vand0576
Sep 1, 01:03 PM
I don't think they'll ever make the iMac very upgradable. While iMac and Mac Pro users tend to be a different type, I still think if they leave to much room for the iMac to grow at a bargain, then there will be no reason for a Mac Pro.
Computer lines (outside of Apple) overlap ALL THE TIME. It seems like all of you are afraid of the iMac outselling the Mac Pro. The smart thing to do is, yes, to make the iMac super-upgradeable but more expensive to do so, something which is probably intuitive anyway. People will then make the choice of an all-in-one or a tower. There is no such thing as a "too powerful" iMac. Apple sets the price, consumers buy.
Computer lines (outside of Apple) overlap ALL THE TIME. It seems like all of you are afraid of the iMac outselling the Mac Pro. The smart thing to do is, yes, to make the iMac super-upgradeable but more expensive to do so, something which is probably intuitive anyway. People will then make the choice of an all-in-one or a tower. There is no such thing as a "too powerful" iMac. Apple sets the price, consumers buy.
Metatron
Jan 1, 05:46 PM
Whatever happend to the thin macbook? That is all I wanted this year.
Leoff
Nov 27, 05:43 PM
This thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor to possibly complement the Mac Mini, Apple's only headless consumer desktop.
No, actually, this thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor.
There is no mention of it being a compliment to the Mac mini, a smaller pro version for a ProMac, or what it is.
Of course, all this is probably a moot point because
1) It's Digitimes, so chances are it's bogus.
2) It's Apple, so no matter what they charge, people will buy it.
No, actually, this thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor.
There is no mention of it being a compliment to the Mac mini, a smaller pro version for a ProMac, or what it is.
Of course, all this is probably a moot point because
1) It's Digitimes, so chances are it's bogus.
2) It's Apple, so no matter what they charge, people will buy it.
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?
Electro Funk
Jul 18, 07:49 PM
Yeah, if it's $9.99 to rent, it's going to fail. $1.99, might be worth it. I'm sure a lot of people will be happy, then a lot of people will complain. Both with have good points, but the rest of us won't care.
i wouldnt even pay a $1.99 if the resolution is the same as the current video content on iTunes... HORRID!
i wouldnt even pay a $1.99 if the resolution is the same as the current video content on iTunes... HORRID!
apb3
Aug 31, 10:12 AM
Blue sky on wireless? Think a device which works out presence of others, and can connect safely.
Imagine being able to *share* (not stream, but share) your tunes with others on a "I'm interested in your... can I share/get that from you).
This goes beyond fair use and would not be legal. Just because I buy a song or CD, movie whatever does not mean I can give it to all my friends. I'm sure you didn't mean that
If you want to use up all your authorized machines (what is it? 5 now?) for a few friends to listen to a few songs every once in a while - I guess that would be arguably OK, but I think it would still go beyond fair use rules.
Being on the tube/commuting for ~ 1 1/2 hours a day or so and seeing >6 ipods through glancing for white buds alone, the possiblities are huge.
What are net connections used mostly for (in terms of Mb up/down) It's P2P. There wouldn't be any roaming charges, any peak rates. You could do it in a lecture room, whilst you were studying, or having coffee with friends (sharing tunes, rather than listening )
Think one big interacting social darknet :D Think virality without PC's needed.
Someone has a cool tune, and it could replicate exponentially!
For more benefits: Linking up to USB wireless receiver chips - you can wireless move files to/from PC.
Hands free driving - using changeable function paddles/butons on the steeering wheel. Hell - You could have a HUD of iTunes on a car soon (or at the very least, hook it up to those screens in the back of those orrible 4x4s )
In terms of illegal possibilities, think discogs. The amount of music you'll bump into increases a lot, so the rarer stuff might be out there. You could strike up a friendship with someone who had say, the entire back catalogue of (insert your fave band/movie/TV series). People could be walking lossless discographies of current artists. A discog of an artist is at most probably under 10Gig, so for a >60Gig player...
