NXTMIKE
May 2, 04:22 PM
Whatever happened to Command-Delete?
....this is starting to look like Aero in Windows Vista.
See any similarities?
http://thecustomizewindows.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/How-to-remove-the-confirmation-prompt-to-delete-any-file-in-Windows-7-2.png
http://cdn.macrumors.com/article/2011/05/02/171331-lion_delete_evernote.jpg
....this is starting to look like Aero in Windows Vista.
See any similarities?
http://thecustomizewindows.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/How-to-remove-the-confirmation-prompt-to-delete-any-file-in-Windows-7-2.png
http://cdn.macrumors.com/article/2011/05/02/171331-lion_delete_evernote.jpg
AppliedVisual
Nov 15, 12:34 PM
You are not a developer, I take it?
Are you seriously suggesting that a developer should ship a product with features that are not only untested, but haven't even been tried out?
What do you prefer: Unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, 50 percent CPU usage, or unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, kaboom!
Being a developer with a fair bit of graphics programming and multithreaded development experience, I would say the solution is somewhere in-between. There's no reason software isn't being planned for the upcoming CPU architectures and newer versions being developed to handle such. In other words, it's no secret that this hardware is coming, we've known about quad-core clovertown CPUs for nearly a year.. Engineering samples started shipping several months ago (early september, IIRC). Too bad Apple doesn't make pre-release hardware available via higher-level ADC programs, only a select few get the priviledge.
Programmers should make the effort to accommodate upcoming multi-core designs into their software development cycle. Once a new system is released, it should be a minimal effort to test and tweak the software for the new system and quickly release an update, thus making their customers only wait a week or two from when the systems first ship as opposed to several weeks/months while much of an application is re-written to accommodate 8 cores since the last version was hard-coded to handle 4. And then the cycle starts again in 18 months when 12 or 16 core chips start shipping. I don't think the software industry has really warmed-up to the multi-core paradigm just yet. They have been resisting it for years as anyone who has run multiprocessor systems over the years will attest to. But this is the way it's going to be for a while and eventually we'll hit a core barrier, just as the MHz barrier popped up. Both Intel and AMD are predicting 80 to 120 cores being the max for the x86 architecture. So start planning and figuring how to micro-manage threads and fibers within your code because we'll be hitting 16 to 24 cores by 2010 and MHz per core isn't going to creep much past 3GHz. And the current thread per task, thread per CPU core mentality that many programmers have is not the proper way to approach this.
Are you seriously suggesting that a developer should ship a product with features that are not only untested, but haven't even been tried out?
What do you prefer: Unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, 50 percent CPU usage, or unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, kaboom!
Being a developer with a fair bit of graphics programming and multithreaded development experience, I would say the solution is somewhere in-between. There's no reason software isn't being planned for the upcoming CPU architectures and newer versions being developed to handle such. In other words, it's no secret that this hardware is coming, we've known about quad-core clovertown CPUs for nearly a year.. Engineering samples started shipping several months ago (early september, IIRC). Too bad Apple doesn't make pre-release hardware available via higher-level ADC programs, only a select few get the priviledge.
Programmers should make the effort to accommodate upcoming multi-core designs into their software development cycle. Once a new system is released, it should be a minimal effort to test and tweak the software for the new system and quickly release an update, thus making their customers only wait a week or two from when the systems first ship as opposed to several weeks/months while much of an application is re-written to accommodate 8 cores since the last version was hard-coded to handle 4. And then the cycle starts again in 18 months when 12 or 16 core chips start shipping. I don't think the software industry has really warmed-up to the multi-core paradigm just yet. They have been resisting it for years as anyone who has run multiprocessor systems over the years will attest to. But this is the way it's going to be for a while and eventually we'll hit a core barrier, just as the MHz barrier popped up. Both Intel and AMD are predicting 80 to 120 cores being the max for the x86 architecture. So start planning and figuring how to micro-manage threads and fibers within your code because we'll be hitting 16 to 24 cores by 2010 and MHz per core isn't going to creep much past 3GHz. And the current thread per task, thread per CPU core mentality that many programmers have is not the proper way to approach this.
lordonuthin
Nov 20, 09:51 PM
holy crap dude, thats why i fold at work. since big adv i shut off my 4ghz hackie folder
how many machines do you have running?
