guzhogi
Jul 18, 09:56 AM
Why not offer both a subscription and an a-la-carte system? The rental movies could be cheaper, lesser quality and last for only a certain amount of plays/days while the ones you buy to own can be of higher quality, more expensive and you get to keep it.
Macula
Jan 11, 10:28 PM
In colloquial modern Greek, "air" is metaphorically a price premium one pays for hype.
Sinister.
Sinister.
twoodcc
Mar 25, 12:12 PM
congrats to 4JNA for 6 million points!
zerolight
Jul 18, 05:28 AM
Thing is Steve Jobs is going to pull the usual trick (stupid contracts) and only release this to the American public. Rubbish if you ask me, we live in a world of more than one country. Which is why this sounds like another stupid pipe dream that the rest of the world will never get to enjoy *points at TV shows*.
Iggy :rolleyes:
Surely the TV Shows issue is because the US shows are sold on to European TV Stations, usually after the show has aired in the states. These TV Stations aren't going to be too pleased if they've shelled out a bucketload of money for the UK premier of 24 for example, only to have it show up on iTunes before they've even aired it.
The only way it can work is if iTunes waits until after all the channels have aired it first. In the UK you'd find 24 showing up on something like E4, then Channel 4, then some of the scrubbers like Channel 5 or Bravo would likely have a deal, then it could show up on iTunes. By then the show is so old that there's no point. Hence, I imagine, why we don't get iTunes TV Shows here.
Iggy :rolleyes:
Surely the TV Shows issue is because the US shows are sold on to European TV Stations, usually after the show has aired in the states. These TV Stations aren't going to be too pleased if they've shelled out a bucketload of money for the UK premier of 24 for example, only to have it show up on iTunes before they've even aired it.
The only way it can work is if iTunes waits until after all the channels have aired it first. In the UK you'd find 24 showing up on something like E4, then Channel 4, then some of the scrubbers like Channel 5 or Bravo would likely have a deal, then it could show up on iTunes. By then the show is so old that there's no point. Hence, I imagine, why we don't get iTunes TV Shows here.
Multimedia
Nov 15, 05:43 PM
Im really looking forwards to this, if the 8-core 2.66 Macpro its going to cost just a little more than a quad 3ghz Macpro, im going to be buying as soon as it hits the website...
As a recent Mac switcher, coming straight in with a base spec macpro(4x2.66/4gb/1750gbHDD), im now happy to invest in a more powerful machine.
My only concern is the heat... my current Macpro runs 24/7 and 95% of the time is at full load across all 4 cores... and its still silent with temps never going over 52c... will these quad core chips run much hotter, meaning the front fans have to spin faster/noisier to keep the machine cool?Maybe. If Apple goes from the 80 Watt 3GHz Woody to the 120 Watt 2.66GHz Clovertown then definitely. But if Apple chooses to only offer the 80 Watt 2.33GHz Dual Clovertown, then perhaps not and we'll all be happier campers. Or perhaps Apple has other cooling schemes in mind to keep a 2.66GHz set of Clovertowns quiet via other ways. Given that the Logic board stays the same, I'd rather buy the 2.33GHz version.
As a recent Mac switcher, coming straight in with a base spec macpro(4x2.66/4gb/1750gbHDD), im now happy to invest in a more powerful machine.
My only concern is the heat... my current Macpro runs 24/7 and 95% of the time is at full load across all 4 cores... and its still silent with temps never going over 52c... will these quad core chips run much hotter, meaning the front fans have to spin faster/noisier to keep the machine cool?Maybe. If Apple goes from the 80 Watt 3GHz Woody to the 120 Watt 2.66GHz Clovertown then definitely. But if Apple chooses to only offer the 80 Watt 2.33GHz Dual Clovertown, then perhaps not and we'll all be happier campers. Or perhaps Apple has other cooling schemes in mind to keep a 2.66GHz set of Clovertowns quiet via other ways. Given that the Logic board stays the same, I'd rather buy the 2.33GHz version.
maceleven
Jan 13, 01:46 AM
Apple and several other companies began lobbying the Federal Communications Commission, which regulates use of the airwaves in the
twoodcc
Feb 8, 09:54 PM
Thanx!