Who needs radio when you can stream? You could get it to actively hunt for a MP3 id tag genre - rock/pop, or highly rated artists. You could have the function to hunt for certain artists/songs...
That's another reason why I want wireless.
All this still does not tip the scales in terms of cost/benefit. Wireless will eat up your battery. It will be clumsy and frustrating (I would really hate for the new Streets single to break off midway through because iPod girl gets off at her stop or walks out of range). Also, I would not be thrilled adding drain to my battery by engaging sharing/wireless just so a bunch of strangers can mooch off of me. If my friend wants to listen to a song I have there are many ways he can do so without adding cost to the iPod and my time by having to charge the iPod all the time to make it possible in the first place
As for wireless sync... why? My god man, if we've come to the point where putting the iPod in its base is too difficult, we're screwed. Maybe there'd be the odd time when you forgot your cable or dock on a trip but that should be a rare enough occurence. If you find you always forget your cables, get an extra. You're also not addressing that you'd need that cable or dock for charging anyway (especially since you're going to be using that wireless feature to kill your battery much more quickly).
The chance that someone with an iPod (who also happens to be willing to kill their battery for my enjoyment) will be in range long enough for me to enjoy a few x-ray specks or spacemen 3 tracks are, in my opinion, close to nil.
The car options using wireless make some degree of sense (you'd be able to charge the unit by the cig lighter at least), but this seems better addressed by car/stereo makers. They're already doing it. Theree are also adapters for sale that do this.
I don't have all I need yet in this area but hooking my iPod up to the charger/FM transmitter I have let's me use the steering wheel controls for everything except the menu/scrolling bits (I know that's a big thing but I've got it set up so the iPod in it's charger/transmitter is right next to my knee and easier to manipulate than a cell phone and no harder than using the controls on the radio that are not available on the steering column). The HUD would be cool, though, and would make me a safer driver... I always wanted a HUD for my car. I think Cadillac actually had a model with an optional HUD for the main instrument panel items a while back. I wonder why more auto makers don't do this... or do they and I am just ignorant?
All in all, I just don't see enough good in adding wireless (of whatever kind) to the iPod to justify it. Now, a non-iPod (new) product that had wireless with a limited music/photo/video feature set (iPhone?, iBerry?) might be on the horizon. That wouldn't be bad as it would give those you feel the same as you the option to get their much needed "wireless," while letting others enjoy the most elegant, easy to use media player on the market without the bloat.
Imagine being able to *share* (not stream, but share) your tunes with others on a "I'm interested in your... can I share/get that from you).
This goes beyond fair use and would not be legal. Just because I buy a song or CD, movie whatever does not mean I can give it to all my friends. I'm sure you didn't mean that
If you want to use up all your authorized machines (what is it? 5 now?) for a few friends to listen to a few songs every once in a while - I guess that would be arguably OK, but I think it would still go beyond fair use rules.
Being on the tube/commuting for ~ 1 1/2 hours a day or so and seeing >6 ipods through glancing for white buds alone, the possiblities are huge.
What are net connections used mostly for (in terms of Mb up/down) It's P2P. There wouldn't be any roaming charges, any peak rates. You could do it in a lecture room, whilst you were studying, or having coffee with friends (sharing tunes, rather than listening )
Think one big interacting social darknet :D Think virality without PC's needed.
Someone has a cool tune, and it could replicate exponentially!
For more benefits: Linking up to USB wireless receiver chips - you can wireless move files to/from PC.
Hands free driving - using changeable function paddles/butons on the steeering wheel. Hell - You could have a HUD of iTunes on a car soon (or at the very least, hook it up to those screens in the back of those orrible 4x4s )
In terms of illegal possibilities, think discogs. The amount of music you'll bump into increases a lot, so the rarer stuff might be out there. You could strike up a friendship with someone who had say, the entire back catalogue of (insert your fave band/movie/TV series). People could be walking lossless discographies of current artists. A discog of an artist is at most probably under 10Gig, so for a >60Gig player...
