Sammio2
Nov 28, 11:39 AM
Received my brand new MacBook Air 11" today, YAY!
http://www.onemorething.nl/uploads/community/1c20ce8280ca07d2fd0a93e2450015ca5bfa3f34_0.jpg
(1,6 GHz, 4 GB RAM, 128 GB SSD)
Nice purchase, but I think you're meant to take it out of the box. Not sure though, maybe someone else here could provide some clarification on this...
http://www.onemorething.nl/uploads/community/1c20ce8280ca07d2fd0a93e2450015ca5bfa3f34_0.jpg
(1,6 GHz, 4 GB RAM, 128 GB SSD)
Nice purchase, but I think you're meant to take it out of the box. Not sure though, maybe someone else here could provide some clarification on this...
popelife
Jan 4, 03:55 PM
I may just go with BootCamp, Windows, Adobe, but that means buying Windows, BootCamp, and I�m concerned about conflicts.
Use Boot Camp and your Mac is a Windows PC, just like any other (although arguably nicer to look at ;) ). Any "conflicts" will be precisely the same conflicts that you'd get on a PC laptop.
BTW, right-clicking on an Apple notebook is now awesome! The "two-fingers on trackpad" click is great, and actually easier than having two buttons IMO.
Times Square, New York City
New York City Times Square
The Muse Hotel Times Square
Renaissance New York Hotel
Times Square-New York City
hotels in time square new york
Paramount Hotel Times Square
Times Square New York
New York City Times Square
New York City Times Square
Times Square New York City
New York City-Times Square
Make a Booking middot; Hotel
339 W. 39th Street, New York,
Is W New York - Times Square
hotels in new york city times
Hotels in New York City
Reacent Post
Use Boot Camp and your Mac is a Windows PC, just like any other (although arguably nicer to look at ;) ). Any "conflicts" will be precisely the same conflicts that you'd get on a PC laptop.
BTW, right-clicking on an Apple notebook is now awesome! The "two-fingers on trackpad" click is great, and actually easier than having two buttons IMO.
ellsworth
Apr 26, 12:50 PM
Ridiculous.
AppliedVisual
Oct 23, 11:11 AM
I've read that even the current MBP supports 4gigs.
Apple just doesn't offer it in their store since the CPU can only address around 3,2gigs (like every other 32bit cpu).
Unfortunately, the current MBP is restricted to about 3.2GB because of the 32bit CPU *AND* the 32bit i945 chipset. Intel won't have a 64bit mobile chipset until they ship Crestline (the i965 mobile chipset for Santa Rosa). So, unless Crestline is ready early and Apple has some sort of exclusive agreement, the updated MBP still will not allow anyone to use more than approximately 3.2GB of RAM.
In a 32bit system, the 32bit CPUs and/or chipsets can address a total memory capacity of 4GB. But this 4GB address window must account for all memory I/O addresses, BIOS/ROM as well as video memory in addition to the actual RAM heap. That is why when you install 4GB of RAM, you essentially miss out on the last 600 to 800 MB. Also why the C2D/Merom iMac systems can only be configured with up to 3GB of RAM. Apple probably figured they didn't need to sell people RAM that they can't use. Some PC vendors still sell 4GB installed into such systems even though it can't all be used because by installing two matched 2GB modules, the dual-channel performance benefits are there, just not the last 800MB.
Apple just doesn't offer it in their store since the CPU can only address around 3,2gigs (like every other 32bit cpu).
Unfortunately, the current MBP is restricted to about 3.2GB because of the 32bit CPU *AND* the 32bit i945 chipset. Intel won't have a 64bit mobile chipset until they ship Crestline (the i965 mobile chipset for Santa Rosa). So, unless Crestline is ready early and Apple has some sort of exclusive agreement, the updated MBP still will not allow anyone to use more than approximately 3.2GB of RAM.
In a 32bit system, the 32bit CPUs and/or chipsets can address a total memory capacity of 4GB. But this 4GB address window must account for all memory I/O addresses, BIOS/ROM as well as video memory in addition to the actual RAM heap. That is why when you install 4GB of RAM, you essentially miss out on the last 600 to 800 MB. Also why the C2D/Merom iMac systems can only be configured with up to 3GB of RAM. Apple probably figured they didn't need to sell people RAM that they can't use. Some PC vendors still sell 4GB installed into such systems even though it can't all be used because by installing two matched 2GB modules, the dual-channel performance benefits are there, just not the last 800MB.
rasmasyean
Mar 19, 04:14 PM
mispost...ignore.