8 and I would never be allowed to do any folding at work, even though I work in IT at a large biotech firm...
how many machines do you have running?
8 and I would never be allowed to do any folding at work, even though I work in IT at a large biotech firm...
CIA
Apr 12, 08:56 PM
50 years ago there were no computers. If you want to go back to the moviola, nobody is stopping you. You seem to think that sticking with outdated metaphors is inherently somehow better.
You may have never used iMovie but it is foolish to assume that none of us have. That idea that you can't edit in iMovie is nonsense, and absurd on the face of it.
The basic process of "This is my source, this is my output" has been around as long as film editing. The overall look of video editing, be it tape to tape, or the current (FC7) editing layout is more or less the same. In points, out points, etc.
Anyway, you know what. Fine. You can have your new iMovie. All yours. I sure as hell can't use it. The trailers in '11 were cute, but beyond that, it's not nearly good enough for polished output. If you want am, there's your option.
All I'm asking is they leave final cut PRO to the pros who know how to use it and like the interface. I want under the hood tweaks to make it faster. Cocoa?
You may have never used iMovie but it is foolish to assume that none of us have. That idea that you can't edit in iMovie is nonsense, and absurd on the face of it.
The basic process of "This is my source, this is my output" has been around as long as film editing. The overall look of video editing, be it tape to tape, or the current (FC7) editing layout is more or less the same. In points, out points, etc.
Anyway, you know what. Fine. You can have your new iMovie. All yours. I sure as hell can't use it. The trailers in '11 were cute, but beyond that, it's not nearly good enough for polished output. If you want am, there's your option.
All I'm asking is they leave final cut PRO to the pros who know how to use it and like the interface. I want under the hood tweaks to make it faster. Cocoa?
spicyapple
Aug 29, 01:54 PM
Hope they bring back the $499 price point, Merom or not
I agree. :)
I was shocked when the price of the core duo minis increased in price above $500. As mentioned several times, that is the reason to buy a Mac mini. I think we'll see meroms in the iMacs as they represent the mid-level Macs in Apples line-up.
I agree. :)
I was shocked when the price of the core duo minis increased in price above $500. As mentioned several times, that is the reason to buy a Mac mini. I think we'll see meroms in the iMacs as they represent the mid-level Macs in Apples line-up.
Don Kosak
May 2, 05:20 PM
I wonder if this means MacOS will end up with iOS-style "multi-tasking."
iOS style multitasking features (benefits) are indeed in Lion.
Applications written for Lion can "suspend and resume" without having to "save and close" documents. The reason the little light below running apps on the Dock was removed is that "running" is now more of a decision between the App and OS -- not so much the user. (APP - "Am I idle right now? Can I resume from this point very quickly? If so, I'll just suspend myself till the user or an event wakes me back up. No need to burn RAM or CPU, the user won't even notice I'm not here.)
There is no reason with modern computer architecture for humans to do memory management by getting involved with which programs are actually physically in memory/active. We have 7200rpm SATA3 or SSD drives, multicore processors with Gigahertz speeds, and Gigabytes of RAM...
The way we interact with Multitasking in Windows 7 and OS X Snow Leopard is based on the hardware limitations imposed by 640K RAM, 4.7 Megahertz single core processor, and Floppy Disks. Apple took the first brave step away from that with iOS. It's good to see it moving forward in Lion.
iOS style multitasking features (benefits) are indeed in Lion.
Applications written for Lion can "suspend and resume" without having to "save and close" documents. The reason the little light below running apps on the Dock was removed is that "running" is now more of a decision between the App and OS -- not so much the user. (APP - "Am I idle right now? Can I resume from this point very quickly? If so, I'll just suspend myself till the user or an event wakes me back up. No need to burn RAM or CPU, the user won't even notice I'm not here.)
There is no reason with modern computer architecture for humans to do memory management by getting involved with which programs are actually physically in memory/active. We have 7200rpm SATA3 or SSD drives, multicore processors with Gigahertz speeds, and Gigabytes of RAM...
