Queso
Jul 25, 11:26 AM
What if he is?
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Point is that there ARE lots of people who like to expand their systems.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
To them, iMac is completely unsuitable, and PowerMac is simply too much (too much space, too much technology, too much money, you name it). There have been LOTS of people saying that they would love to see a relatively inexpensive Mac that is expandable. iMac is not that. Neither is PowerMac.
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs? Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result. Keeping the range small means they have tight control on inventory and can dedicate the Apple Stores to showing what Macs can do. So far it's brought the company a lot of money.
What happens if the screen in the iMac breaks down? The whole computer becomes useless. What if you need faster vid-card? you have to buy a new computer. All-in-one has it's benefits, but it has it's drawbacks, and there are lots of people who do not want those drawbacks.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Yes, minitower (for example) has it's drawbacks as well, but there are lots of people who would be willing to accept those drawback for the benefits such a system offers.
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Well good for you. How that helps ME is beyond me.
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Are we using somekind of miniature-desks or something? I have a rather typical desk, and it currently has a Mac Mini, a TFT-screen, old, huge printer that does not work, and it still has plenty of space for mouse, keyboard and other items.
Yeah, I used to have one of those, then I realised how much wasted space it was causing and ditched it for a smaller one. You obviously live in a bigger place than me, but then for me it's location, location, location :)
And that "small metallic box" means that your iMac loses that all-in-one elegance it now has.
I don't care about "all-in-one elegance". I didn't buy an iMac because it matches the curtains. I just want something that takes up minimum space. The iMac does that perfectly.
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
But only SOME of you. Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower? Jobs' arrogance or because they don't think it'll sell in enough quantity to justify it? As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Let's wait and see what comes out at WWDC. The G5 case had to be enormous for cooling reasons. The MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Point is that there ARE lots of people who like to expand their systems.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
To them, iMac is completely unsuitable, and PowerMac is simply too much (too much space, too much technology, too much money, you name it). There have been LOTS of people saying that they would love to see a relatively inexpensive Mac that is expandable. iMac is not that. Neither is PowerMac.
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs? Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result. Keeping the range small means they have tight control on inventory and can dedicate the Apple Stores to showing what Macs can do. So far it's brought the company a lot of money.
What happens if the screen in the iMac breaks down? The whole computer becomes useless. What if you need faster vid-card? you have to buy a new computer. All-in-one has it's benefits, but it has it's drawbacks, and there are lots of people who do not want those drawbacks.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Yes, minitower (for example) has it's drawbacks as well, but there are lots of people who would be willing to accept those drawback for the benefits such a system offers.
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Well good for you. How that helps ME is beyond me.
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Are we using somekind of miniature-desks or something? I have a rather typical desk, and it currently has a Mac Mini, a TFT-screen, old, huge printer that does not work, and it still has plenty of space for mouse, keyboard and other items.
Yeah, I used to have one of those, then I realised how much wasted space it was causing and ditched it for a smaller one. You obviously live in a bigger place than me, but then for me it's location, location, location :)
And that "small metallic box" means that your iMac loses that all-in-one elegance it now has.
I don't care about "all-in-one elegance". I didn't buy an iMac because it matches the curtains. I just want something that takes up minimum space. The iMac does that perfectly.
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
But only SOME of you. Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower? Jobs' arrogance or because they don't think it'll sell in enough quantity to justify it? As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Let's wait and see what comes out at WWDC. The G5 case had to be enormous for cooling reasons. The MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
joeshell383
Dec 20, 01:58 AM
V.I.S.T.A (Virus Infections Spyware Trojans Adware)
I like that one :D
I like that one :D
ksgant
Apr 13, 02:28 PM
What does it take to be an analyst now? Just some 20-sided dice and a few key/buzz word decisions to make?
These guys throw out hundreds of the wild-ass predictions each year and just through sheer probability, someone is right. But they always pat each other on the back in each other's blogs with stuff like "Wow, White really nailed that one didn't he".
