Steve121178
Apr 20, 08:49 AM
I would also hope for the 3.4ghz i7-2600 sandy bridge processor.
I have the new i5-2500k in my new PC and this CPU will be suitable for the vast majority of people (obviously Apple would offer the i5-2500 rather than the 'k' varient). I think the premium charged for the minor performance gain for the i7-2600 simply isn't worth it.
I did a lot of research before settling on the i5-2500k and I'm very happy with the performance.
Worth reading:
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/reviews/processors/363982/intel-sandy-bridge
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/pc-components/processors/intel-core-i5-2500k-917570/review
http://i.imgur.com/RMdSq.png
I have the new i5-2500k in my new PC and this CPU will be suitable for the vast majority of people (obviously Apple would offer the i5-2500 rather than the 'k' varient). I think the premium charged for the minor performance gain for the i7-2600 simply isn't worth it.
I did a lot of research before settling on the i5-2500k and I'm very happy with the performance.
Worth reading:
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/reviews/processors/363982/intel-sandy-bridge
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/pc-components/processors/intel-core-i5-2500k-917570/review
http://i.imgur.com/RMdSq.png
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 03:07 PM
I still think amazon can win this case as their name is "appstore" instead of "app store" in many icons. When typed as text, the full name given is usually "amazon app store", not just app store.
So it is possible Apple could get the final app store trademark approval after challenges from Microsoft, etc. and still lose this case against amazon.
So it is possible Apple could get the final app store trademark approval after challenges from Microsoft, etc. and still lose this case against amazon.
DMann
Jan 13, 07:29 PM
Come on, people!!
In my opinion, their quote, "There's something in the air," is nothing other than an allusion to the fact that they're going to introduce a 3G iPhone. We have all known that this was coming eventually; Jobs even said that the only thing stopping them from introducing it was low battery life.
Much prefer "Wi-Max in the air" to a power hungry, girth expanding, comparatively slower 3G.
In my opinion, their quote, "There's something in the air," is nothing other than an allusion to the fact that they're going to introduce a 3G iPhone. We have all known that this was coming eventually; Jobs even said that the only thing stopping them from introducing it was low battery life.
Much prefer "Wi-Max in the air" to a power hungry, girth expanding, comparatively slower 3G.
apple-science
Jul 19, 05:15 PM
Would be interesting to see the trajectory of sales. Jobs usually shows such a graph at the keynotes - anyone got the data to post to see if the trend is slowing and by how much?
It's remarkable that iPods are still selling so well given the stale refresh rate. Still, Microsoft would love a piece of 8.1 million sales for Zune.....
It's remarkable that iPods are still selling so well given the stale refresh rate. Still, Microsoft would love a piece of 8.1 million sales for Zune.....
MM2270
Sep 7, 12:14 PM
I agree with everyone here that if Apple only intros a movie purchase model, it will suck. Most people don't want to own movies. After all, you don't see many music rental services out there in the brick and mortar world, but there are millions of movie rental places. It's a tried and true model that they should emulate to an extent and bring to the online world. Of course, they should innovate on the basic model as Apple is known to do.
But, I keep thinking, why stop at one model? I know Apple likes to keep things simple, but it seems to me you could have both.
Here is how I would envision a great movie distro system.
Users have the option to either rent or buy a movie, with two buttons "rent this movie", "buy this movie" next to it's description.
The rental model would work like this:
• Quality would be slightly lower than DVD quality. Maybe same resolution, but compressed a little bit more to reduce file size (after all, if you aren't keeping it, it should download quickly)
• You can play the movie up to 5 times or within a 14 day period, whichever comes first. After that, it expires, so you can no longer play it. This would be linked to the DRM model within iTunes.
• No DVD burning with rentals. They would never allow you to make a copy of it since you don't own it. (I mean of course, burning to DVD playable in a standard DVD player. If you wanted to somehow back up the data file itself, you could, but it would be pointless.)
The purchase model would be like this:
• DVD quality playback. So, somewhat larger downloads, but they will be worth it, because it would be the same as renting from your local video store.