The way we interact with Multitasking in Windows 7 and OS X Snow Leopard is based on the hardware limitations imposed by 640K RAM, 4.7 Megahertz single core processor, and Floppy Disks. Apple took the first brave step away from that with iOS. It's good to see it moving forward in Lion.
Roy Hobbs
Jan 2, 11:30 AM
Since Intel is releasing the 2.0 Ghz C2Q chip this week, it seems likely to find its way into an iTV and/or iMac device. That's four cores on the cheap.
Rocketman
Highly unlikely that the Quad chip will end up in the iTV. Especially at the already announced $299 proce point of iTV
Rocketman
Highly unlikely that the Quad chip will end up in the iTV. Especially at the already announced $299 proce point of iTV
.jpg "Tage:justin bieber biography")
takao
Mar 1, 03:52 PM
and VW with their darn PumpeD�se engines sure didn't help ... the PD concept was always good for saving fuel but those engines could have easily put into a tractor pulling contest
today IMHO the german carmaker diesels are leading the way only in fuel usage and torque ratings. In regards to emissions & noise/smooth running the french (PSA) and Fiat have very likely taken over
and yeah it has mostly has to do with trucks using the diesel engines.. because you know even her in europe those trucks are smelly and noisy ... even if yourself are driving in a diesel behind them ;)
today IMHO the german carmaker diesels are leading the way only in fuel usage and torque ratings. In regards to emissions & noise/smooth running the french (PSA) and Fiat have very likely taken over
and yeah it has mostly has to do with trucks using the diesel engines.. because you know even her in europe those trucks are smelly and noisy ... even if yourself are driving in a diesel behind them ;)
DrFrankTM
Aug 25, 09:05 AM
I'd be shocked if we saw Merom based Minis before Merom based MBP and MB.. maybe a Core Duo upgrade, to hold us over? A price drop and high speed Yonah?
OR wishful thinking from someone who doesn't want his Core Duo Mini to seem old(even though its not)
Merom would be a good jump up for the Mini. I think it'd be cool if they offer it (even though I've had my Core Duo for just a couple of months :P), but I agree with you that we might simply see faster Yonah chips in the new Minis. One way or the other though, I'm happy the processor isn't soldered. When Merom drops in price, I'll grab the fastest thing I can put in my Mini. Chances are it will make it faster than whatever's the ultimate you can buy from Apple at that time. It's a fun time to be a Mini owner...
OR wishful thinking from someone who doesn't want his Core Duo Mini to seem old(even though its not)
Merom would be a good jump up for the Mini. I think it'd be cool if they offer it (even though I've had my Core Duo for just a couple of months :P), but I agree with you that we might simply see faster Yonah chips in the new Minis. One way or the other though, I'm happy the processor isn't soldered. When Merom drops in price, I'll grab the fastest thing I can put in my Mini. Chances are it will make it faster than whatever's the ultimate you can buy from Apple at that time. It's a fun time to be a Mini owner...
SchneiderMan
Nov 27, 02:20 PM
I like this. I really wish it didn't have the logo, though. Much classier as just a photograph, IMHO.
Yeah I wish I could Photoshop it LOL.
Yeah I wish I could Photoshop it LOL.
flopticalcube
Apr 22, 09:51 AM
Why would Apple release an iMac refresh a couple of months before a new OS debuts? Also, this would be the FASTEST REFRESH IN APPLE HISTORY at 9 months.
You all fell for the hype and made Bri@n T0ng (eat that SEO) and Sea-NET advertising revenue. :rolleyes:
Not correct. Since the launch of Intel iMacs there have been three occasions when refreshes are shorter than 9 months so it's not unprecedented. What would be unprecedented would be simultaneous release of hw and sw so that is unlikely.
You all fell for the hype and made Bri@n T0ng (eat that SEO) and Sea-NET advertising revenue. :rolleyes:
Not correct. Since the launch of Intel iMacs there have been three occasions when refreshes are shorter than 9 months so it's not unprecedented. What would be unprecedented would be simultaneous release of hw and sw so that is unlikely.