Never thought I'd ever get to this point when I started folding (almost) 4 years ago
;)
yeah i never thought i'd even get to 1 million. much less 5. keep it up!
On a side note, I have reached #977 overall with 6.4 mio units! I didn't think it was possible before the bigadv units...
mio?
Never thought I'd ever get to this point when I started folding (almost) 4 years ago
;)
yeah i never thought i'd even get to 1 million. much less 5. keep it up!
On a side note, I have reached #977 overall with 6.4 mio units! I didn't think it was possible before the bigadv units...
mio?
Earendil
Nov 27, 09:49 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
petej
Jul 18, 02:30 AM
Movie rentals good. I rarely watch a movie more than once so this would suit me fine. I don't rent as much as would like to currently because I hate the trudge of taking the damn thing back to the rental store.
Movie subscriptions bad. I don't watch enough of them for it to be worth my while to subscribe to any Movie service. Work and kids make sure of that.
Movie download to own - no way. The last thing I want to do is fill up my HD with mountains of films that I'll probably never watch again and then have to back them all up to CD/DVD.
Kid's movies - These do get watched over and over again so hey, I can buy the DVD.
Now what would be cool added value is if I could choose the movie I want to rent from anywhere in the world and get it downloaded to my playback device (doesn't have to be a mac as such could just be an apple media center box) at home so that it is sitting waiting there when i get back. That could be great use for WAP / 3G mobile phones.
Streaming movies are hopeless. My broadband may be fast but it still suffers from way too much congestion at my ISP for this to be reliable for anything other than a low res movie.
Movie subscriptions bad. I don't watch enough of them for it to be worth my while to subscribe to any Movie service. Work and kids make sure of that.
Movie download to own - no way. The last thing I want to do is fill up my HD with mountains of films that I'll probably never watch again and then have to back them all up to CD/DVD.
Kid's movies - These do get watched over and over again so hey, I can buy the DVD.
Now what would be cool added value is if I could choose the movie I want to rent from anywhere in the world and get it downloaded to my playback device (doesn't have to be a mac as such could just be an apple media center box) at home so that it is sitting waiting there when i get back. That could be great use for WAP / 3G mobile phones.
Streaming movies are hopeless. My broadband may be fast but it still suffers from way too much congestion at my ISP for this to be reliable for anything other than a low res movie.
BlizzardBomb
Aug 29, 09:01 AM
But this IS Apple were talking about lol. Anyway the article doesnt mention which 1.66/1.83 chips they will use.
It says Core Duo. If we were talking about Merom, it would be Core 2 Duo.
It says Core Duo. If we were talking about Merom, it would be Core 2 Duo.
czeluff
Jan 12, 12:25 PM
I think the "Air" more likely refers to over the air rentals.
Bingo! This guy nailed it. Apple maintains a professional naming scheme for all of their machines. "Macbook Air" is NOT one of them.
Based on the current specs listed, here's what consumers would choose between (and this is why those specs are wrong):
Macbook: 13.3", ~$1100, Optical Drive.
Macbook Air: 13.3, ~$1500, No Optical Drive.
Sounds like a pretty dumb decision to me. I'll take the cheaper one ANY DAY.
Bingo! This guy nailed it. Apple maintains a professional naming scheme for all of their machines. "Macbook Air" is NOT one of them.
Based on the current specs listed, here's what consumers would choose between (and this is why those specs are wrong):
Macbook: 13.3", ~$1100, Optical Drive.
Macbook Air: 13.3, ~$1500, No Optical Drive.
Sounds like a pretty dumb decision to me. I'll take the cheaper one ANY DAY.
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 03:07 PM
I'm not talking about using a discrete GPU, but about what you can do with just the CPU (or should I call it "APU"?).
Once again, Sandy Bridge will smoke the Llano CPU. The amount of applications that currently support OpenCL are slim to none. You can keep using your theoretical AMD video to somehow prove something but the fact remains: Sandy Bridge's CPU will outperform AMD's Llano in EVERY application that isn't supported for OpenCL, and it will outperform it in EVERY application that does have OpenCL support if you have a discrete GPU. End of story. Saying that Sandy Bridge is a 'bad purchase' is laughable at best when we haven't even seen any hard benchmarks for Llano, all we've seen a video from AMD's own YouTube channel. What the hell do you expect them to upload? Them getting destroyed by Intel like they do in every other test that has been done since 2006?