• You can play it unlimited number of times. You own it, so why not?
• DVD burning capability for backup purposes, but would be limited to 3 burns, then it's done. They would have to encode something within the file itself that would know it's been burned to DVD 3 times, not within iTunes, or that could possibly be circumvented.
Oh, and as for price of each? I think $2.99 - $4.99 for rentals and $9.99 - $14.99 for purchase would be ideal.
And one other thing. The iTMS would keep track of what you've rented, and if you decide you'd like to own that movie later, you can purchase it by paying the difference in price between the rental and purchase. So, for a movie that was $4.99 rental and $14.99 puchase, you'd pay $10. Now THAT would be sweet!
In the end, I doubt we'll see something like this, but that's what I would want and use. For those great movies that I would like to own, I would pay the purchase price for the convenience of not having to go out to a store or buy it at Amazon and wait for it to arrive.
For everything else that I don't want to keep, the rental model would be what I'd use.
But, I keep thinking, why stop at one model? I know Apple likes to keep things simple, but it seems to me you could have both.
Here is how I would envision a great movie distro system.
Users have the option to either rent or buy a movie, with two buttons "rent this movie", "buy this movie" next to it's description.
The rental model would work like this:
• Quality would be slightly lower than DVD quality. Maybe same resolution, but compressed a little bit more to reduce file size (after all, if you aren't keeping it, it should download quickly)
• You can play the movie up to 5 times or within a 14 day period, whichever comes first. After that, it expires, so you can no longer play it. This would be linked to the DRM model within iTunes.
• No DVD burning with rentals. They would never allow you to make a copy of it since you don't own it. (I mean of course, burning to DVD playable in a standard DVD player. If you wanted to somehow back up the data file itself, you could, but it would be pointless.)
The purchase model would be like this:
• DVD quality playback. So, somewhat larger downloads, but they will be worth it, because it would be the same as renting from your local video store.
• You can play it unlimited number of times. You own it, so why not?
• DVD burning capability for backup purposes, but would be limited to 3 burns, then it's done. They would have to encode something within the file itself that would know it's been burned to DVD 3 times, not within iTunes, or that could possibly be circumvented.
Oh, and as for price of each? I think $2.99 - $4.99 for rentals and $9.99 - $14.99 for purchase would be ideal.
And one other thing. The iTMS would keep track of what you've rented, and if you decide you'd like to own that movie later, you can purchase it by paying the difference in price between the rental and purchase. So, for a movie that was $4.99 rental and $14.99 puchase, you'd pay $10. Now THAT would be sweet!
In the end, I doubt we'll see something like this, but that's what I would want and use. For those great movies that I would like to own, I would pay the purchase price for the convenience of not having to go out to a store or buy it at Amazon and wait for it to arrive.
For everything else that I don't want to keep, the rental model would be what I'd use.
craigdawg
Mar 20, 07:51 PM
yes, this is true. but apple is not in the business to sell more computers. apple is in the business to turn profits.
tiffany's would sell more diamond rings if they cut the price in half.
BMW would sell more cars if they cut the price by 30%.
...but so what?
Exactly. Apple will stay in business as long as it's profitable; it's that simple.
It doesn't bother me that Apple has low single-digit marketshare and it doesn't necessarily bother Apple as long as they continue to make money.
And I don't know if a $500 - $600 loss leader Mac would guarantee an increase in desktop marketshare. (This is different to me than the loss leader that ITMS is). The only effect it would have would be to decrease profits.
tiffany's would sell more diamond rings if they cut the price in half.
BMW would sell more cars if they cut the price by 30%.
...but so what?
Exactly. Apple will stay in business as long as it's profitable; it's that simple.
It doesn't bother me that Apple has low single-digit marketshare and it doesn't necessarily bother Apple as long as they continue to make money.
And I don't know if a $500 - $600 loss leader Mac would guarantee an increase in desktop marketshare. (This is different to me than the loss leader that ITMS is). The only effect it would have would be to decrease profits.