HecubusPro
Sep 7, 01:17 PM
5. iPods screens are too small to watch full length movies on, and their disk space is too limited for movies (iPod nano outsells the video iPod)
A lot of thought went into your opinion, and it was a good read (I agree with a lot of it), but I have a slight problem with point 5. Not a big problem, just a slight one. :)
I have a 30GB iPod video, and I do enjoy watching movies and tv shows on it. I also have what I think is a ton of content on it (all 3 LOTR movies extended editions, 150 eps. of various Star Trek episodes, a couple of Star Trek movies, all 3 star wars movies, all 3 Indiana Jones movies, about 30 eps. of Kids in the Hall, Akira, a few episodes of Deadwood, 5 or 6 other movies [not pr0n :) ] and about 30 music videos) and I still have 8gigs of space left on the drive.
I have no problem watching movies on the small screen. I enjoy it, but that's my opinion. I find there's plenty of space on the drive for tons of content, but you may look at that and say that's not a lot.
I will however, very much look forward to a widescreen iPod video. I hope it comes out on the 12th, but I don't think it will. We'll see.
A lot of thought went into your opinion, and it was a good read (I agree with a lot of it), but I have a slight problem with point 5. Not a big problem, just a slight one. :)
I have a 30GB iPod video, and I do enjoy watching movies and tv shows on it. I also have what I think is a ton of content on it (all 3 LOTR movies extended editions, 150 eps. of various Star Trek episodes, a couple of Star Trek movies, all 3 star wars movies, all 3 Indiana Jones movies, about 30 eps. of Kids in the Hall, Akira, a few episodes of Deadwood, 5 or 6 other movies [not pr0n :) ] and about 30 music videos) and I still have 8gigs of space left on the drive.
I have no problem watching movies on the small screen. I enjoy it, but that's my opinion. I find there's plenty of space on the drive for tons of content, but you may look at that and say that's not a lot.
I will however, very much look forward to a widescreen iPod video. I hope it comes out on the 12th, but I don't think it will. We'll see.
mtbdudex
Apr 21, 11:13 AM
Time to hide my iPhone file from the wife:rolleyes:
Seriously......privacy issues seem all over the place in this digital age....here is another example.
I guess we need a law disclosing if such and such device tracks you and needs to disclose that to you clearly via a warning label/other....
Seriously......privacy issues seem all over the place in this digital age....here is another example.
I guess we need a law disclosing if such and such device tracks you and needs to disclose that to you clearly via a warning label/other....
Doctor Q
Sep 1, 02:03 PM
How big and small an iMac would consumers actually want? 50"? 10"?
Will we eventually see an ad with Verne Troyer and Yao Ming working side-by-side on their big and small desktop Macintoshes?
Will we eventually see an ad with Verne Troyer and Yao Ming working side-by-side on their big and small desktop Macintoshes?
0815
May 2, 04:25 PM
Perhaps, though I suspect for some people, the MAS will be the only way they interact with apps on the Mac.
arn
True, but I still would wish for a consistent look and feel (and not the need to remember if I installed through MAS or download to know where to find apps or how to uninstall)
but I'm afraid that Apple is lately no longer on board with consistent behavior and look&feel (just look at the buttons on iTunes, MAS and other apps - no consistency anymore - or is it just public beta testing to get feedback what people like?)
I always enjoyed that things are more consistent on MacOS than under Windows (especially across apps [with exceptions]) - but if even Apple doesn't do that anymore ....
arn
True, but I still would wish for a consistent look and feel (and not the need to remember if I installed through MAS or download to know where to find apps or how to uninstall)
but I'm afraid that Apple is lately no longer on board with consistent behavior and look&feel (just look at the buttons on iTunes, MAS and other apps - no consistency anymore - or is it just public beta testing to get feedback what people like?)