hansolo669
Mar 1, 10:23 AM
haha - luckilly my family dont control my eBay account, and if they complain I find a way of hiding a few more of them in a cupboard (I actually ended up moving a shelf at one point so I could fit a iMac G3 in it) - although it is reaching the point where both my room and my dorm room are nearly full of old (and new) Macs... xD (All of them bar 1 boot, and the 1 that doesnt is only because its HD is on the way out - with a goodun it boots just fine).
haha- nice ;) , im just waiting till i move out (oh and have that magical thing called money). the thrill of makeing old machines work "just one more" :)
haha- nice ;) , im just waiting till i move out (oh and have that magical thing called money). the thrill of makeing old machines work "just one more" :)
iStudentUK
Mar 31, 03:27 PM
When the Nazis like practically conquered everyone in their path and are invading the UK, the Brits had to transfer a lot of technologies they made for the war to the US...where the US industrial might pretty much defined what we know today as "air dominance".
During the Battle of Britain the British Isles alone produced more aircraft than the Nazis. An impressive feat considering the resources available to the Germans. The Battle of Britain took place in the summer of 1940, the lend-lease agreement with the US (which dramatically increased US supplies to the UK) was signed in 1941.
In 1944 more men landed on the beaches of Normandy fighting under a British flag than the stars and stripes. 1/3 of the airborne troops that landed were British. The Royal Navy accounted for around 75% of the ships used (remember in 1939 the Royal Navy was the world's largest, and remained significant throughout WWII). America and Britain had roughly equal numbers of aircraft available.
However, the D-day was a side show in Europe. Britain (and her empire) and America took some of the pressure off Russia but not much more. As my history teacher used to say- WWII was fought on three continents- Europe, Africa and Asia. The Soviets did the most for Europe, the British Empire for Africa and the US for Asia.
I'm not saying Britain won WWII, or that it would have been possible without the US. I'm just pointing out that many people seem to be under the impression that the US dominated WWII, maybe because in the 21st century the US has a much larger armed forces than Britain, and a better equipped on than Russia, but the situation was a bit different back then.
During the Battle of Britain the British Isles alone produced more aircraft than the Nazis. An impressive feat considering the resources available to the Germans. The Battle of Britain took place in the summer of 1940, the lend-lease agreement with the US (which dramatically increased US supplies to the UK) was signed in 1941.
In 1944 more men landed on the beaches of Normandy fighting under a British flag than the stars and stripes. 1/3 of the airborne troops that landed were British. The Royal Navy accounted for around 75% of the ships used (remember in 1939 the Royal Navy was the world's largest, and remained significant throughout WWII). America and Britain had roughly equal numbers of aircraft available.
However, the D-day was a side show in Europe. Britain (and her empire) and America took some of the pressure off Russia but not much more. As my history teacher used to say- WWII was fought on three continents- Europe, Africa and Asia. The Soviets did the most for Europe, the British Empire for Africa and the US for Asia.
I'm not saying Britain won WWII, or that it would have been possible without the US. I'm just pointing out that many people seem to be under the impression that the US dominated WWII, maybe because in the 21st century the US has a much larger armed forces than Britain, and a better equipped on than Russia, but the situation was a bit different back then.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 02:38 PM
I am a current law student who has concentrated in IP, particularly trademark law.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
It was my understanding that Apple filed in 2008 and got some level of approval in early 2011. I imagine it is analogous to a "patent pending".
I imagine this case will then bear on the final full approval of the trademark.
Apple should file for "The App Store" in the interim as well as "appstore". The latter is used by amazon.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
It was my understanding that Apple filed in 2008 and got some level of approval in early 2011. I imagine it is analogous to a "patent pending".
I imagine this case will then bear on the final full approval of the trademark.
Apple should file for "The App Store" in the interim as well as "appstore". The latter is used by amazon.
jgould
Feb 22, 07:53 PM
I love the look of older apple tech still in use. It's a good reminder that you don't need to constantly update with every single product refresh. Helps that it's stylish too :cool:
I agree with this statement. I was using a White MacBook from 2006 until Sunday when I upgraded because 2GB of RAM just wasn't cutting it any more. With the new MBP, I'll be set for a while.
I agree with this statement. I was using a White MacBook from 2006 until Sunday when I upgraded because 2GB of RAM just wasn't cutting it any more. With the new MBP, I'll be set for a while.
GeekOFComedy
Nov 24, 03:21 PM
i do :D
nope
yup jack bauer from 24 ... got this one too
Is it odd or should I say to the ladies: I Got a jack sack :cool: /innuendo
nope
yup jack bauer from 24 ... got this one too
Is it odd or should I say to the ladies: I Got a jack sack :cool: /innuendo
surroundfan
Sep 6, 09:56 AM
Is it just me, or does the $599 mini *not* let you configure it with a DVD burner?
