walk away from this. We know this guy is an ignoramus. We know Apple doesn't need saving. We know that as far as corporations go Apple couldn't be much healthier. We know what Apple's target market is, and that a cheap computer won't accomplish anything. Most importantly, we know we won't change iMacjapan's mind. He's stubborn and he's not listening. Why risk carpal tunnel on it? How about those NHL playoffs? I predict San Jose will take the Blues in 6 games.
i agree....
i agree....
4np
Sep 6, 08:46 AM
Hmm... the Mini still has no Core 2 Duo? That does not sound too promising for MacBook (Pro) updates... unless Apple only wants to use the Core 2 Duo for the high end laptops (MacBook Pro) of course... Or are they waiting untill Leopard has been released?
BC2009
Oct 24, 12:59 AM
What a crock of nonsense. :rolleyes:
Apparently, your idea of "corrupt" is to tell the truth about products instead of letting unsafe, Chinese garbage get pushed on the world with millions in advertising, but not a useful word in the bunch. Do you think Apple is going to advertise their antenna problem or Suzuki is going to brag that their vehicle is more likely to roll over than most other vehicles on the road? Heck no. Most magazines take money directly from the manufacturers that advertise in their magazines and thus have a total conflict of interests. Here's a magazine that doesn't take a dime from advertisers and thus has no reason to pick on anyone or lie about anything. But YOU call that "corruption." That's like Republicans saying they will create jobs (and leave out the "in China" part).
First off, Consumer Reports makes money by selling subscriptions which means free press is good for them. Sensational popular bad reviews gets them publicity - good reviews get them nothing. In fact their video review was so obviously biased and unprofessional it was a joke. The guy should have been wearing an "Down with Apple" T-shirt with the Android robot peeing on the Apple logo.
Second, the Suzuki Samarai is not a Chinese vehicle - Suzuki is a Japanese company.
Third, save your political slant for some other forum - we talk tech here - not politics.
Fourth, hate China much?
Fifth, I personally tried to verify Consumer Reports claims in multiple iPhone-4 units to no avail. I'm still holding off for iPhone-5 to save my budget, but all I can say about iPhone-4 is that it's the best phone I've ever seen.
Apparently, your idea of "corrupt" is to tell the truth about products instead of letting unsafe, Chinese garbage get pushed on the world with millions in advertising, but not a useful word in the bunch. Do you think Apple is going to advertise their antenna problem or Suzuki is going to brag that their vehicle is more likely to roll over than most other vehicles on the road? Heck no. Most magazines take money directly from the manufacturers that advertise in their magazines and thus have a total conflict of interests. Here's a magazine that doesn't take a dime from advertisers and thus has no reason to pick on anyone or lie about anything. But YOU call that "corruption." That's like Republicans saying they will create jobs (and leave out the "in China" part).
First off, Consumer Reports makes money by selling subscriptions which means free press is good for them. Sensational popular bad reviews gets them publicity - good reviews get them nothing. In fact their video review was so obviously biased and unprofessional it was a joke. The guy should have been wearing an "Down with Apple" T-shirt with the Android robot peeing on the Apple logo.
Second, the Suzuki Samarai is not a Chinese vehicle - Suzuki is a Japanese company.
Third, save your political slant for some other forum - we talk tech here - not politics.
Fourth, hate China much?
Fifth, I personally tried to verify Consumer Reports claims in multiple iPhone-4 units to no avail. I'm still holding off for iPhone-5 to save my budget, but all I can say about iPhone-4 is that it's the best phone I've ever seen.
pkson
Apr 2, 07:29 PM
Such a great ad.
They should have done something like this and not the "well you don't have an iPhone" ad.
They should have done something like this and not the "well you don't have an iPhone" ad.
woddy
Jan 12, 09:07 AM
i think there may be a umts / hsdpa powered macbook for the out off office use.
:cool:
:cool:
BlizzardBomb
Sep 1, 02:02 PM
But then again, look how aggressively priced the Mac Pros are. My out-'n-left-field wishful thinking says:
17" iMac - $999
20" iMac - $1,499
23" iMac - $1,999
BTW, I adjusted my post to:
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,599 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,099 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
Of course, only some of the folks at Apple know truly what the specs and prices are.
If iMacs don't get Conroe inside that is going to be SO WEAK.
2.33GHz is the top of Merom folks. How can that be the best Apple can offer non Mac Pro customers?
If you want something else the alternative is single-core 2.1 GHz G5 iMacs. I would prefer a cooler, near silent iMac because the speeds of even Core Duos are pretty damn good.
