Object-X
Nov 28, 03:25 AM
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
Skika
May 2, 07:45 PM
Haha so many mad fanboys. " APL Y U RUIN MY OSX"
I think its a neat trinket, deleting apps this way, but nothing major worth over analyzing.
I think its a neat trinket, deleting apps this way, but nothing major worth over analyzing.
TuffLuffJimmy
Jun 22, 02:56 PM
I hope not. That sounds transitional and I don't like where that would be transitioning to.
Veinticinco
Mar 23, 04:21 AM
As for the Classic, no reason to update it, no reason to EOL it either.
I still have my "CarPod" for road trips - an old but pristine 30GB iPod Photo, still love it.
Bit of custom job when I got bored a while back - white body but with a red (U2) clickwheel, white centre button, and a smooth brushed Alu back.
I still have my "CarPod" for road trips - an old but pristine 30GB iPod Photo, still love it.
Bit of custom job when I got bored a while back - white body but with a red (U2) clickwheel, white centre button, and a smooth brushed Alu back.
Edge100
Sep 1, 12:29 PM
if not, how am I supposed to convice my wife this time?:D
It seems you can convince her of almost anything ;)
It seems you can convince her of almost anything ;)
Xero910
Mar 31, 10:11 AM
Regarding the launchpad... I can't remove applications anymore...
When I click "option" the icons get to "shake" but there is not X sign to click to delete the app... they just wiggle and can't be deleted.
Any of you the same?
Also very difficult to move them around...
In my experience launchpad was working better on preview 1!
Ideas?
Yea it's a little buggy right now. You can delete apps the same as as before with some added frustration.
1. Press and hold, CMD+OPT+CTRL (so they all wiggle)
2. Next press and hold one app until they stop wiggling.
3. Now click the apps you want once to delete them.
4. Make sure you hold those 3 keys throughout all steps.
The only thing I haven't figured out yet is adding apps manually. When I drag them to the LaunchPad icon, nothing happens.
When I click "option" the icons get to "shake" but there is not X sign to click to delete the app... they just wiggle and can't be deleted.
Any of you the same?
Also very difficult to move them around...
In my experience launchpad was working better on preview 1!
Ideas?
Yea it's a little buggy right now. You can delete apps the same as as before with some added frustration.
1. Press and hold, CMD+OPT+CTRL (so they all wiggle)
2. Next press and hold one app until they stop wiggling.
3. Now click the apps you want once to delete them.
4. Make sure you hold those 3 keys throughout all steps.
The only thing I haven't figured out yet is adding apps manually. When I drag them to the LaunchPad icon, nothing happens.
balamw
Sep 7, 02:24 PM
Sorry for the nastly long URL (http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:9OrBsXYjfxgJ:www.amazon.com/b/%3Fie%3DUTF8%26node%3D16263011+unbox+site:amazon.com&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&client=firefox-a), but this is a cache page from a google search where you can see what Amazons offerings are for their new download service.
Pretty broad selection. Including some TV Shows similarly priced to iTMS.
B
Pretty broad selection. Including some TV Shows similarly priced to iTMS.
B
CIA
Apr 12, 08:47 PM
From what I understand that was Steve Job's doing. The guy made a separate simple movie app, and Jobs liked it so much he decided to make it the new iMovie.
I remember the keynote... He was on vacation and wanted a super easy way to edit his home movie. So he whipped up this "new" program to do it. Steve liked it and it became iMovie. And in the process threw 50 years of video editing out the window. Great if you've never edited before, but if you want to edit, iMovie isn't an option. If you want to slap together a super quick video, it's almost faster to cut and paste clips in a QT7 window then use iMovie now.
Speaking of that. I really hope they fix QTX today also, at least bring it up to par with QT7 in features.
I remember the keynote... He was on vacation and wanted a super easy way to edit his home movie. So he whipped up this "new" program to do it. Steve liked it and it became iMovie. And in the process threw 50 years of video editing out the window. Great if you've never edited before, but if you want to edit, iMovie isn't an option. If you want to slap together a super quick video, it's almost faster to cut and paste clips in a QT7 window then use iMovie now.
Speaking of that. I really hope they fix QTX today also, at least bring it up to par with QT7 in features.