I always enjoyed that things are more consistent on MacOS than under Windows (especially across apps [with exceptions]) - but if even Apple doesn't do that anymore ....
macman2790
Nov 27, 01:19 PM
this would be cool. It would even be better if someone other than the digitimes discovered it.
noriyori
Nov 29, 03:02 PM
I would just hope they would have video streaming like the slingbox so you can access all of your content from where ever you may be around the globe.
three
Feb 6, 03:57 PM
It has been fairly nice lately so perfect time to get her clean again. Nothing much has changed since the last time I posted, installed a Fujita F5 CAI not too long ago though. I plan on getting BC coils, and new (non fake) wheels fairly soon.
http://www.imgur.com/OmeHh.jpg
http://www.imgur.com/OmeHh.jpg
QuarterSwede
Apr 10, 06:18 PM
as the other guys have said, in the UK automatics are pretty rare. i think we all know one friend or so who has an Auto only license, everyone else just gets a normal license.
if you are the sort of person who enjoys driving to any degree then a manual gearbox is much better. autos are just so boring, they never kick down when you need it or bizarrely hold on to a gear for much longer than you were expecting. im sure there are some good autos out there but they will always be more inefficient than a manual.
When is the last time you were in an automatic and what year/make/model was the car?
Automatics these days are generally a LOT better than they used to be. This is coming from someone who really loves driving a stick on country roads and likes the control you get from one.
I'm starting to think most stick drivers are blind to how much automatics have changed.
if you are the sort of person who enjoys driving to any degree then a manual gearbox is much better. autos are just so boring, they never kick down when you need it or bizarrely hold on to a gear for much longer than you were expecting. im sure there are some good autos out there but they will always be more inefficient than a manual.
When is the last time you were in an automatic and what year/make/model was the car?
Automatics these days are generally a LOT better than they used to be. This is coming from someone who really loves driving a stick on country roads and likes the control you get from one.
I'm starting to think most stick drivers are blind to how much automatics have changed.
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 03:38 PM
Why would I look at anything else if it were OK to use Windows?
Well then why the hell are you even chanting from the rooftops about how great Fusion is *supposedly* going to be when you KNOW that the chances of Apple using it are slim to none? It's like a kid nagging his parents for the ice cream that has a fancier logo and packaging when they know their parents aren't going to buy it for them because in reality it's all the same and will most likely taste worse then what they bought previously despite what their ads say.
Well then why the hell are you even chanting from the rooftops about how great Fusion is *supposedly* going to be when you KNOW that the chances of Apple using it are slim to none? It's like a kid nagging his parents for the ice cream that has a fancier logo and packaging when they know their parents aren't going to buy it for them because in reality it's all the same and will most likely taste worse then what they bought previously despite what their ads say.
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
quagmire
Mar 6, 12:18 PM
That's true, though there have been a few successes, like the Ford Focus.
We won't see the success of the global Ford Focus until the 2012 Focus. Before the new model, the American and Euro Focus were completely different. Only thing they shared was the name.
We won't see the success of the global Ford Focus until the 2012 Focus. Before the new model, the American and Euro Focus were completely different. Only thing they shared was the name.
truz
Aug 6, 08:51 PM
Longhorn is code name, The product name is Vista you will not see a third name for windows vista. Just like Windows XP I think was called Whistler (code name).
Just about all companies give there product a code name and then a release name once it's ready for the retail stores or a public beta like you see windows vista.
Just about all companies give there product a code name and then a release name once it's ready for the retail stores or a public beta like you see windows vista.
macgeek18
Feb 18, 12:59 AM
Oh, it was mostly my media. I have a large collection of music/movies/tv shows and I can only fit a certain amount on my iPhone and iPad. I turned off my mac mini at home since I was going to be gone for 2 months here so I can't stream from that. Even if I could, my wifi here is terrible, Netflix is always poor quality and has a hard time keeping up with that. So I bought the macbook and a 1TB hard drive to install when I get back home and then I'm headed off again for my mobilization and then deployment in the summer. Just wanted to be able to take my whole library with me. The MBP will also be used for college when I get back from Afghanistan.
Wait..You said military school then you say deployment to Afghanistan? Do you mean bootamp or tech school? I'm confused. lol Btw which branch are you in?
Wait..You said military school then you say deployment to Afghanistan? Do you mean bootamp or tech school? I'm confused. lol Btw which branch are you in?