rgarjr
Mar 22, 09:17 PM
What is there to update on the classic besides capacity?
lots, Bluetooth, WIFI (for internet radio), design..
Here's my classic mockup
http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=277273&stc=1&thumb=1&d=1300734199
lots, Bluetooth, WIFI (for internet radio), design..
Here's my classic mockup
http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=277273&stc=1&thumb=1&d=1300734199
Earendil
Nov 28, 10:32 AM
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?
*snip*
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20".
*snip*
But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
And that percentage shoots up when you take into account only the Pro style Towers. And it's a shame your Cinema display is showing age sooner than I would think it should. Still, in my own experience with color reproduction and accuracy in Photography, the cinema displays I have used have exceeded my Dell 2005. In regular computer use I wouldn't be able to tell them apart (aside from the back light bleed on the Dell).
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.
Do you see any fan boys making posts here? I see some people here that are ignorant of the way monitors work and yet are trying to pass opinions on Apple/Dell/LCD market as gold though.
That's the issue though, currently Apple doesn't sell a consumer computer that either doesn't already come with a monitor, or where you aren't supposed to already have a monitor.
the MacBook and iMac both have screens built in, the MacMini, if you saw any of it's advertisements or presentation, is meant as a direct replacement for a PC box. i.e. bring your own mouse, keyboard and monitor. I as well as another guy have already said this though.
It's a problem, still, I want too want Apple to sell a consumer level monitor. But Apple certainly doesn't have to enter that market if they don't want to. Besides, the market for a cheap 17" monitor is TINY. You're talking Mini owners (who don't already have a monitor) maybe a few laptop owners, and...? G5 owners? If you're plugin a $150 LCD up to a G5 you should be shot :P Unless you are running three at once or something.
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?
Many professionals run Duel 20" screens. In fact I see this setup far more often that a 30" screen.
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.
wow wow wow. You just me on that logic jump. Apple sells some high end systems to Professions in industry that demand at least a certain standard. Apple also sells other computers. Apple Sells monitors that are aiming at (hitting is another matter) those professionals that demand a certain standard. Apple doesn't currently sell any other monitors. How is that proof that Apple is trying to personally screw you out of your cash?
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?
Yeah, there is a gap, and I do see it as a problem. No one in the entire thread is disagreeing with that. You ideas on why there is a gap is viewed a little bit more negative than I would, but whatever.
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.
Another huge jump in logic based on no facts and stretched assumptions. Do you know what Apple takes home at the end of the day from each monitor sale, each iMac sale, and each Mini sale? Can you provide that data to back up any of your conclusions? It sure would go a long way in getting anyone to side with you on that point. However, until you do, I'm going to say this one more time:
Cinema Display = Pro quality Display (I don't give a hoot if your eyes can't see it, the components alone show it, and that is what cost money to make not your eye sight)
Pro Quality = not cheap, don't go looking for a $200 monitor for pro work.
And for the last time, I'm still waiting for someone to show me a display that matches the Cinemas tech specs and qualifications and also cost downwards in the $400 range that people keep speaking about. Because until someone does, I'm inclined to believe, based on my own looking, that Apple is right with the industry on this one (or close) and all our whining on cost means jack.
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.
In light of that little sarcastc jab, the irony is that you are one of, if not the only user, to have admitted to owning a 20" Cinema display in this thread so far :rolleyes:
[quote]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?
I'll just quote myself on this one...
[QUOTE=Earendil]You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in back lighting and change in color based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benefits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level monitor for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
But if you had been following the thread you'd know that about me already...
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?
No, you are asking for two very different things here.
1. You are asking Apple to produce a consumer level monitor that you can afford and falls in line with the market. I think everyone agrees with this idea, whether there is a large enough market for Apple to justify it (only Aple costumers would consider them) is up for debate.
and...
2. You are asking Apple to drop the price on their Pro displays without giving a reason (all your reasons apply to a consumer LCD), nor have you provided a similarly speced display to show that Apple is out of line with it's pricing.
There are large difference between a Mini and a G5. Just because most people wouldn't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. Just relax and trust me that in two properly functioning displays, Apple's monitors are very good, and imho should never be compared to Apple's displays unless you are trying to convince a consumer (who can't tell the difference) not to buy it and buy an alternative display. I have done this before. Just like you'd never compare a Mini and a G5 unless grandma was thinking about buying a G5 to surf the web with...
~Tyler
*snip*
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20".