The Superdrive option in the base model has gone.
Earth to Apple: a Combo drive in 2002 was state of the art. A Combo drive in 2004 was a reasonably priced alternative to a DVD burner. A Combo drive in 2005 was an acceptable means of marketing differentiation. A Combo drive in 2006 (particularly with no option to buy a DVD burner) is an embarrassment...
The Superdrive option in the base model has gone.
Earth to Apple: a Combo drive in 2002 was state of the art. A Combo drive in 2004 was a reasonably priced alternative to a DVD burner. A Combo drive in 2005 was an acceptable means of marketing differentiation. A Combo drive in 2006 (particularly with no option to buy a DVD burner) is an embarrassment...
dr Dunkel
Apr 20, 02:54 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; sv-se) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
2. HDMI out
Why would be ever see this on an iMac? Mac mini, yes (it was overdue). iMac, never.
HDMI-in would be nice :-)
2. HDMI out
Why would be ever see this on an iMac? Mac mini, yes (it was overdue). iMac, never.
HDMI-in would be nice :-)
wizard
Mar 24, 02:17 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
That is exactly what I'm thinking! Seriously there is no need for that many GPUs in the Pro and IMac requires a custom card. So where would all of these cards go - XMac is my guess.
Or it could simply be a sign of a unified driver from AMD. That would make sense as it is a smarter approach than the highly targeted drivers of the past.I don't see why Apple would want to start supporting older 5000 cards for said machine? *shrug*
How is it silly ? We're talking about a GPU. Even at 1280x800, the Intel GPU sucks, why would it be silly to want to run games on high settings
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/8
It outperforms the 320M under OS X. It certainly doesn't "suck" as much as you make it out to be.
Don't fall for anandtechs crap. Those tests where designed to make Intels GPU look good. The minute you do anything demanding the GPU falls flat on it's face. By this I mean turn on all the latest features to get the best on screen results.
For many other reasons I don't consider anandtech to be a credible web site. It has become an extension of Intels marketing team. A lot of people don't want to hear that but there is a trend in the articles that indicate that they have become a fan site and have lost the ability to report objectively.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
That is exactly what I'm thinking! Seriously there is no need for that many GPUs in the Pro and IMac requires a custom card. So where would all of these cards go - XMac is my guess.
Or it could simply be a sign of a unified driver from AMD. That would make sense as it is a smarter approach than the highly targeted drivers of the past.I don't see why Apple would want to start supporting older 5000 cards for said machine? *shrug*
How is it silly ? We're talking about a GPU. Even at 1280x800, the Intel GPU sucks, why would it be silly to want to run games on high settings
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/8
It outperforms the 320M under OS X. It certainly doesn't "suck" as much as you make it out to be.
Don't fall for anandtechs crap. Those tests where designed to make Intels GPU look good. The minute you do anything demanding the GPU falls flat on it's face. By this I mean turn on all the latest features to get the best on screen results.
For many other reasons I don't consider anandtech to be a credible web site. It has become an extension of Intels marketing team. A lot of people don't want to hear that but there is a trend in the articles that indicate that they have become a fan site and have lost the ability to report objectively.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 01:19 PM
The one argument Amazon can make is that they used "appstore" instead of "app store".
"Appstore" was a trademark held by a computer store that was later abandoned. When you search for "app store" in the TESS you find both but Apple's trademark is specifically "app store" with two words.
Not that I am an expert on the law of trademarks. Let them fight it out. What do I care. I'm just pointing out that the one word version of the trademark may not fall under Apple's two word trademark.
"Appstore" was a trademark held by a computer store that was later abandoned. When you search for "app store" in the TESS you find both but Apple's trademark is specifically "app store" with two words.
Not that I am an expert on the law of trademarks. Let them fight it out. What do I care. I'm just pointing out that the one word version of the trademark may not fall under Apple's two word trademark.
donfishinghocke
Jan 10, 12:11 PM
My 2010 Evo X. Soo fast, and so fun!
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4711634981_96255bab85_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4712302914_e3b47c2054_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4711634981_96255bab85_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4712302914_e3b47c2054_b.jpg
climhazzard85
Sep 6, 11:04 AM
I just bought a Core Duo on the 21st, needless to say I'm pissed. Anyone know apple's price match policy?
Yamcha
May 2, 05:21 PM
Whatever happened to Command-Delete?
....this is starting to look like Aero in Windows Vista.
See any similarities?