Once again, Sandy Bridge will smoke the Llano CPU. The amount of applications that currently support OpenCL are slim to none. You can keep using your theoretical AMD video to somehow prove something but the fact remains: Sandy Bridge's CPU will outperform AMD's Llano in EVERY application that isn't supported for OpenCL, and it will outperform it in EVERY application that does have OpenCL support if you have a discrete GPU. End of story. Saying that Sandy Bridge is a 'bad purchase' is laughable at best when we haven't even seen any hard benchmarks for Llano, all we've seen a video from AMD's own YouTube channel. What the hell do you expect them to upload? Them getting destroyed by Intel like they do in every other test that has been done since 2006?
briantology
Oct 23, 01:26 PM
When does anyone think Apple will throw in the rumored Flash mem?
andrew.gw
Apr 4, 09:29 AM
I can. Full screen is in large part based on the iOS, if that holds true the address bar is staying.
That's true, but even in iOS the address bar hides when you scroll down to save space for content. In Lion DP2, Apple has implemented a nice little auto�hide for the bookmarks bar and tab bar � I just don't see why they couldn't do the same thing for the navigation bar.
It's no big deal; I probably wouldn't hide my navigation bar anyway. All I'm saying is that I think they'll make it an option.
That's true, but even in iOS the address bar hides when you scroll down to save space for content. In Lion DP2, Apple has implemented a nice little auto�hide for the bookmarks bar and tab bar � I just don't see why they couldn't do the same thing for the navigation bar.
It's no big deal; I probably wouldn't hide my navigation bar anyway. All I'm saying is that I think they'll make it an option.
DewGuy1999
Apr 21, 11:19 AM
Amazing that a thread on whether or not a person CAN drive a stick shift car has turned into a full blown debate on the merits of automatic vs manual transmissions. Personally I think this argument is similar to the Mac vs PC argument that has gone on for years, ultimately they're different, and a person should be able to use whichever one (or both) they choose for their own personal reasons. In both cases, transmissions and personal computers, they have their good points and their bad points. To each their own...
berkleeboy210
Sep 1, 12:03 PM
just checked the apple store... currently 1-2 business day shipping time for the iMac.
this could mean updates on 9/5.....
MBP's still ship w/ in 24hrs though.
this could mean updates on 9/5.....
MBP's still ship w/ in 24hrs though.
mr.steevo
Apr 19, 01:10 PM
Just in time - I just decided yesterday that it is time to replace my first generation iMac.
You still use a 233 Mhz iMac G3?
That's impressive.
You still use a 233 Mhz iMac G3?
That's impressive.
AFPoster
Mar 22, 12:50 PM
Nope. Not everyone. I am quite happy where I am… thanks.
Quite frankly after a few visits I am happy never to return to the Land of the super-sized, home of the intolerant.
HAHA, if I lived in Europe I wouldn't want to leave that place, not to say that's where you are, but Europe is great. Not everyone is true, but a big understatement thus the millions of illegal immigrants and people constantly being killed trying to get here. Ahem, Mexico for one.
Quite frankly after a few visits I am happy never to return to the Land of the super-sized, home of the intolerant.
HAHA, if I lived in Europe I wouldn't want to leave that place, not to say that's where you are, but Europe is great. Not everyone is true, but a big understatement thus the millions of illegal immigrants and people constantly being killed trying to get here. Ahem, Mexico for one.
rhythmac
Nov 27, 04:36 PM
Stop buying things for yourself! 'Tis the season of giving, you know.
but I need so many things! Am I selfish?...well maybe a little, but don't judge!!!!
but I need so many things! Am I selfish?...well maybe a little, but don't judge!!!!
pavelbure
Apr 12, 09:20 PM
To be more exact, "You wait while I use 2 of your 8 cores to render"
Ty that's what I thought it was. I know on fce that irritated me.
Ty that's what I thought it was. I know on fce that irritated me.
spookje
Jan 1, 05:55 PM
As long they don't announce a MacBook Pro update it's all fine for me. Not sure if I would be shocked when they announce 100 pixels extra screen, or better videocard. But if they are going for a higher resolution like 1920x1080px for a 15" inch edition. Then it will be troublesome for me!
wordoflife
Feb 17, 09:51 PM
Wow those are some really big speakers you have there! :eek:
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 05:30 PM
I am not trying to back pedal, I was talking about OpenCL before, I've been talking about that and graphics for a while now.