I think all those that want a 23" iMac that is chinless better hope for a Merom. I think conroe would be to hot, or does conroe run pretty cool?
Merom or Conroe wouldn't make a difference to the chin. An external power supply or a much thinner power supply is needed. As for Conroe running hot... no hotter than iMac G5s.
17" iMac - $999
20" iMac - $1,499
23" iMac - $1,999
BTW, I adjusted my post to:
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,599 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,099 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
Of course, only some of the folks at Apple know truly what the specs and prices are.
If iMacs don't get Conroe inside that is going to be SO WEAK.
2.33GHz is the top of Merom folks. How can that be the best Apple can offer non Mac Pro customers?
If you want something else the alternative is single-core 2.1 GHz G5 iMacs. I would prefer a cooler, near silent iMac because the speeds of even Core Duos are pretty damn good.
I think all those that want a 23" iMac that is chinless better hope for a Merom. I think conroe would be to hot, or does conroe run pretty cool?
Merom or Conroe wouldn't make a difference to the chin. An external power supply or a much thinner power supply is needed. As for Conroe running hot... no hotter than iMac G5s.
shecky
Oct 23, 08:36 PM
So you think Santa Rosa will be out in time for MWSF? I thought the release date was to be in the 2nd quarter of 2007.
correct. santa rosa will not even be released by intel until april 2007 at the earliest, and i would guess not actually in a buyable system until may/june.
correct. santa rosa will not even be released by intel until april 2007 at the earliest, and i would guess not actually in a buyable system until may/june.
Ktulu
Jan 1, 07:02 PM
http://images.apple.com/home/2007/images/welcome2007_20070101.jpg
This year better be good!
Where did you find that image? Are there others?
This year better be good!
Where did you find that image? Are there others?
kungming2
Jan 11, 09:38 PM
I actually like the name. Anyone else? :D
lordonuthin
Mar 23, 09:22 PM
Haha. I wanted the 2.66 octo but couldn't justify the price jump (and still somehow managed to justify the quad-to-octo jump, but that's another story). Of course my times tend to deviate, during the days it's just under 33 minutes but now and then a bit of Aperture work comes in and needs CPU attention.
I haven't noticed that bigadv units do not restart. Mine seem to restart just fine the few times I've shut FahCore down, continuing from the same frame. Does it affect the points awarded or so? Good thing I can usually bunch in the updates, last time it was a few software updates and a third HDD :rolleyes:
I wanted the top octo but couldn't justify it :D I had never had anything but the lowest Powermacs (G3 & G5) or, cough, Performa, so I splurged.
The bigadv units NEVER restart on my machine :mad: it only affects the points to the extent that I'm restarting from zero and not where I was at oh say 90 percent or something. I will work on consolidation as soon as I have my Victory Vegas (http://www.polarisindustries.com/en-us/Victory-Motorcycles/2010/Pages/Find-Your-Model.aspx) with new paint back together :p:p it's an 04 with silver goldish paint and a 1500 cc engine :cool:
I haven't noticed that bigadv units do not restart. Mine seem to restart just fine the few times I've shut FahCore down, continuing from the same frame. Does it affect the points awarded or so? Good thing I can usually bunch in the updates, last time it was a few software updates and a third HDD :rolleyes:
I wanted the top octo but couldn't justify it :D I had never had anything but the lowest Powermacs (G3 & G5) or, cough, Performa, so I splurged.
The bigadv units NEVER restart on my machine :mad: it only affects the points to the extent that I'm restarting from zero and not where I was at oh say 90 percent or something. I will work on consolidation as soon as I have my Victory Vegas (http://www.polarisindustries.com/en-us/Victory-Motorcycles/2010/Pages/Find-Your-Model.aspx) with new paint back together :p:p it's an 04 with silver goldish paint and a 1500 cc engine :cool:
GregA
Nov 29, 05:51 PM
B) Add a built in iPod dock. This would enable friends to bring their iPod to your iTv and play their videos.
Well, it has a USB port. Wouldn't it be better to use an existing dock through the USB port than have it on the iTV itself? Easier to put the iTV in your stereo cabinet that way.
ps. Perhaps an external hard disk, external HD-DVD drive, eyeSight, digital TV tuner, and iPod will compete for 1 USB port...
Well, it has a USB port. Wouldn't it be better to use an existing dock through the USB port than have it on the iTV itself? Easier to put the iTV in your stereo cabinet that way.
ps. Perhaps an external hard disk, external HD-DVD drive, eyeSight, digital TV tuner, and iPod will compete for 1 USB port...
No comments:
Post a Comment