These guys throw out hundreds of the wild-ass predictions each year and just through sheer probability, someone is right. But they always pat each other on the back in each other's blogs with stuff like "Wow, White really nailed that one didn't he".
RBR2
Apr 13, 11:58 AM
Do you trust Wikipedia? :) In fact the line above this one on Wikipedia says:
Everything I've read that is sourced to Intel says an add-on card won't be possible. It's my guess that the integration for Thunderbolt needs to be deeper than an PCI Express card, especially with its capability to carry video/data. It may be that Intel does not want people confused by data-only Thunderbolt ports. OTOH, I'm not a Thunderbolt engineer, so I may be completely mistaken. :D
Technical issues aside - odds are that Apple would rather sell you a new Mac Pro with Thunderbolt onboard.
I am not a Thunderbolt engineer either...in fact, it is interesting (and odd) that Intel is only now announcing the availability of a TB developer kit.
Do you trust the Wiki? While a grain of salt is advisable, I merely reference the item. It does seem to me, however, that the line you reference is talking about a non-GPU PCIe card. I had posted an earlier comment referencing the Intel position that there could not be a TB card (because TB must directly access both the graphics processor and the PCIe lanes). This means that there will not be a simple TB add-on card like adding a FW800/USB 2 card in the past.
The line I referenced seems to indicate that it would be possible for a TB controller to be on a graphics card (and thereby gaining direct access to the GPU) and have direct access to the PCIe lane(s) in which the "TB enabled Graphics Card" is mounted with true (video and data) TB port(s) on the outside.
Would Apple prefer to sell you a new machine? Of course they would. Apple have a well established, if nasty, pattern of abandoning the purchasers of earlier hardware to their fate (not co-incidentally, it is one of the arguments against the use of the Mac platform frequently aired by the PC community).
I believe I mentioned third party developers. If not I do so now. It would be an interesting project for a third party manufacturer to integrate a TB controller and associated ports onto a graphics card that is otherwise the same as a supported graphics card so that it would be recognized by the OS.
Whether Apple have tied access to the TB ports in some bizarre manner which would make this impossible only some clever engineers would know after looking at the new OS & hardware implementation. Apple probably could not care less, but it is a market opportunity for somebody nonetheless.
The reason for the earlier reference to the data only possibility is the reality that external storage for Mac Pros is severely hampered by the lack of a fast interface unless one has made the transition to fibre.
A good RAID array could challenge the current TB bandwidth, but I doubt anyone would complain too loudly considering the lack of alternatives and the degree of improvement over the status quo.
Cheers
Everything I've read that is sourced to Intel says an add-on card won't be possible. It's my guess that the integration for Thunderbolt needs to be deeper than an PCI Express card, especially with its capability to carry video/data. It may be that Intel does not want people confused by data-only Thunderbolt ports. OTOH, I'm not a Thunderbolt engineer, so I may be completely mistaken. :D
Technical issues aside - odds are that Apple would rather sell you a new Mac Pro with Thunderbolt onboard.
I am not a Thunderbolt engineer either...in fact, it is interesting (and odd) that Intel is only now announcing the availability of a TB developer kit.
Do you trust the Wiki? While a grain of salt is advisable, I merely reference the item. It does seem to me, however, that the line you reference is talking about a non-GPU PCIe card. I had posted an earlier comment referencing the Intel position that there could not be a TB card (because TB must directly access both the graphics processor and the PCIe lanes). This means that there will not be a simple TB add-on card like adding a FW800/USB 2 card in the past.
The line I referenced seems to indicate that it would be possible for a TB controller to be on a graphics card (and thereby gaining direct access to the GPU) and have direct access to the PCIe lane(s) in which the "TB enabled Graphics Card" is mounted with true (video and data) TB port(s) on the outside.