Who needs radio when you can stream? You could get it to actively hunt for a MP3 id tag genre - rock/pop, or highly rated artists. You could have the function to hunt for certain artists/songs...
That's another reason why I want wireless.
All this still does not tip the scales in terms of cost/benefit. Wireless will eat up your battery. It will be clumsy and frustrating (I would really hate for the new Streets single to break off midway through because iPod girl gets off at her stop or walks out of range). Also, I would not be thrilled adding drain to my battery by engaging sharing/wireless just so a bunch of strangers can mooch off of me. If my friend wants to listen to a song I have there are many ways he can do so without adding cost to the iPod and my time by having to charge the iPod all the time to make it possible in the first place
As for wireless sync... why? My god man, if we've come to the point where putting the iPod in its base is too difficult, we're screwed. Maybe there'd be the odd time when you forgot your cable or dock on a trip but that should be a rare enough occurence. If you find you always forget your cables, get an extra. You're also not addressing that you'd need that cable or dock for charging anyway (especially since you're going to be using that wireless feature to kill your battery much more quickly).
The chance that someone with an iPod (who also happens to be willing to kill their battery for my enjoyment) will be in range long enough for me to enjoy a few x-ray specks or spacemen 3 tracks are, in my opinion, close to nil.
The car options using wireless make some degree of sense (you'd be able to charge the unit by the cig lighter at least), but this seems better addressed by car/stereo makers. They're already doing it. Theree are also adapters for sale that do this.
I don't have all I need yet in this area but hooking my iPod up to the charger/FM transmitter I have let's me use the steering wheel controls for everything except the menu/scrolling bits (I know that's a big thing but I've got it set up so the iPod in it's charger/transmitter is right next to my knee and easier to manipulate than a cell phone and no harder than using the controls on the radio that are not available on the steering column). The HUD would be cool, though, and would make me a safer driver... I always wanted a HUD for my car. I think Cadillac actually had a model with an optional HUD for the main instrument panel items a while back. I wonder why more auto makers don't do this... or do they and I am just ignorant?
All in all, I just don't see enough good in adding wireless (of whatever kind) to the iPod to justify it. Now, a non-iPod (new) product that had wireless with a limited music/photo/video feature set (iPhone?, iBerry?) might be on the horizon. That wouldn't be bad as it would give those you feel the same as you the option to get their much needed "wireless," while letting others enjoy the most elegant, easy to use media player on the market without the bloat.
KnightWRX
Apr 17, 08:31 AM
double.
Chupa Chupa
Sep 7, 02:37 PM
I think it will have to be a rental or stream service. There is no way I would pay $14.99 for a lower quality movie at the same price I would pay for a DVD at circuit city or best buy. I know Steve Jobs has been fighting with the movie companies to have a uniform price. Unfortunately, these companies get pretty greedy and don't see the big picture.
I also don't think apple would put out an option, like $14.99 downloads, when that doesn't make sense.
-Chuck
You won't, but you are probably more technically savvy then 99% of the world population. How many people pay $10 for an album of songs encoded @ 128Mbps and couldn't be happier?
I also don't think apple would put out an option, like $14.99 downloads, when that doesn't make sense.
-Chuck
You won't, but you are probably more technically savvy then 99% of the world population. How many people pay $10 for an album of songs encoded @ 128Mbps and couldn't be happier?
SeattleMoose
Apr 19, 02:37 PM
please!!!!:rolleyes:
Multimedia
Sep 7, 11:10 AM
Now that iMac is Core 2 Duo, the Academic $899 17" iMac is a mini killer config.Except that I want to use my 24" monitor...Exactly. And because the 17" iMac Supports External up to 1920 x 1200 24" Second Monitor Spanning you not only can, you gain the benefit of an additional 1440 x 900 desktop space almost for FREE @ $899. It's still only Intel 950 IG, but it's cheap and doable like from the mini & MacBooks only with 3.5" SATA HD inside etc etc. It's a miracle. :eek:
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 02:38 PM
AMD Fusion is a better CPU because it does true OpenCL in the GPU, not like Intel's alpha OpenCL which runs on the CPU side.