*snip*
But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
And that percentage shoots up when you take into account only the Pro style Towers. And it's a shame your Cinema display is showing age sooner than I would think it should. Still, in my own experience with color reproduction and accuracy in Photography, the cinema displays I have used have exceeded my Dell 2005. In regular computer use I wouldn't be able to tell them apart (aside from the back light bleed on the Dell).
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.
Do you see any fan boys making posts here? I see some people here that are ignorant of the way monitors work and yet are trying to pass opinions on Apple/Dell/LCD market as gold though.
That's the issue though, currently Apple doesn't sell a consumer computer that either doesn't already come with a monitor, or where you aren't supposed to already have a monitor.
the MacBook and iMac both have screens built in, the MacMini, if you saw any of it's advertisements or presentation, is meant as a direct replacement for a PC box. i.e. bring your own mouse, keyboard and monitor. I as well as another guy have already said this though.
It's a problem, still, I want too want Apple to sell a consumer level monitor. But Apple certainly doesn't have to enter that market if they don't want to. Besides, the market for a cheap 17" monitor is TINY. You're talking Mini owners (who don't already have a monitor) maybe a few laptop owners, and...? G5 owners? If you're plugin a $150 LCD up to a G5 you should be shot :P Unless you are running three at once or something.
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?
Many professionals run Duel 20" screens. In fact I see this setup far more often that a 30" screen.
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.
wow wow wow. You just me on that logic jump. Apple sells some high end systems to Professions in industry that demand at least a certain standard. Apple also sells other computers. Apple Sells monitors that are aiming at (hitting is another matter) those professionals that demand a certain standard. Apple doesn't currently sell any other monitors. How is that proof that Apple is trying to personally screw you out of your cash?
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?
Yeah, there is a gap, and I do see it as a problem. No one in the entire thread is disagreeing with that. You ideas on why there is a gap is viewed a little bit more negative than I would, but whatever.
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.
Another huge jump in logic based on no facts and stretched assumptions. Do you know what Apple takes home at the end of the day from each monitor sale, each iMac sale, and each Mini sale? Can you provide that data to back up any of your conclusions? It sure would go a long way in getting anyone to side with you on that point. However, until you do, I'm going to say this one more time:
Cinema Display = Pro quality Display (I don't give a hoot if your eyes can't see it, the components alone show it, and that is what cost money to make not your eye sight)
Pro Quality = not cheap, don't go looking for a $200 monitor for pro work.
And for the last time, I'm still waiting for someone to show me a display that matches the Cinemas tech specs and qualifications and also cost downwards in the $400 range that people keep speaking about. Because until someone does, I'm inclined to believe, based on my own looking, that Apple is right with the industry on this one (or close) and all our whining on cost means jack.
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.
In light of that little sarcastc jab, the irony is that you are one of, if not the only user, to have admitted to owning a 20" Cinema display in this thread so far :rolleyes:
[quote]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?
I'll just quote myself on this one...
[QUOTE=Earendil]You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in back lighting and change in color based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benefits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level monitor for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
But if you had been following the thread you'd know that about me already...
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?
No, you are asking for two very different things here.
1. You are asking Apple to produce a consumer level monitor that you can afford and falls in line with the market. I think everyone agrees with this idea, whether there is a large enough market for Apple to justify it (only Aple costumers would consider them) is up for debate.
and...
2. You are asking Apple to drop the price on their Pro displays without giving a reason (all your reasons apply to a consumer LCD), nor have you provided a similarly speced display to show that Apple is out of line with it's pricing.
There are large difference between a Mini and a G5. Just because most people wouldn't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. Just relax and trust me that in two properly functioning displays, Apple's monitors are very good, and imho should never be compared to Apple's displays unless you are trying to convince a consumer (who can't tell the difference) not to buy it and buy an alternative display. I have done this before. Just like you'd never compare a Mini and a G5 unless grandma was thinking about buying a G5 to surf the web with...
~Tyler
thisisahughes
Apr 3, 06:19 AM
I like the black theme A LOT more than the all white themes. I hope to see more like this in the future.
Biff...
Feb 21, 04:11 PM
Gotta stop looking at this thread, its giving me to many ideas that will cost me dearly. :eek:
Machead III
Sep 7, 08:07 AM
Judging by the ratings, I get the sensation that some of us here don't like disney movies.
Like I've said already, Disney own Touchstone and Miramax, both of whom have a vast catalog of films between them covering practically every genre.
Miramax also pick up the odd non-English language film too, which is important for serious film fans. I know a whole bunch of Jean-Pierre Juenet and Adurey Tautou movies were, like "Un long dimanche de fiancailles" and "A la folie... pas du tout", both of which are fricking brilliant.