Would Apple prefer to sell you a new machine? Of course they would. Apple have a well established, if nasty, pattern of abandoning the purchasers of earlier hardware to their fate (not co-incidentally, it is one of the arguments against the use of the Mac platform frequently aired by the PC community).
I believe I mentioned third party developers. If not I do so now. It would be an interesting project for a third party manufacturer to integrate a TB controller and associated ports onto a graphics card that is otherwise the same as a supported graphics card so that it would be recognized by the OS.
Whether Apple have tied access to the TB ports in some bizarre manner which would make this impossible only some clever engineers would know after looking at the new OS & hardware implementation. Apple probably could not care less, but it is a market opportunity for somebody nonetheless.
The reason for the earlier reference to the data only possibility is the reality that external storage for Mac Pros is severely hampered by the lack of a fast interface unless one has made the transition to fibre.
A good RAID array could challenge the current TB bandwidth, but I doubt anyone would complain too loudly considering the lack of alternatives and the degree of improvement over the status quo.
Cheers
dba7dba
Apr 13, 02:35 PM
This. I can see manufacturers adopting Airplay or eventually adopting something more sophisticated like actual software from apple to mimic that of the Apple TV
you mean something like Samsung apps?
http://thenextweb.com/gadgets/2011/01/17/samsung-tv-apps-surpass-2-million-downloads/
you mean something like Samsung apps?
http://thenextweb.com/gadgets/2011/01/17/samsung-tv-apps-surpass-2-million-downloads/
DaBlackMamba
Mar 17, 01:25 PM
2 White Ipads 16GB! :apple:
Had fun in line too.
Waited from 7 AM.
Had fun in line too.
Waited from 7 AM.
Matt-M
Apr 28, 04:36 PM
That ones not really too accurate due to the camera angle...its on a slope.
It was on a slope. I used a guide line in Photoshop and rotated the original photo 0.9 degrees CCW to remove the slope. Check my photo vs. the original.
It was on a slope. I used a guide line in Photoshop and rotated the original photo 0.9 degrees CCW to remove the slope. Check my photo vs. the original.
cult hero
Apr 24, 02:49 AM
What product will the T-Mobile chic bash now??? :rolleyes:
The same one: AT&T's network. The phones never really mock the phone so much as they mock the slow network.
The same one: AT&T's network. The phones never really mock the phone so much as they mock the slow network.
timinbovey
Apr 26, 07:17 PM
Let's just assume it's half music and half movies. That's roughly 142,000 songs and over 3000 movies. At .99 cents per song and $10 per movie, that's $170,000 if he paid for it. And he's complaining about $20 year. Hmmm....
Well, I don't know about this guy specifically. But I own over 20,000 vinyl records. Average 10 tracks each, that's 200,000 songs right there. Not to count at least that many 45's. A collection I've gathered over 50 years. Not to mention 78's, cylinders, etc.
Ever shopped a used music store? Movie store? Goodwill? I have thousands of movies myself, many of which I only paid a dollar or even less for.
I download hundreds of songs from emusic for about half the iTunes price.
It's pretty easy to amass a large collectiion without ever paying retail, and being completely legal.
I can't even begin to count the LP's that have been GIVEN to me over the years by people who went to CD and didn't want them anymore, taking up room. Literally station wagons full -- back when station wagons were HUGE. Cost? How about 0 cents per track, except the time spent playing them into the computer. And I'll be damned if I rebuy all the vinyl I bought through the 60's, 70's and 80's.
Ever have someone GIVE you a few hundred CD's because they're all now in their computer and ipod, and they don't want them taking up the room anymore? Sure, thats probably not legal, however, they made a copy and gave the originals away! It certainly wasn't a legal violation on my part! Are they supposed to put them in the trash? I suppose so.
Any idea how many CD's you can buy out there at 50 cents a pop at second hand stores and garage sales? Somehow, that's still legal!