Image (http://thecustomizewindows.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/How-to-remove-the-confirmation-prompt-to-delete-any-file-in-Windows-7-2.png)
Image (http://cdn.macrumors.com/article/2011/05/02/171331-lion_delete_evernote.jpg)
lol true, infact the new buttons look similar to the ones found on Windows 7.. Anyway one thing that is annoying about Launchpad is that you cannot remove applications from the grid, sometimes you end up with uninstallers, and it just becomes a huge mess, would be nice if we could remove applications from Launchpad, not necessarily uninstalling them but just removing them from the grid..
....this is starting to look like Aero in Windows Vista.
See any similarities?
Image (http://thecustomizewindows.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/How-to-remove-the-confirmation-prompt-to-delete-any-file-in-Windows-7-2.png)
Image (http://cdn.macrumors.com/article/2011/05/02/171331-lion_delete_evernote.jpg)
lol true, infact the new buttons look similar to the ones found on Windows 7.. Anyway one thing that is annoying about Launchpad is that you cannot remove applications from the grid, sometimes you end up with uninstallers, and it just becomes a huge mess, would be nice if we could remove applications from Launchpad, not necessarily uninstalling them but just removing them from the grid..
smulji
Apr 12, 11:24 PM
Well?????????
I wonder if the next FCE will cost $99.00 now.
Or
is FCP X the new FCE?
Jeeebers! FCP X is the Glee version of video editing.
Yep times are changing.
My guess (and this is just a guess) is that FCE is dead. At $299, there's no reason for someone not to go to FCP X, if they're making a jump from iMovie or some other entry-level video program.
I love the fact that Apple has adopted the iMovie UI for FCP X. That makes the transition from iMovie to FCP X that much easier
I wonder if the next FCE will cost $99.00 now.
Or
is FCP X the new FCE?
Jeeebers! FCP X is the Glee version of video editing.
Yep times are changing.
My guess (and this is just a guess) is that FCE is dead. At $299, there's no reason for someone not to go to FCP X, if they're making a jump from iMovie or some other entry-level video program.
I love the fact that Apple has adopted the iMovie UI for FCP X. That makes the transition from iMovie to FCP X that much easier
gkarris
Nov 27, 09:04 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.
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.
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, 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.
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. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
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.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
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.
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.
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, 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.
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. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
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.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
FireStar
Oct 1, 05:58 PM
Not sure. I do however, find it funny, that some of the major case manufacturers take so long to release cases. I realize the understanding is that Apple doesn't leak the specs until the day of the Keynote announcement. But, there were eBay sellers with silicone cases available the day of the Keynote (they may have even been up before, I didn't look) that fit perfectly. I bought some of them. So there ARE leaks in China, and the cheap case manufacturers get their hands on them successfully, so I don't know why the major manufacturers aren't privy to the same leaks.
I find it depressing. :( Sorta. I would like more cases out sooner, at least from major case manufacturers. (Especially Switcheasy. :() I however think I'm gonna get a Griffin Reveal (Case with clear backing) so I can have the durability of a case and the customization of a skin. (For the most part.)
I find it depressing. :( Sorta. I would like more cases out sooner, at least from major case manufacturers. (Especially Switcheasy. :() I however think I'm gonna get a Griffin Reveal (Case with clear backing) so I can have the durability of a case and the customization of a skin. (For the most part.)
bjoplin21
Feb 17, 09:08 PM
Just got my 2009 Mac Pro Quad 2.66 today. It has a 120GB SSD drive and 640GB secondary drive, blu ray player, and 16GB of DDR3 Ram. Sitting next to it is my 2009 17 inch 2.66ghz Core2Duo Macbook Pro which has a 240GB SSD drive and 8GB of RAM.
http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/bjoplin21/DSC00964.jpg
http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/bjoplin21/DSC00972.jpg
http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/bjoplin21/DSC00964.jpg
http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/bjoplin21/DSC00972.jpg
Meandmunch
Mar 25, 04:02 PM
Very cool!
By the time the big game console companies (xbox, PS3) finally decide it's time to move forward with a new system (2014-15 is what has been projected), a device as mundane as an iPhone sporting a A7-A8 processor will blow right past existing console tech. iDevices and there closest competitors will be biting deeply into console market share.
By the time the big game console companies (xbox, PS3) finally decide it's time to move forward with a new system (2014-15 is what has been projected), a device as mundane as an iPhone sporting a A7-A8 processor will blow right past existing console tech. iDevices and there closest competitors will be biting deeply into console market share.
Stetrain
Apr 2, 07:37 PM
this commercial makes ipad seemed like it's only for kids.
Which part, the stock information, typing an email, or working on a spreadsheet? ;)
Which part, the stock information, typing an email, or working on a spreadsheet? ;)
rxse7en
Nov 29, 03:25 PM
Ws there any mention of iTV's HD capabilities?
0 comments:
Post a Comment