Like I've said already, Disney own Touchstone and Miramax, both of whom have a vast catalog of films between them covering practically every genre.
Miramax also pick up the odd non-English language film too, which is important for serious film fans. I know a whole bunch of Jean-Pierre Juenet and Adurey Tautou movies were, like "Un long dimanche de fiancailles" and "A la folie... pas du tout", both of which are fricking brilliant.
mattyuk
Jan 31, 10:54 AM
VW Polo 1.4, had it 3 year.
twoodcc
Jan 23, 03:44 PM
Our PPD has dropped 20% from the peak, I lost a big unit this week due to a reboot, same old annoying problem...
Can't wait for Gulftown and GPU3...
yeah i've noticed the team has been down. again, i believe the less we chat on this forum, the less members will fold. right now, if one of our top users goes down, our whole team does basically.
i think we need to be more involved on here, and more people will fold.
sorry to hear you lost a big unit. yeah gulftown and gpu3 will be great!
Can't wait for Gulftown and GPU3...
yeah i've noticed the team has been down. again, i believe the less we chat on this forum, the less members will fold. right now, if one of our top users goes down, our whole team does basically.
i think we need to be more involved on here, and more people will fold.
sorry to hear you lost a big unit. yeah gulftown and gpu3 will be great!
Twizz91
Mar 22, 04:12 PM
iPod Classic 7G
- Retina display for stunning clickwheel-game-visuals
- Airplay
- 220 GB
- Thunderbolt to fill up that 220 GB in 2 sec
- bluetooth to stream music through your ipad.
- 4mm thin
- same 36 hour battery
Who's with me :D:apple:
- Retina display for stunning clickwheel-game-visuals
- Airplay
- 220 GB
- Thunderbolt to fill up that 220 GB in 2 sec
- bluetooth to stream music through your ipad.
- 4mm thin
- same 36 hour battery
Who's with me :D:apple:
tablo13
Oct 24, 03:07 PM
hello everyone..i have bought a new ipod touch and i want a case to cover it and to provide protection from scratches.please can anyone suggest me.
$1 cases on eBay is good enough to protect from scratches IMO.
$1 cases on eBay is good enough to protect from scratches IMO.
Gatesbasher
Apr 3, 01:23 PM
Are you kidding me?!
The 'pathology of people like me'? Who do you think you are? Facts are that I've neither held, or used either device, so I'll wait until I have until I make my decision. What's so controversial about that? How am I talking about the iPad in any kind of disadvantageous way? I'm just saying I want to try both and have not made up my mind yet. Rational.
The Playbook does exist too, no matter how much you say it doesn't. What on earth are you basing you assumption on? Where did I ever promote the Playbook over the iPad? Please retract your comments.
The Playbook does NOT exist, until people can buy it and compare it with an existing product. You "Haven't made up your mind yet?" On what conceivable basis could you make up your mind between an actual shipping product and pie-in-the-sky vaporware? How is that rational? It used to be Apple products were only sneered at in comparison with existing competitors. Now they have to compete with every imaginary device anybody can dream up, from the HP Slate to next years "100 x as fast" Tegra 3 barn-burner.
The 'pathology of people like me'? Who do you think you are? Facts are that I've neither held, or used either device, so I'll wait until I have until I make my decision. What's so controversial about that? How am I talking about the iPad in any kind of disadvantageous way? I'm just saying I want to try both and have not made up my mind yet. Rational.
The Playbook does exist too, no matter how much you say it doesn't. What on earth are you basing you assumption on? Where did I ever promote the Playbook over the iPad? Please retract your comments.
The Playbook does NOT exist, until people can buy it and compare it with an existing product. You "Haven't made up your mind yet?" On what conceivable basis could you make up your mind between an actual shipping product and pie-in-the-sky vaporware? How is that rational? It used to be Apple products were only sneered at in comparison with existing competitors. Now they have to compete with every imaginary device anybody can dream up, from the HP Slate to next years "100 x as fast" Tegra 3 barn-burner.
applekid
Jul 18, 08:20 AM
Good news and bad news. Movies good, rental bad if not offered with sale. However, if rentals are cheap, I'd probably just as soon rent so i could buy the physical disc which would be much higher quality anyway.
If rentals go for like 99 cents for a given amount of time, I'd probably try the movie with a rental and go out and buy the DVD if I want a high-quality movie with all of the extras that I could always rip. For a lot of the iTunes shows, I might buy an episode, but I usually just rip them from my DVDs to have high quality rips on my computer and a separate rip if I want to transfer them to my Palm (got no video iPod...)
