dkoralek
Oct 24, 09:03 AM
The MacBook Pro isn't the only model to get attention today. The iMac is now available with a 750 GB hard drive, for $200 more than the 500 GB drive. Good news for storing DVDs or high-def programs.
The Mac Pro also has 750GB options (for bays 2 - 4 there are now options for 500GB or 750GB).
Cheers.
The Mac Pro also has 750GB options (for bays 2 - 4 there are now options for 500GB or 750GB).
Cheers.
djsound
Apr 14, 12:03 AM
Apple has it all down to a science. They probably have algorithm's for getting the most possible money out of you.....if you don't see this your blind...Wait for something that actually makes a difference...not just a different color. As if they ever intended to release the white iphone at the same time as the black one hahahaha :rolleyes:
The Maestro
Oct 24, 07:47 AM
wahoooooooo
i better get my card out
i better get my card out
freeny
Jul 25, 08:37 AM
that's at least 3 MX-1000 users we have that are well-satisfied :-)
Add me to that list!
Love my MX:)
Add me to that list!
Love my MX:)
pcb
Jan 29, 11:07 PM
^^yummy!
To add to my earlier post....delivered today, 2008 Honda CBR1000RR; custom paint work, rear tire hugger, Taylormade exhaust, hot bodies under tail, power commander, shorty shift levers, custom pegs, etc and many more yummy upgrades to come. :D
That is sick. I want one so bad but my folks are being difficult. I am allowed to have one I just cant park it anywhere on their property and seeing as I still live in their house that makes it tough to own one.
To add to my earlier post....delivered today, 2008 Honda CBR1000RR; custom paint work, rear tire hugger, Taylormade exhaust, hot bodies under tail, power commander, shorty shift levers, custom pegs, etc and many more yummy upgrades to come. :D
That is sick. I want one so bad but my folks are being difficult. I am allowed to have one I just cant park it anywhere on their property and seeing as I still live in their house that makes it tough to own one.
simX
Oct 18, 06:22 PM
Yes, thank you. At least someone else out there is emotionally distanced enough from the iPod and the Apple entertainment sector to be a bit objective.
Innovation: just what happened to Apple's innovative spirit when it comes to computers? The latest Mac Pro was fitted into the existing (and way oversized) G5 case. The MacBook was disappointing in that - proportionally - Apple did not shrink it at all or make it lighter than its predecessor (a design which had been in existence for about four years). There are more things, but I really don't want to sound like a troll here...
Apple needs to come out with new computer models that are unlike anything else out there. What about a tiny, thin ultraportable? What about a smaller tower, so those of us that want a pro computer don't have to invest in an oversized monster (which is larger than any PCs in the market that I am aware of). Aren't computers supposed to get SMALLER as the technology advances? Why is Apple obsessed with making the iPod smaller and smaller, but does not care as much about its laptops and desktops?
The answer: profit, or course. The iPod is Apple's cash cow. And this, my friends, is what I mean when I say that Apple needs to be partitioning off a little of its innovative energy that it is putting into its entertainment sector and bring it back to the computer line.
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :)
*sigh* How many times do we have to refute your assertions with facts before you stop repeating them?
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
As for Apple's innovative spirit lacking when it comes to the Macs, let's just point out that it Apple updated the iPod in October 2005 to the 5th generation, and we JUST got the 5.5th generation last month. Apple took a year to add slightly brighter screens, better battery life (only for video), and games. The nano just gained the anodized aluminum exterior -- wow, Apple's reaching back to the past for it's innovation now! And the shuffle got slimmed down and consolidated into one product. All this doesn't sound exactly like innovation to me. (Of course, Apple doesn't really need to innovate, since they're already selling iPods by the boatload.)
In contrast, Apple brought all of its Macs over to the Intel processor. The Mac Pro was dramatically higher value, what with double-wide graphics card slot, dual optical drives, 4 internal hard drive bays, etc., etc. All Macs (except for the Mac Pro) now have Front Row and a remote, which is a great feature. Built-in iSights have also migrated across the entire product line. The MacBook and MacBook Pro now have MagSafe -- a great innovation. Boot Camp is now supported on all new Macs. The Xserve has new features like lights-out management, redundant power supplies, etc. And we've seen some great things coming for Leopard, what with Time Machine and Spaces and iChat Theater and Core Animation and iCal Server, etc., etc., etc.
It seems to me that Apple is innovating more on the Macintosh side of things than they are with the iPod. What are they going to add next on the iPod -- wireless? *gasp*, so innovative!