Gatesbasher
Mar 24, 01:48 PM
You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)....
I for one misunderstood you too. Thanks for the elucidation.
I know there's no hope for anyone willing to listen to 128,000 bps noise, or worse yet pay money for it. I don't know about 320k, but my feeling on the subject of compression is this:
I was one of the people convinced by the propaganda that led to the DVD Audio and SACD fiasco. I have since done a lot more reading and am convinced by the math that CDs are about as good as there is any reason for them to be, human hearing being what it is. (I always thought increasing the sampling rate was stupid.)
As far as Apple Lossless and other codecs of the same type�if they can compress video signals losslessly to 2% of their original size for DVDs, why should I doubt you can compress music to 40 or 50%? The thing about going below that is, maybe at first listen, the difference doesn't leap out at you�but maybe it would with extended exposure, and with better equipment than you're using right now. What you're assuming is that you're never going to have better equipment, and that "small" differences in quality are inconsequential.
My problem with that is that then you've been set up for the next decrease in quality, and the one after that, and the one after that. Eventually you're buying 128,000 bps tracks and making fun of "audiophiles" who can tell the difference, and then one of the true triumphs of 20th Century technology�really good audio reproduction�is lost.
Video that can't be told from the real thing is never going to happen in my lifetime, but with sound we were there�and then threw it away!
I for one misunderstood you too. Thanks for the elucidation.
I know there's no hope for anyone willing to listen to 128,000 bps noise, or worse yet pay money for it. I don't know about 320k, but my feeling on the subject of compression is this:
I was one of the people convinced by the propaganda that led to the DVD Audio and SACD fiasco. I have since done a lot more reading and am convinced by the math that CDs are about as good as there is any reason for them to be, human hearing being what it is. (I always thought increasing the sampling rate was stupid.)
As far as Apple Lossless and other codecs of the same type�if they can compress video signals losslessly to 2% of their original size for DVDs, why should I doubt you can compress music to 40 or 50%? The thing about going below that is, maybe at first listen, the difference doesn't leap out at you�but maybe it would with extended exposure, and with better equipment than you're using right now. What you're assuming is that you're never going to have better equipment, and that "small" differences in quality are inconsequential.
My problem with that is that then you've been set up for the next decrease in quality, and the one after that, and the one after that. Eventually you're buying 128,000 bps tracks and making fun of "audiophiles" who can tell the difference, and then one of the true triumphs of 20th Century technology�really good audio reproduction�is lost.
Video that can't be told from the real thing is never going to happen in my lifetime, but with sound we were there�and then threw it away!
Nmx-
Apr 1, 11:07 AM
Has anyone else experienced that the temps has gone up with this release?
my macbook 5,1 2ghz core 2 duo seems to run well over 70 celcius all the time which means that my fans are going crazy, and i hate that high sound. its fine in idle mode, but as soon i start a program like Xcode or Netbeans or just browse the web.
its idling at 60-6x celcius.
and nothing is running at all only activity monitor.
this didn't happen in preview 1
or on my SL partition.
my macbook 5,1 2ghz core 2 duo seems to run well over 70 celcius all the time which means that my fans are going crazy, and i hate that high sound. its fine in idle mode, but as soon i start a program like Xcode or Netbeans or just browse the web.
its idling at 60-6x celcius.
and nothing is running at all only activity monitor.
this didn't happen in preview 1
or on my SL partition.
ckelley
Apr 12, 10:11 PM
Available on the App Store?!?
Seriously, this better come in a box.
I can't get this approved for use without probably buying it myself first, let alone using my own iTunes account, which brings up a whole lot of licensing issues at work. And before you say "create a iTunes account for work."... Tying the corporate credit card to a shared iTunes account? I'd have a better chance of having our CEO give me one of his Jaguars than that. Not to mention, IT would slaughter me for the amount of bandwidth I'd use in downloading it.
Seriously, this better come in a box.
I can't get this approved for use without probably buying it myself first, let alone using my own iTunes account, which brings up a whole lot of licensing issues at work. And before you say "create a iTunes account for work."... Tying the corporate credit card to a shared iTunes account? I'd have a better chance of having our CEO give me one of his Jaguars than that. Not to mention, IT would slaughter me for the amount of bandwidth I'd use in downloading it.