NameUndecided
Apr 2, 05:16 PM
On a happier note -- I don't think I've seen this mentioned yet -- DP 2 seems to be taking about 1.5gb less space.
RebootD
Apr 12, 09:20 PM
Basically: "You Wait While I Render."
New one will apparently let you keep working while it renders in the background.
Which was understandable back in 2003 but with today's machines it was downright sad you had to 'wait while rendering'.
New one will apparently let you keep working while it renders in the background.
Which was understandable back in 2003 but with today's machines it was downright sad you had to 'wait while rendering'.
aswitcher
Aug 25, 09:25 AM
There are no single core Core 2 processors. That's why. 1.66GHz Core 2 Duo is the bottom of the line. Cost Apple same they paid for Solo 1.5GHz Yonah.
Yeah I thought mini would go Core 2 last. But maybe Apple is getting such a huge shipment that they can go Core 2 across the board right away. I don't know. Hope Springs Eternal. :p
Arent Core 2s being reported in shortage by intel suppliers?
Yeah I thought mini would go Core 2 last. But maybe Apple is getting such a huge shipment that they can go Core 2 across the board right away. I don't know. Hope Springs Eternal. :p
Arent Core 2s being reported in shortage by intel suppliers?
hogo
Sep 15, 06:16 AM
and who cares...
Xpress
Apr 2, 11:42 PM
My backlight bleeds
Mine did too. Returned it to Apple, got a new one in 10 days. No bleeding.:D
Mine did too. Returned it to Apple, got a new one in 10 days. No bleeding.:D
Eidorian
Aug 25, 12:21 PM
I remember the rumors of iPod docks in the Mini before the last Mini release (February 28th). I though they were pretty ridicolous.:p
Anway's, a chance of X3000 now? That would rock!;)http://www.math.purdue.edu/~abarreno/laptop_chipsets_intel_8_2006.png
Find me a mobile 965.
Anway's, a chance of X3000 now? That would rock!;)http://www.math.purdue.edu/~abarreno/laptop_chipsets_intel_8_2006.png
Find me a mobile 965.
AFPoster
Mar 22, 12:38 PM
The US was not founded on Christianity, and some 2,000 book written by man about an invisible man in the sky should not be basis for law.
Our Founding Fathers believed in God, proof alone is the pledge of allegiance "under god". Yes our country was founded on christian belief. Hate to say it, but it's true!
As for the invisible man in the sky I have no clue to what you are referring.
Our Founding Fathers believed in God, proof alone is the pledge of allegiance "under god". Yes our country was founded on christian belief. Hate to say it, but it's true!
As for the invisible man in the sky I have no clue to what you are referring.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 4, 02:27 PM
In many ways, it's shameful today that we think that 60 or even 70mpg is somehow remarkable for a family car. :(
It certainly could be significantly higher. Public taste, laziness on the part of manufacturers and other things have all conspired to keep the bar set low on fuel economy.
In the US, there's one key reason why small cars don't sell (above and beyond the reasons I already listed), and that is that popular wisdom holds that you will die in a small car when someone in a large SUV or truck hits you. It's a self-fulfilling prophesy as people buy big cars because they don't feel safe in small ones, with the result that they become part of the "problem". Ultimately it's down to selfishness. Apparently people would rather kill someone else in an accident than risk being killed themselves.
It's idiotic, but this "wisdom" will only be unlearned slowly. Smaller cars are much safer now then they once were - safer than trucks and SUVs.
By way of a postscript, it's worth pointing out that today's safety and environmental regulations make it more difficult to make a car frugal, small and light than it was when Alec Issigonis designed the Mini. Also, aluminum construction (in smaller production cars such as the A2) remains nearly as rare and expensive as it was in the 50s.
But not the brand image... that could perhaps be the biggest stumbling block of all, it certainly is in Europe anyway.
True, and that's a shame, because brand image often matters than a car's actual merits. If the new Jetta is a turd, people will still buy it because the VW badge has cachet here that GM does not, at least in the realm of small cars.