I know I'm not the only one like me out here! Just saying... you're not considering the possibilities. And there's no way I would EVEr pay to stream my stuff from the internet (there is no "cloud")
Well, I don't know about this guy specifically. But I own over 20,000 vinyl records. Average 10 tracks each, that's 200,000 songs right there. Not to count at least that many 45's. A collection I've gathered over 50 years. Not to mention 78's, cylinders, etc.
Ever shopped a used music store? Movie store? Goodwill? I have thousands of movies myself, many of which I only paid a dollar or even less for.
I download hundreds of songs from emusic for about half the iTunes price.
It's pretty easy to amass a large collectiion without ever paying retail, and being completely legal.
I can't even begin to count the LP's that have been GIVEN to me over the years by people who went to CD and didn't want them anymore, taking up room. Literally station wagons full -- back when station wagons were HUGE. Cost? How about 0 cents per track, except the time spent playing them into the computer. And I'll be damned if I rebuy all the vinyl I bought through the 60's, 70's and 80's.
Ever have someone GIVE you a few hundred CD's because they're all now in their computer and ipod, and they don't want them taking up the room anymore? Sure, thats probably not legal, however, they made a copy and gave the originals away! It certainly wasn't a legal violation on my part! Are they supposed to put them in the trash? I suppose so.
Any idea how many CD's you can buy out there at 50 cents a pop at second hand stores and garage sales? Somehow, that's still legal!
I know I'm not the only one like me out here! Just saying... you're not considering the possibilities. And there's no way I would EVEr pay to stream my stuff from the internet (there is no "cloud")
LagunaSol
Apr 28, 11:46 AM
Android is *unstoppable.
*when it's the only game in town
Let's get the iPhone on Sprint and T-Mobile and see how things shake out, hmm?
*when it's the only game in town
Let's get the iPhone on Sprint and T-Mobile and see how things shake out, hmm?
ten-oak-druid
Apr 29, 07:48 AM
It's actually 2.4 grams, which may not be a huge difference per se but in a product with such tight parts tollerance to me suggest differences in parts used. It may be the white casing, it may be a reshaped chassis or even a different chip. iFixit will tell.
Thanks for catching that. 2.4g yes.
Thanks for catching that. 2.4g yes.
louis Fashion
Apr 13, 08:22 PM
Might get this, might not. Don't do contracts so it would be a simple case of buying and selling. Something most people I know do. You lot (Americans) should start doing the same and stop being beholden to 24 month contracts.
Good pont London, I don't do contracts either, but I don't think the telcoms here in the US of Corporations will let us go with the UK plan. And if we do go on a 24 month contract I do believe that there is no cost reduction after the equipment is "paid" for. That is the 25 month cost the same as the 24th month.
Good pont London, I don't do contracts either, but I don't think the telcoms here in the US of Corporations will let us go with the UK plan. And if we do go on a 24 month contract I do believe that there is no cost reduction after the equipment is "paid" for. That is the 25 month cost the same as the 24th month.
BrianMojo
Jul 24, 10:33 PM
The new Ipod has no buttons, no scroll wheel, no headphone jack, no dock connector. In other words freedom from everything. The most aesthetic piece of technology ever conceived.
...
*ipod Nano will still have dock connector for now.
A non-physical hold switch would be highly impractical. I just want to be able to slip the thing into my pocket without worrying about changing the volume -- I don't want to have to use a fingerprint identification to do that.
Also, this was all posted on AppleInsider last week, why is this front-page news?
...
*ipod Nano will still have dock connector for now.
A non-physical hold switch would be highly impractical. I just want to be able to slip the thing into my pocket without worrying about changing the volume -- I don't want to have to use a fingerprint identification to do that.
Also, this was all posted on AppleInsider last week, why is this front-page news?
Macaroony
Mar 9, 01:38 AM
I would like to see them pull off a change of actor for once, without changing the character. I think it's an insult to the audience's intelligence that networks think we can't accept someone else in the role. They always go for the knee-jerk reaction, which is to kill off the character. Give us some credit, and a chance for another actor to make the role his own. It's not like it's unheard of. How many James Bonds have there been??