Tonsko
Jan 9, 03:53 AM
Pretty fly zmmer with nice rims! Not tempted to squeeze 17/18s on? (Assuming it won't **** up the running gear/handling)
twoodcc
Dec 12, 07:58 PM
yeah we all have to keep it going! things should get better when smp2 and gpu3 get here also
JRM PowerPod
Aug 6, 11:19 PM
Or when there are multiple threads analyzing a photograph of a banner with dozens of icons on it, and nobody notices the photo also shows (the same) two covered banners. :)
Don't be like that, i noticed it.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=2677363#post2677363
But that doesn't mean everyone isnt going nuts, because they are. This is worse than any build up to an Apple event i've ever remembered
Don't be like that, i noticed it.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=2677363#post2677363
But that doesn't mean everyone isnt going nuts, because they are. This is worse than any build up to an Apple event i've ever remembered
MattSepeta
Mar 23, 02:15 PM
You don't like the idea that businesses can choose what they want to offer or not offer.
No, I fully support that.
I am simply disappointed that they pander to special interests. Just one of many reasons I voted with my wallet and bought a droid.
No, I fully support that.
I am simply disappointed that they pander to special interests. Just one of many reasons I voted with my wallet and bought a droid.
moobookpro
Oct 23, 09:24 PM
hardly.
i'm trying to put all of this core 2 duo hype into perspective. there have been rumors about new pro's for the last 2 months. at this rate, no one will ever purchase a new mac notebook.
prove to me how a core 2 duo chip will make my EVERYDAY computing that more productive compared to a core duo.
I stand by my point that you will be only shaving seconds of waiting for your stuff to run. a real wank...
if you are gonna wait - macworld 07 will be the big update.
aussie_geek
I'll grant you some slack on a lot of the points you've made, but I simply can't sit here and read your smug comments about people waiting for the C2D without pointing out at least one thing you are missing. Just exactly how do you expect your Core Duo MBP to support 64-bit instructions when Leopard comes out? Oh, that's right. It won't. You're severely misguided if you think that won't make a difference.
i'm trying to put all of this core 2 duo hype into perspective. there have been rumors about new pro's for the last 2 months. at this rate, no one will ever purchase a new mac notebook.
prove to me how a core 2 duo chip will make my EVERYDAY computing that more productive compared to a core duo.
I stand by my point that you will be only shaving seconds of waiting for your stuff to run. a real wank...
if you are gonna wait - macworld 07 will be the big update.
aussie_geek
I'll grant you some slack on a lot of the points you've made, but I simply can't sit here and read your smug comments about people waiting for the C2D without pointing out at least one thing you are missing. Just exactly how do you expect your Core Duo MBP to support 64-bit instructions when Leopard comes out? Oh, that's right. It won't. You're severely misguided if you think that won't make a difference.
newdeal
Mar 25, 06:38 PM
It makes me laugh that people are saying bad things about this when the playbook did it it was the best thing ever and the software it was displaying wasn't nearly so advanced
gnasher729
Nov 15, 09:53 AM
I wonder how Handbrake, iDVD encoding, or Quicktime encoding will take advantage of the extra cores?
For some time, Handbrake didn't use more than two cores - owners of Quad G5s reported CPU usage of exactly 50 percent, then someone changed it and Quad G5s reported 100 percent CPU usage.
What we don't know: Was the code changed to use up to four processors, or as many processors as are available? Developers are usually very unwilling to ship code that they haven't been able to try out, so expect a version using eight cores about two days after the developers have access to an eight core machine.
In the case of Handbrake, encoding to MPEG4 seems already limited by the speed of the DVD drive; you can't encode faster than you can read from the DVD. H.264 is still limited by processor speed. Using eight cores is not too difficult; for example, if you encode 60 minutes of video, just give 7 1/2 minutes to each core.
For some time, Handbrake didn't use more than two cores - owners of Quad G5s reported CPU usage of exactly 50 percent, then someone changed it and Quad G5s reported 100 percent CPU usage.
What we don't know: Was the code changed to use up to four processors, or as many processors as are available? Developers are usually very unwilling to ship code that they haven't been able to try out, so expect a version using eight cores about two days after the developers have access to an eight core machine.