I'm not going to stand up too much for GM, I've never held a high opinion of most of their products, but I have reasonably read good reviews of the Cruze and I hope they bring the diesel here.
Have to say my preference is for saloons... occasionally an estate (particularly A4 & A6 allroads, also 159 Sportwagons, that sort of thing), hatches (the bigger ones anyway) & estates can/tend to be a little boomy in my experience. Saloons also often have better body rigidity too.
The sedan body is the default in the US. Hatches and wagons are much rarer and therefore more interesting. In Europe it's really the other way around. When you're talking about mid-size or larger cars, sedans do generally have better proportions in my opinion (with a few exceptions - I like 5-Series wagon, and the 1990s Subaru Legacy wagon). Hatches look good on small cars though. The Focus, for example, looked stupid as a sedan but great as a hatch.
I do agree with you about the noise though - my Forester's rear suspension is sometimes very audible in the cabin, especially with the seats down. A few years before I bought my Forester, I used to mock it as the ugliest thing on the road, but I've gotten used to it and while it's never going to be attractive it does have a certain pleasing purposefulness in its proportions. Even though a lesbian couple I know call it my lesbian wagon. :rolleyes::D
It certainly could be significantly higher. Public taste, laziness on the part of manufacturers and other things have all conspired to keep the bar set low on fuel economy.
In the US, there's one key reason why small cars don't sell (above and beyond the reasons I already listed), and that is that popular wisdom holds that you will die in a small car when someone in a large SUV or truck hits you. It's a self-fulfilling prophesy as people buy big cars because they don't feel safe in small ones, with the result that they become part of the "problem". Ultimately it's down to selfishness. Apparently people would rather kill someone else in an accident than risk being killed themselves.
It's idiotic, but this "wisdom" will only be unlearned slowly. Smaller cars are much safer now then they once were - safer than trucks and SUVs.
By way of a postscript, it's worth pointing out that today's safety and environmental regulations make it more difficult to make a car frugal, small and light than it was when Alec Issigonis designed the Mini. Also, aluminum construction (in smaller production cars such as the A2) remains nearly as rare and expensive as it was in the 50s.
But not the brand image... that could perhaps be the biggest stumbling block of all, it certainly is in Europe anyway.
True, and that's a shame, because brand image often matters than a car's actual merits. If the new Jetta is a turd, people will still buy it because the VW badge has cachet here that GM does not, at least in the realm of small cars.
I'm not going to stand up too much for GM, I've never held a high opinion of most of their products, but I have reasonably read good reviews of the Cruze and I hope they bring the diesel here.
Have to say my preference is for saloons... occasionally an estate (particularly A4 & A6 allroads, also 159 Sportwagons, that sort of thing), hatches (the bigger ones anyway) & estates can/tend to be a little boomy in my experience. Saloons also often have better body rigidity too.
The sedan body is the default in the US. Hatches and wagons are much rarer and therefore more interesting. In Europe it's really the other way around. When you're talking about mid-size or larger cars, sedans do generally have better proportions in my opinion (with a few exceptions - I like 5-Series wagon, and the 1990s Subaru Legacy wagon). Hatches look good on small cars though. The Focus, for example, looked stupid as a sedan but great as a hatch.