With respect to your objection, what does DirectX 10.1 mean in OpenCL terms? 1.0? 1.1?
All I can see about Sandy Bridge regarding OpenCL is conflicting information. As of now, it has no true OpenCL.
The DirectX version number has nothing to do with whether or not OpenCL support is possible. What does DirectX 10.1 mean in OpenCL terms? Absolutely nothing. They are two separate entities. The reason why Intel's IGP doesn't have true OpenCL support has absolutely nothing to do with a DirectX version number. There are tons of 'DirectX 10.1' cards that support OpenCL, hell the majority of the ones that you can use on Snow Leopard are 'DirectX 10.1' cards. DirectX 11 adds absolutely nothing in the aspect of which you were using it.
With respect to your objection, what does DirectX 10.1 mean in OpenCL terms? 1.0? 1.1?
All I can see about Sandy Bridge regarding OpenCL is conflicting information. As of now, it has no true OpenCL.
The DirectX version number has nothing to do with whether or not OpenCL support is possible. What does DirectX 10.1 mean in OpenCL terms? Absolutely nothing. They are two separate entities. The reason why Intel's IGP doesn't have true OpenCL support has absolutely nothing to do with a DirectX version number. There are tons of 'DirectX 10.1' cards that support OpenCL, hell the majority of the ones that you can use on Snow Leopard are 'DirectX 10.1' cards. DirectX 11 adds absolutely nothing in the aspect of which you were using it.
BeefUK
Aug 29, 09:23 AM
Why is everyone so hung up on Merom?
I never expected the mini to go that way this year. Remember, the entire point of the mini is to be LOW COST.
The switch to Intel caused the price of the mini to jump $100. I would much rather see its processor lag behind a little bit if they can get that price back to $499.
Same thing with the Macbook, I'd rather see a $999 Macbook with the current chips than a $1,099 Macbook that keeps up with the Macbook Pro's chips.
Of course, there's nothing saying Apple will lower the prices but IF they do then I would be very happy to see the "old" Intel chips stay in those machines another 6 months. The first core chips are still VERY fast chips, it's the rest of the system (video card) that's holding things up now. I wonder how much extra benefit you'd even get from a Merom chip in a mini.
I agree, if the mac mini is dropped in price but keeps the Core Duo, I think that is a logical step. I think one of the original ideas of the mini was to tempt switchers, who already have a PC, but want to try a mac for cheap. I was nearly tempted last year, but held off for the Intel Update, and then decided I wanted a laptop instead.
However if they keep prices the same, then that seems a strange decision.
I have to say though I hope u are wrong with regard to the Macbooks, i'm hoping for a Core 2 Duo update so I can purchase my first mac. Maybe if they don't i'll just save up some more money and buy and Core 2 Duo MBP when they're released!!
I never expected the mini to go that way this year. Remember, the entire point of the mini is to be LOW COST.
The switch to Intel caused the price of the mini to jump $100. I would much rather see its processor lag behind a little bit if they can get that price back to $499.
Same thing with the Macbook, I'd rather see a $999 Macbook with the current chips than a $1,099 Macbook that keeps up with the Macbook Pro's chips.
Of course, there's nothing saying Apple will lower the prices but IF they do then I would be very happy to see the "old" Intel chips stay in those machines another 6 months. The first core chips are still VERY fast chips, it's the rest of the system (video card) that's holding things up now. I wonder how much extra benefit you'd even get from a Merom chip in a mini.
I agree, if the mac mini is dropped in price but keeps the Core Duo, I think that is a logical step. I think one of the original ideas of the mini was to tempt switchers, who already have a PC, but want to try a mac for cheap. I was nearly tempted last year, but held off for the Intel Update, and then decided I wanted a laptop instead.
However if they keep prices the same, then that seems a strange decision.
I have to say though I hope u are wrong with regard to the Macbooks, i'm hoping for a Core 2 Duo update so I can purchase my first mac. Maybe if they don't i'll just save up some more money and buy and Core 2 Duo MBP when they're released!!