Seriously, can we stop with this myth already? It's the same thing with all of Apple's "woes" with quality control (which was busted by the recent consumer reports articles where Apple has actually brought DOWN the number of new computers needing repair in their first year). It's something that's repeated ad nauseum by a few vocal people, when it's really not a problem at all. Same here: everybody gawks and writes about the iPod precisely because more people can afford it and more people can use it with whatever computer they have. So, obviously, you will hear more about the iPod.
Let's see if repeating myself again has any effect: the iPod is not Apple's cash cow!
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :rolleyes:
Innovation: just what happened to Apple's innovative spirit when it comes to computers? The latest Mac Pro was fitted into the existing (and way oversized) G5 case. The MacBook was disappointing in that - proportionally - Apple did not shrink it at all or make it lighter than its predecessor (a design which had been in existence for about four years). There are more things, but I really don't want to sound like a troll here...
Apple needs to come out with new computer models that are unlike anything else out there. What about a tiny, thin ultraportable? What about a smaller tower, so those of us that want a pro computer don't have to invest in an oversized monster (which is larger than any PCs in the market that I am aware of). Aren't computers supposed to get SMALLER as the technology advances? Why is Apple obsessed with making the iPod smaller and smaller, but does not care as much about its laptops and desktops?
The answer: profit, or course. The iPod is Apple's cash cow. And this, my friends, is what I mean when I say that Apple needs to be partitioning off a little of its innovative energy that it is putting into its entertainment sector and bring it back to the computer line.
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :)
*sigh* How many times do we have to refute your assertions with facts before you stop repeating them?
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
As for Apple's innovative spirit lacking when it comes to the Macs, let's just point out that it Apple updated the iPod in October 2005 to the 5th generation, and we JUST got the 5.5th generation last month. Apple took a year to add slightly brighter screens, better battery life (only for video), and games. The nano just gained the anodized aluminum exterior -- wow, Apple's reaching back to the past for it's innovation now! And the shuffle got slimmed down and consolidated into one product. All this doesn't sound exactly like innovation to me. (Of course, Apple doesn't really need to innovate, since they're already selling iPods by the boatload.)
In contrast, Apple brought all of its Macs over to the Intel processor. The Mac Pro was dramatically higher value, what with double-wide graphics card slot, dual optical drives, 4 internal hard drive bays, etc., etc. All Macs (except for the Mac Pro) now have Front Row and a remote, which is a great feature. Built-in iSights have also migrated across the entire product line. The MacBook and MacBook Pro now have MagSafe -- a great innovation. Boot Camp is now supported on all new Macs. The Xserve has new features like lights-out management, redundant power supplies, etc. And we've seen some great things coming for Leopard, what with Time Machine and Spaces and iChat Theater and Core Animation and iCal Server, etc., etc., etc.
It seems to me that Apple is innovating more on the Macintosh side of things than they are with the iPod. What are they going to add next on the iPod -- wireless? *gasp*, so innovative!
Seriously, can we stop with this myth already? It's the same thing with all of Apple's "woes" with quality control (which was busted by the recent consumer reports articles where Apple has actually brought DOWN the number of new computers needing repair in their first year). It's something that's repeated ad nauseum by a few vocal people, when it's really not a problem at all. Same here: everybody gawks and writes about the iPod precisely because more people can afford it and more people can use it with whatever computer they have. So, obviously, you will hear more about the iPod.
Let's see if repeating myself again has any effect: the iPod is not Apple's cash cow!
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :rolleyes:
vvebster
Nov 8, 10:40 AM
I'd like to receive an iPhone 3gs 16gb White for Christmas and a ticket to watch the "mighty red" Ottawa Senators :)
firestarter
Apr 27, 11:50 AM
For that matter, I get the feeling that the person taking the video isn't an employee, just a hunch.
It was an employee. You don't need to have 'just a hunch' when most of the media reports confirm this. The employee was fired.
I can understand not reading the whole thread, but not reading anything and preferring to make up your own version of events is kind of lazy.
It was an employee. You don't need to have 'just a hunch' when most of the media reports confirm this. The employee was fired.
I can understand not reading the whole thread, but not reading anything and preferring to make up your own version of events is kind of lazy.
tigress666
Apr 29, 01:03 AM
It's thinking like that which makes lotteries so successful for raising revenue in so many states. Total cost is always a factor, and total cost includes not only plan costs for two years, but it also includes the value of the respective phones at the end of the contract period. At a minimum, a 3GS is going to be worth $100 less than an iPhone 4 after 2 years. So, with a total expenditure in the $1500-$2000 range, you'll be lucky if you save $50 in the long run by going with the slower, lower resolution, older technology model. Hardly worth it.