I do agree with you about the noise though - my Forester's rear suspension is sometimes very audible in the cabin, especially with the seats down. A few years before I bought my Forester, I used to mock it as the ugliest thing on the road, but I've gotten used to it and while it's never going to be attractive it does have a certain pleasing purposefulness in its proportions. Even though a lesbian couple I know call it my lesbian wagon. :rolleyes::D
wordoflife
Nov 26, 05:44 PM
Swatch New Gent "black Rebel"
http://www.kstreetwear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Swatch-New-Gent-Watches-03.jpeg
Where did you buy that watch and for how much? I really like it :o
__________________________________________________________
Last purchase:
http://www.i-mockery.com/minimocks/candycane-report/5.jpg
http://www.kstreetwear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Swatch-New-Gent-Watches-03.jpeg
Where did you buy that watch and for how much? I really like it :o
__________________________________________________________
Last purchase:
http://www.i-mockery.com/minimocks/candycane-report/5.jpg
spyderracer393
Nov 27, 02:34 PM
Wow, for the first time ever I actually beat MacRumors: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=3095478#post3095478
I think a 17" model would be a good idea for Apple. It'll stop people buying Minis from getting their LCD fix from elsewhere to some extent and won't cost Apple a bean in R&D costs since they already use 17" panels in the iMac and have all the internals ready because of the 20" and 23" ACDs. It would only need a different sized chassis to be designed.
dude you may have "beaten them" by getting on the front page, but I sent this tip in this morning at 8 AM and it was not from digitimes, it was from industry resources and factories in Asia so HA I beat you.
I think a 17" model would be a good idea for Apple. It'll stop people buying Minis from getting their LCD fix from elsewhere to some extent and won't cost Apple a bean in R&D costs since they already use 17" panels in the iMac and have all the internals ready because of the 20" and 23" ACDs. It would only need a different sized chassis to be designed.
dude you may have "beaten them" by getting on the front page, but I sent this tip in this morning at 8 AM and it was not from digitimes, it was from industry resources and factories in Asia so HA I beat you.
hob
Jan 1, 06:28 PM
Who really needs more iLife. Honestly. I think they should bundle it with OS X, and update it all at once!
BlueVelvet, you have ruined my life forever :p First time I've read that! So true though!
BlueVelvet, you have ruined my life forever :p First time I've read that! So true though!
Fubar1977
Apr 17, 10:35 AM
IMO, if a gearbox has a setting where it will automatically shift gears for you and you don't have to touch it, it's an automatic gearbox.
Sure, some auto gearboxes (DSG) are better than others (torque converter) but they're still automatic.
I must admit that, other than a couple of times just to try it out, I pretty much never use manual mode on the DSG box.
TBH there is no-way I could manually change faster than this box can.
In my case it`s fitted to a 2 litre turbo-diesel and the 6 speed DSG can keep the engine in the "power band" pretty much constantly if you want it to.
In "Sport Mode" it`s so damn fierce it`s almost undriveable.
I have embarrased many a petrol powered car in this thing :)
Sure, some auto gearboxes (DSG) are better than others (torque converter) but they're still automatic.
I must admit that, other than a couple of times just to try it out, I pretty much never use manual mode on the DSG box.
TBH there is no-way I could manually change faster than this box can.
In my case it`s fitted to a 2 litre turbo-diesel and the 6 speed DSG can keep the engine in the "power band" pretty much constantly if you want it to.
In "Sport Mode" it`s so damn fierce it`s almost undriveable.
I have embarrased many a petrol powered car in this thing :)
sord
Aug 6, 11:12 PM
I certainly hope Leopard isn't like Vista 2.0 - it (Vista 2.0) will be horrible as usual!
PowerFullMac
Jan 12, 12:50 PM
Just thinking... Perhaps the MacBook Air IS the tablet Mac!
MattyMac
Aug 6, 09:12 PM
It's like Christmas Eve:D
LostPacket
Nov 29, 02:26 PM
I don't care what extra features it has, as long as Apple designs a decent remote for it. Something full-sized with a click-wheel. I'd love to fast-forward through a movie using the click-wheel. The 4X, 8X etc on my current PVR just doesn't do it for me.
macEfan
Nov 29, 10:30 PM
Its the Pippin 2!! this time its intel instead of Bandai!
lets hope so!
I want a pippin, but they are all so rare and expensive... would be grate if the itv let you play games on your tv!
lets hope so!
I want a pippin, but they are all so rare and expensive... would be grate if the itv let you play games on your tv!
swingerofbirch
Jul 19, 04:32 PM
How could the analysts be off by almost a billion dollars? Are they held to account for this?
No comments:
Post a Comment