I'm sorry, but this never works. At some point, in every show that did the that it becomes some kind of inside joke on and off camera. I'm reminded of the 200th episode of Stargate: SG-1, where upon a ridiculous parody of the show one of the characters says:
"Never underestimate your audience. They're generally sensitive, intelligent people who respond positively to quality entertainment."
This on a sci-fi show with enough technobabble to keep you busy arguing with other viewers about the authenticity of the in-show's reality.
For movies it's different because each one is a narrative of it's own. You can't can't compare Sean Connery with Pierce Brosnan as you can't compare Never Say Never with Tomorrow Never Dies because both movies are done in their individual way.
On a television series, you have a continuous narrative that can change its direction, but as soon as you change major plot points or dare switch the main actors with new ones, that's a plain insult to the audience who watched from the start.
I'm sorry, but this never works. At some point, in every show that did the that it becomes some kind of inside joke on and off camera. I'm reminded of the 200th episode of Stargate: SG-1, where upon a ridiculous parody of the show one of the characters says:
"Never underestimate your audience. They're generally sensitive, intelligent people who respond positively to quality entertainment."
This on a sci-fi show with enough technobabble to keep you busy arguing with other viewers about the authenticity of the in-show's reality.
For movies it's different because each one is a narrative of it's own. You can't can't compare Sean Connery with Pierce Brosnan as you can't compare Never Say Never with Tomorrow Never Dies because both movies are done in their individual way.
On a television series, you have a continuous narrative that can change its direction, but as soon as you change major plot points or dare switch the main actors with new ones, that's a plain insult to the audience who watched from the start.
roadbloc
Mar 31, 01:25 PM
Looks awful. I smell an april fool's joke from Apple.
imacken
Nov 13, 03:33 AM
It's available in the Canadian Store.
That's weird. On the web-site it says US only - coming soon to ROW.
That's weird. On the web-site it says US only - coming soon to ROW.
shanmugam
May 3, 08:02 AM
sad sad, not the updated iMac :cool:
Chundles
Jul 25, 10:08 AM
look at the bottom of http://www.apple.com/mightymouse
what's this?
Mighty Mouse � Viacom International Inc. All Rights Reserved.
i thought apple made them :S
Never heard of the cartoon character Mighty Mouse (Here he comes to save the daaaaaaayyyyyyyyy!!!!!). Apple had to license the name from Viacom.
what's this?
Mighty Mouse � Viacom International Inc. All Rights Reserved.
i thought apple made them :S
Never heard of the cartoon character Mighty Mouse (Here he comes to save the daaaaaaayyyyyyyyy!!!!!). Apple had to license the name from Viacom.
roar08
Mar 11, 11:22 PM
Got mine at Target today. No waiting. They had 10 16's and 5 64's, all black. A Target 10 minutes away had 5 16's - all white.
caspersoong
Apr 29, 09:05 PM
That's tempting. Only if it were available here. Why isn't it?
SciFrog
Oct 20, 10:14 PM
Looks like 45 mins is more realistic. These chips seems as fast as i920, Impressive.
aardwolf
Sep 30, 09:55 AM
I get very good reception in the DC metro area (NoVA). I estimate only 1-5% dropped calls, which is acceptable to me.
Same here in the Memphis metro area... I probably get somewhere near 1%.
Same here in the Memphis metro area... I probably get somewhere near 1%.
maconservative
Apr 22, 05:21 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148a Safari/6533.18.5)
Fugly
That is all.
Fugly
That is all.
ProfessorApple
Apr 28, 12:29 PM
They can always try.
Please can we have some rumors abour iOS5 maybe?
Nice!
Please can we have some rumors abour iOS5 maybe?
Nice!
No comments:
Post a Comment