Fusion is DirectX 11 class. Intel is DirectX 10.1 class.
Uhh, no bro. The CPU and GPU are two separate things, and Sandy Bridge smokes Fusion on the CPU side. If you want to argue OpenCL for all of the zero current day applications it currently has then be my guest and do so. Fusion is DX11? Wow, more vaporware that rarely gets added in modern games due to wanting to be backwards compatible, how exciting!
Once again, run Sandy Bridge and a discrete GPU if you are really looking for performance. There's your OpenCL and DX11 support that you need so badly. It will smoke anything AMD has to offer.
Fusion is DirectX 11 class. Intel is DirectX 10.1 class.
Uhh, no bro. The CPU and GPU are two separate things, and Sandy Bridge smokes Fusion on the CPU side. If you want to argue OpenCL for all of the zero current day applications it currently has then be my guest and do so. Fusion is DX11? Wow, more vaporware that rarely gets added in modern games due to wanting to be backwards compatible, how exciting!
Once again, run Sandy Bridge and a discrete GPU if you are really looking for performance. There's your OpenCL and DX11 support that you need so badly. It will smoke anything AMD has to offer.
SciFrog
Mar 5, 12:47 PM
Ditto!
I see some new folks putting up some points, designed, DistortedLoop, and MAcProCPO is back at it again, thanks for the effort to those and other newbies!
I had a problem with the MacPro after I upgraded to a 3 SSD raid for booting ... I forgot to set the machine to NOT go to sleep, DUH! I could not figure out why it was timing out of folding every so often with the remote Linux boards that I'm ssh'd into from the Mac. NOW that I have that figured out my points will pick up again. It was still impressive just running the 6 GPU's and 2 win clients at about 50k per day!
And congrats for 10mio points!
Still sIting for Gulftown to be released, and to see the price... My current 8 core 3ghz 2,1 mac pro isbbeyond my needs already... And still no GPU on OS X...
On the good news front, SMP2 is rock solid, haven't lost a unit yet even after reboots.
I see some new folks putting up some points, designed, DistortedLoop, and MAcProCPO is back at it again, thanks for the effort to those and other newbies!
I had a problem with the MacPro after I upgraded to a 3 SSD raid for booting ... I forgot to set the machine to NOT go to sleep, DUH! I could not figure out why it was timing out of folding every so often with the remote Linux boards that I'm ssh'd into from the Mac. NOW that I have that figured out my points will pick up again. It was still impressive just running the 6 GPU's and 2 win clients at about 50k per day!
And congrats for 10mio points!
Still sIting for Gulftown to be released, and to see the price... My current 8 core 3ghz 2,1 mac pro isbbeyond my needs already... And still no GPU on OS X...
On the good news front, SMP2 is rock solid, haven't lost a unit yet even after reboots.
XForge
Nov 28, 11:58 AM
I thought Ihnatko's take on the Zune was particularly amusing:
http://www.suntimes.com/technology/ihnatko/147048,CST-FIN-Andy23.article
http://www.suntimes.com/technology/ihnatko/147048,CST-FIN-Andy23.article
sam10685
Aug 16, 07:19 AM
well... i might as well give Apple and Nintendo my credit card number.
zoran
Nov 27, 02:50 PM
Well Apple should just first make a face lift in ACDs both specs and price and then lets all just start thinking about the new 17" wide lcd. Personally i dont give a sh@t about a such a small display, the 23" ACD suits my needs, only its price and its potentials dont!
Damn it! :D
Damn it! :D
tblrsa
Mar 28, 03:12 PM
The iPod Classic is the best iPod ever released, period. I love it since day 1. Only downside is you can�t use it for sports, due to its sensitive hard drive. The device does look awesome, goes well with my aluminum book.
..is an ipod that is just about music and nothing else. and yeah the sound quality of the classic thats out right now does suck...i'd like to see improved battery life, higher quality chips (DAC, amps,...), digital output, maybe airplay - and all of that in a sexy, indestructable metal case with a click wheel and a small non touch display...