Ok, that works if you are thinking of getting a cellphone vs. not getting a cellphone.
But when you are thinking of getting what type of cellphone, no, it doesn't count. Cause by deciding you are getting a cellphone but trying to decide which type, you already committed to buying the plan,what type of cellphone does not affect the cost of the plan, you are going to pay it regardless. So the cost of the plan really doesn't count for the cost of the cellphone when you are comparing cellphones together.
Maybe if we were comparing getting a landline to a cellphone (where the costs of the service for the landline are going to be drastically different).
Or even if we were comparing going from AT&T to Verizon there might be some small difference. So only if the cellphones are on different networks (with the iphone though, this only matters if you are comparing to a T-Mobile or Sprint phone as you can get an iphone on either AT&T or Verizon so the plan cost will be the same for the iphone as whatever other phone you want to get on either network).
You still don't get the point.
The point is when we are comparing different cellphones to each other, the service doesn't matter cause if you are getting the cellphone, you are going to pay the service regardless and which cellphone you get isn't going to affect the service's price. Therefore it is irrelevant when talking cost of one cellphone vs. another to bring in the cost o the contract.
Ok, that works if you are thinking of getting a cellphone vs. not getting a cellphone.
But when you are thinking of getting what type of cellphone, no, it doesn't count. Cause by deciding you are getting a cellphone but trying to decide which type, you already committed to buying the plan,what type of cellphone does not affect the cost of the plan, you are going to pay it regardless. So the cost of the plan really doesn't count for the cost of the cellphone when you are comparing cellphones together.
Maybe if we were comparing getting a landline to a cellphone (where the costs of the service for the landline are going to be drastically different).
Or even if we were comparing going from AT&T to Verizon there might be some small difference. So only if the cellphones are on different networks (with the iphone though, this only matters if you are comparing to a T-Mobile or Sprint phone as you can get an iphone on either AT&T or Verizon so the plan cost will be the same for the iphone as whatever other phone you want to get on either network).
You still don't get the point.
The point is when we are comparing different cellphones to each other, the service doesn't matter cause if you are getting the cellphone, you are going to pay the service regardless and which cellphone you get isn't going to affect the service's price. Therefore it is irrelevant when talking cost of one cellphone vs. another to bring in the cost o the contract.
tarjan
Oct 24, 09:06 AM
triple: 20-30 dollar cost difference, probably less in quantity. It is just coming from apple not wanting to put a high res screen on the laptop for some reason, probably their misguided attempt at hitting a specific dpi count until resolution independance.
lmalave
Jul 11, 02:57 PM
I hope so, but I won't say it's a given.
Supposedly, Bill Gates and other Microsoft top brass were obsessed with the decline of the big great corporations (IBM being one of the best examples). Yet Microsoft has been (arguably) slowly heading in that direction as it tends to stumble in markets where they can't exercise their monopolisitc power (as in anything not OS or Office related).
And Apple's quite familiar with monumental success and decline from past experience. So we'll see. But for once, the roles are reversed.
I dunno, the XBox seems to be doing pretty well, and I don't see how one could say that Microsoft had a monopolistic advantage there. All they really had was a brand name and mucho $$$ for marketing, and they managed to establish a foothold in the game industry.
Microsoft is very smart to leverage its successful XBox brand rather than its floundering (in terms of reputation, not profits) Windows brand.
I for one, am glad to see Microsoft push Apple. My biggest hope is that Apple introduces an iTunes subscription-to-go service. I tried the Microsoft-compatible ones (especially Rhapsody), and they were awesome.
Supposedly, Bill Gates and other Microsoft top brass were obsessed with the decline of the big great corporations (IBM being one of the best examples). Yet Microsoft has been (arguably) slowly heading in that direction as it tends to stumble in markets where they can't exercise their monopolisitc power (as in anything not OS or Office related).
And Apple's quite familiar with monumental success and decline from past experience. So we'll see. But for once, the roles are reversed.
I dunno, the XBox seems to be doing pretty well, and I don't see how one could say that Microsoft had a monopolistic advantage there. All they really had was a brand name and mucho $$$ for marketing, and they managed to establish a foothold in the game industry.
Microsoft is very smart to leverage its successful XBox brand rather than its floundering (in terms of reputation, not profits) Windows brand.
I for one, am glad to see Microsoft push Apple. My biggest hope is that Apple introduces an iTunes subscription-to-go service. I tried the Microsoft-compatible ones (especially Rhapsody), and they were awesome.
(marc)
Apr 25, 02:54 AM
How did they find out that she's a transgender? It's not like women's restrooms have urinals...