As long as the pricing and rental term is fair, this should be a decent system. It definitely should be close to 99 cents a day. The cheapest physical movie rental service I can think of is RedBox (http://www.redbox.com/) which is $1 a night. Maybe Steve worked out a good deal to do a buck or two for a week.
If rentals go for like 99 cents for a given amount of time, I'd probably try the movie with a rental and go out and buy the DVD if I want a high-quality movie with all of the extras that I could always rip. For a lot of the iTunes shows, I might buy an episode, but I usually just rip them from my DVDs to have high quality rips on my computer and a separate rip if I want to transfer them to my Palm (got no video iPod...)
As long as the pricing and rental term is fair, this should be a decent system. It definitely should be close to 99 cents a day. The cheapest physical movie rental service I can think of is RedBox (http://www.redbox.com/) which is $1 a night. Maybe Steve worked out a good deal to do a buck or two for a week.
skidudeoz
Sep 14, 03:36 PM
Well if the US had a decent 3G network, then there would be no problem, like the REST OF THE WORLD!!!! No issues here in OZ!!
HecubusPro
Sep 6, 06:06 PM
Personally, I wouldn't want to DL a large movie file without the option of being able to burn it to DVD so I can have that tangible hard copy that makes me feel safe and warm. Then I wouldn't have a problem deleting it off of my hard drive.
I could be wrong, but I don't see them dealing with rentals. Most people still don't have fast enough connections to warrant downloading a big movie file when they can just have it delivered to their door via Netflix or they can head down to their local Blockbuster and have it right away. Same goes for purchases. I like having the retail box. It just makes me a little bit happier. :) Now, if they offered HD downloads, I'd definitely be interested in that, even if it is a super big file.
I could be wrong, but I don't see them dealing with rentals. Most people still don't have fast enough connections to warrant downloading a big movie file when they can just have it delivered to their door via Netflix or they can head down to their local Blockbuster and have it right away. Same goes for purchases. I like having the retail box. It just makes me a little bit happier. :) Now, if they offered HD downloads, I'd definitely be interested in that, even if it is a super big file.
Miker2k
Jan 12, 11:53 AM
Brrrrr
longsilver
Sep 5, 08:21 AM
Well, the US store is down anyways. UK and Ireland are still up. Anyone checked any others?
tablo13
Sep 17, 08:08 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
Do you suggest any cheap good quality silicon cases on eBay other than the one above?
Do you suggest any cheap good quality silicon cases on eBay other than the one above?
Psychic Shopper
Jul 18, 11:18 AM
I must have watched 20 different video clips from the Daily Show on You Tube, streaming in almost real time. Why would I want to buy that content on the Itunes store?
interslicer
Mar 1, 02:01 AM
mac pro, tripple monitors running off a 5770 :D
RITZFit
Jan 6, 03:49 PM
My teggy
MattDell
Sep 6, 08:29 PM
Renting would never fly. It's far too easy to just burn the movie to DVD if it's already in digital format. The movie executives would flip. It would take some impressive coding to prevent users from doing this, and even then... somebody will figure out a way around it.
So, no. I don't think any movie corporation will allow digital movie rentals.
-Matt
So, no. I don't think any movie corporation will allow digital movie rentals.
-Matt
Pressure
Aug 27, 06:07 PM
Err...I was defending that Conroe could fit in the iMac. Especially having the G5 in there. (Woodcrest's TDP is 85W by the way...)
And look here (http://spamreaper.org/frankie/macintel.html)
Remember that TDP is for the highest clocked chip (3.0Ghz). The rest of the family sits at 65W TDP, like the Conroe.
And look here (http://spamreaper.org/frankie/macintel.html)
Remember that TDP is for the highest clocked chip (3.0Ghz). The rest of the family sits at 65W TDP, like the Conroe.
minnesotamacman
Sep 1, 03:30 PM
You know.... If you wanted to have a beautiful ACD 23" or 30" and hide the computer, there is a bracket that allows a Mac Mini to sit behind the display. I personally don't mind the all-in-one. I was against it, until I got an iMac 2 months ago and love it. So, wouldn't bother me to have the 23" imac... I would get AppleCare and be happy for 3 years.
dethmaShine
May 2, 05:26 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.
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.
zombierunner
Apr 20, 08:38 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)
HDMI-in would be nice :-)
hell yea xbox 360 on imac in 1080p ... kanex xd and similar can only do 720p atm . need 1080p target display mode support
HDMI-in would be nice :-)
hell yea xbox 360 on imac in 1080p ... kanex xd and similar can only do 720p atm . need 1080p target display mode support
No comments:
Post a Comment