Sounds like an awesome idea for a new Classic.
..is an ipod that is just about music and nothing else. and yeah the sound quality of the classic thats out right now does suck...i'd like to see improved battery life, higher quality chips (DAC, amps,...), digital output, maybe airplay - and all of that in a sexy, indestructable metal case with a click wheel and a small non touch display...
Sounds like an awesome idea for a new Classic.
guzhogi
Jun 22, 11:58 AM
I wouldn't mind an iOS-type OS on an iMac as long as it had some more features of a full-fledged desktop OS. As in:
-Multiple Users
-Printing
-Some kind of file system
-More apps of a creative side (ie movie editing, word processing, programming, etc.) instead of just media consuming apps
Note: this list is not exhaustive; there are many more features I'd like that I just can't think of at the moment.
Plus, some games/apps will need to be done, specifically those that need the accelerometers. I don't think people would want to swing around a 20/30 pound computer. But that would be a good way to make more money; people keep breaking them so they'll have to pay for repairs/new ones.
Who wants to be touching a vertically standing screen all the time, that's tiring!
Maybe this is why we didn't see OS X 10.7 info because it might include support for this...
I was actually hoping to see a completely new mac Pro with new very high res screens and wireless trackpad.
I doubt 10.7 will be such an overhaul. Probably more like Mac OS X 11.0 or a totally new naming scheme.
-Multiple Users
-Printing
-Some kind of file system
-More apps of a creative side (ie movie editing, word processing, programming, etc.) instead of just media consuming apps
Note: this list is not exhaustive; there are many more features I'd like that I just can't think of at the moment.
Plus, some games/apps will need to be done, specifically those that need the accelerometers. I don't think people would want to swing around a 20/30 pound computer. But that would be a good way to make more money; people keep breaking them so they'll have to pay for repairs/new ones.
Who wants to be touching a vertically standing screen all the time, that's tiring!
Maybe this is why we didn't see OS X 10.7 info because it might include support for this...
I was actually hoping to see a completely new mac Pro with new very high res screens and wireless trackpad.
I doubt 10.7 will be such an overhaul. Probably more like Mac OS X 11.0 or a totally new naming scheme.
puuukeey
Aug 25, 11:34 AM
just a thought. I'd like to see at least one mini stay as cheap as possible. cheap minis are condusive to the "non desktop" or "inivisible" situations we all love them for.
creative things like
Home automation,
Home theater
automotive fun
art installations
internet radio.
cash registers
security systems
advertising kiosks(shoot me)
rhumba?
I always thought they should lay a tiny screen on them for applications like these where it's purpose doesn't need to infinitely pliable.
creative things like
Home automation,
Home theater
automotive fun
art installations
internet radio.
cash registers
security systems
advertising kiosks(shoot me)
rhumba?
I always thought they should lay a tiny screen on them for applications like these where it's purpose doesn't need to infinitely pliable.
rezenclowd3
Jan 10, 07:33 PM
Americans mostly don't get the allure of a rallye type car. Ovals and 1/4 mile are about as sophisticated as we can manage. :p
So very sad but true. F1 fan here, and rally if I can ever find time to watch it. I might not be a F1 fan for much longer though if they keep making "the ultimate racing machine" slower and slower by limiting the technology :mad: I understand the safety reasons, but its getting to be worse than the bicycle world:eek:
So very sad but true. F1 fan here, and rally if I can ever find time to watch it. I might not be a F1 fan for much longer though if they keep making "the ultimate racing machine" slower and slower by limiting the technology :mad: I understand the safety reasons, but its getting to be worse than the bicycle world:eek:
rezenclowd3
Jan 10, 11:56 AM
I didn't even notice my car had the German flag colors on the grill till I paid for it and stopped at a coffee shop to admire my toy:o
The 1 serious is VERY cool; I am glad it is a sub-compact size once again, though I wish it was not as tall.