In the case of Handbrake, encoding to MPEG4 seems already limited by the speed of the DVD drive; you can't encode faster than you can read from the DVD. H.264 is still limited by processor speed. Using eight cores is not too difficult; for example, if you encode 60 minutes of video, just give 7 1/2 minutes to each core.
DrEasy
Mar 23, 02:08 AM
With a bigger hard drive, it would be conceivable to think of the iPod classic as a portable hard drive that you could also use for Time Machine backups. I would have a greater incentive in backing up my files if I could use my iPod that is always nearby. It would back up my files as I'm recharging it.
Or look at it the other way: there's plenty of portable hard drives in the market, but how many of you carry one "just in case"? Whereas if the portable hard drive doubles up as a very competent MP3 player, you will always have it with you.
Now there should be some data protection scheme so that if someone steals your iPod they can't use all your data. Encryption + some kind of pairing with your machines should do the job.
I know I'd buy such a thing...
Or look at it the other way: there's plenty of portable hard drives in the market, but how many of you carry one "just in case"? Whereas if the portable hard drive doubles up as a very competent MP3 player, you will always have it with you.
Now there should be some data protection scheme so that if someone steals your iPod they can't use all your data. Encryption + some kind of pairing with your machines should do the job.
I know I'd buy such a thing...
spyd4r
Oct 23, 09:19 PM
I have been patiently waiting for the new macbook pro just as long as the rest of you, but i have had it, they are like 1.5 - 2 months behind their competitors now.. I am just about ready to drop the money and upgrade my PC desktop instead...they betttter hurrry! ;)
DewGuy1999
Feb 28, 08:21 PM
Thank you, Yes my office room here had single pane windows originally. The rest of the house has windows like what is on the outside but they are double pane from when the house was built. For some reason not in here. The house has a lot of history and the windows are beautiful so it would be a shame to take out the originals. They are the very thin glass that you can see the distortion when looking through(I am not sure what to call that). In this room the heat loss was bad but in order to preserve the old glass and original look outside this was a decent option We back up to a river that the american army crossed through during WWII and the last of the bullet holes from the fire fight in the back of the basement were just patched up with the latest renovation work.
I see, so, the inside windows are essentially storm windows. I'm glad to hear that you kept the original windows, too many people think that replacement windows are the only solution to old windows. They're not, there's a reason replacement windows are called "replacement", because you'll be replacing them, probably sooner than later. I don't think the old glass has a name, but most people refer to it as wavy. Thanks for sharing.
I see, so, the inside windows are essentially storm windows. I'm glad to hear that you kept the original windows, too many people think that replacement windows are the only solution to old windows. They're not, there's a reason replacement windows are called "replacement", because you'll be replacing them, probably sooner than later. I don't think the old glass has a name, but most people refer to it as wavy. Thanks for sharing.
Dont Hurt Me
Sep 1, 02:52 PM
Apple used to have all-in-ones, consumer towers, pro towers, etc. Remember the PowerMac 6400? Too many products is too confusing for the consumer. If that means that a couple of people can't get the exact configuration they want, so be it.Apple still needs to sell a not overpriced cube, Millions,perhaps billions have monitors that are just fine. What they need is a machine between near nothing Mini and workstation MacPro. Its been said a million times so here it is again.:)
mc68k
Oct 5, 06:41 PM
hey, congrats to you for 6 million!!thanks! with those bigadv units i almost feel like im cheating!
blondepianist
May 2, 05:33 PM
i think I'm horribly wrong here.
You can drag and drop the app (any deletable) in the trash and it will come up with the same pop up. There's no need to hold down on the app to enable deletion. Fair enough on apple's side.
/rant.
That's good! Thanks for sharing before more people went on about Lion being a toy OS.
And if I've said it once, I'll say it again: MacPad cometh. :cool:
You can drag and drop the app (any deletable) in the trash and it will come up with the same pop up. There's no need to hold down on the app to enable deletion. Fair enough on apple's side.
/rant.
That's good! Thanks for sharing before more people went on about Lion being a toy OS.
And if I've said it once, I'll say it again: MacPad cometh. :cool:
0 comments:
Post a Comment