The 1 serious is VERY cool; I am glad it is a sub-compact size once again, though I wish it was not as tall.
KevanDual2.5
Sep 7, 03:16 AM
You are alone on this one - the end of the G5 iMac has already happened, in fact it happened a long time ago when Apple introduced the first Intel iMacs. Hate to break it to ya, but G5 iMacs haven't been around for a long time, nor does a 24" G5 iMac even exist. :p :cool:
As for this new incarnation of the Intel iMac though, it totally depends on Apple's strategy. If they want to leave it as a desktop computer, yeah, it probably doesn't make sense to get much bigger. However, if they want to eventually incorporate a TV tuner and make it even more media-centric, and have it evolve into something else, then this may just be the beginning, not the end. :cool:
As other people have recognised..... the reference to G5 is in relation to the exterior, not the chipset.
I don't know whether you're right or wrong about a possible design change in the near future, but your terminology is wrong.
The G5 iMac is not a model. The G5 is a CPU. The iMac has not been a "G5" (or, to be more correct, has not had a G5) since January.
It's just "iMac." A G5 with a Core 2 Duo chip is like spouting off how you have a great "Intel Pentium Athlon machine made by AMD." People will see right through the ignorance.
Some people have recognised that the reference to G5 relates to the exterior design, not the chips inside.
As for this new incarnation of the Intel iMac though, it totally depends on Apple's strategy. If they want to leave it as a desktop computer, yeah, it probably doesn't make sense to get much bigger. However, if they want to eventually incorporate a TV tuner and make it even more media-centric, and have it evolve into something else, then this may just be the beginning, not the end. :cool:
As other people have recognised..... the reference to G5 is in relation to the exterior, not the chipset.
I don't know whether you're right or wrong about a possible design change in the near future, but your terminology is wrong.
The G5 iMac is not a model. The G5 is a CPU. The iMac has not been a "G5" (or, to be more correct, has not had a G5) since January.
It's just "iMac." A G5 with a Core 2 Duo chip is like spouting off how you have a great "Intel Pentium Athlon machine made by AMD." People will see right through the ignorance.
Some people have recognised that the reference to G5 relates to the exterior design, not the chips inside.
Doctor Q
Nov 29, 05:18 PM
Living room, car, blah blah blah.
Nobody has yet delivered a truly GOOD streaming media solution for my hot air balloon. Are you listening Apple???!!!!! :mad:I get good satellite reception in mine.
Nobody has yet delivered a truly GOOD streaming media solution for my hot air balloon. Are you listening Apple???!!!!! :mad:I get good satellite reception in mine.
bokdol
Jul 14, 01:25 AM
dont forget that there are alot of backers of bluray.
Board of Directors include Dell Inc.; Hewlett Packard Company; Hitachi, Ltd.; LG Electronics Inc.; Mitsubishi Electric Corp.; Panasonic (Matsushita Electric); Pioneer Corp.; Royal Philips Electronics; Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Sharp Corp.; Sony Corp.; TDK Corp.; Thomson; Twentieth Century Fox; and Walt Disney Pictures and Television
and apple
Board of Directors include Dell Inc.; Hewlett Packard Company; Hitachi, Ltd.; LG Electronics Inc.; Mitsubishi Electric Corp.; Panasonic (Matsushita Electric); Pioneer Corp.; Royal Philips Electronics; Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Sharp Corp.; Sony Corp.; TDK Corp.; Thomson; Twentieth Century Fox; and Walt Disney Pictures and Television
and apple
mrkramer
Apr 8, 01:11 AM
HA! Do I get another "I toldya so" moment soon??? :D
General: US may consider sending troops into Libya
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42468330/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/
We better not do that, the no-fly zone is ok, but we can't afford and we shouldn't put troops on the ground. If we do this will just turn into another Iraq.
General: US may consider sending troops into Libya
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42468330/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/
We better not do that, the no-fly zone is ok, but we can't afford and we shouldn't put troops on the ground. If we do this will just turn into another Iraq.
No comments:
Post a Comment