They said "Why are you talking to my man?" to a transgendered woman in a women's "restroom"? :confused:
Does not compute.
Why not? :confused:
They said "Why are you talking to my man?" to a transgendered woman in a women's "restroom"? :confused:
Does not compute.
Why not? :confused:
SciFrog
Nov 23, 08:31 PM
The above is correct.
NickZac
Dec 31, 08:24 AM
I'm sorry, if you struggle to lose weight, you're not doing it right. Losing weight is dead easy. Keeping it off is dead easy too. Have your doctor check for any health problems which might prevent you from losing weight or recheck your food intake vs energy expenditure.
Losing weight is a very simple formula : Calories in < Calories out. Change the symbol around and you gain weight. Make it = and you keep your weight.
A lot of people don't understand this very simple mecanic which is the very basis of weight control. When you have this part down to a science, you can adjust the food intake to provide fibers/vitamins/proteins that you need.
In a physical sense, weight loss is simple. Burn more calories than you consume. Keeping it off means burning the same amount of calories you consume. Eating certain foods (ex broccoli, tea, DARK chocolate) have beneficial effects and are proven to increase the metabolism. Yes, the mechanics behind it are easy.
Now, the psychological aspects of weight control are anything but simple. Food is addicting, especially extremely processed foods (ex: McDonalds cheeseburgers). Many people eat because they are overweight, and they are also overweight because they eat. Many people have not been taught good nutrition and there are places in which eating well is virtually impossible. A study conducted by a government public health organization that I worked for has found that obese children and adolescents have a lower quality of life rating that children in the same age bracket with terminal cancer.
Eating food often is an addictive tendency. Yes, to a degree it is individual choice, but it does cause results which hurts all of society as you noted. With that said, you have to see obesity as a problem with multiple causes and that there is almost always an underlying cause (ex: people eat more when they are depressed). The lady in this particular article however defies all logic as larger people do not want to be obese.
Most importantly, obesity will grow in both prevalence and level of negative effects until a holistic system of living healthy becomes standardized, which thus far, has not occurred to the level needed to start to lower obesity rates. Obesity is both a physical and psychological condition, and I would argue it is also a disease.
Losing weight is a very simple formula : Calories in < Calories out. Change the symbol around and you gain weight. Make it = and you keep your weight.
A lot of people don't understand this very simple mecanic which is the very basis of weight control. When you have this part down to a science, you can adjust the food intake to provide fibers/vitamins/proteins that you need.
In a physical sense, weight loss is simple. Burn more calories than you consume. Keeping it off means burning the same amount of calories you consume. Eating certain foods (ex broccoli, tea, DARK chocolate) have beneficial effects and are proven to increase the metabolism. Yes, the mechanics behind it are easy.
Now, the psychological aspects of weight control are anything but simple. Food is addicting, especially extremely processed foods (ex: McDonalds cheeseburgers). Many people eat because they are overweight, and they are also overweight because they eat. Many people have not been taught good nutrition and there are places in which eating well is virtually impossible. A study conducted by a government public health organization that I worked for has found that obese children and adolescents have a lower quality of life rating that children in the same age bracket with terminal cancer.
Eating food often is an addictive tendency. Yes, to a degree it is individual choice, but it does cause results which hurts all of society as you noted. With that said, you have to see obesity as a problem with multiple causes and that there is almost always an underlying cause (ex: people eat more when they are depressed). The lady in this particular article however defies all logic as larger people do not want to be obese.
Most importantly, obesity will grow in both prevalence and level of negative effects until a holistic system of living healthy becomes standardized, which thus far, has not occurred to the level needed to start to lower obesity rates. Obesity is both a physical and psychological condition, and I would argue it is also a disease.
KnightWRX
Apr 24, 11:19 AM
Apple will eventually support every network, and with that lock up the cell market for a generation. Excellent plan: Start with ATT, prefect the phone, roll out perfected versions slowly, get their data center up offering some free cloud-based system, streamlining the app stores, thereby slowly but surely eating the market share of other vendors.
Brilliant.
Prediction: In 5 years only a few will have a fleeting memory of what Android was. Like the Palm Pilot.
I doubt it. If you don't have a US Centric view and look elsewhere, you'll see Android is gaining and passing the iPhone even in markets where both platforms are available on the same carriers. Here, Rogers sells a metric ton of Android devices, Bell pushes them out and Telus too. I see tons of Nexus One and HTC Desires around, tons of Motorola Milestones and even more Captivates.
Yet all these people had a choice of getting an iPhone too. They opted for Android.
So let's not get ahead of ourselves with all the Apple cheerleading and think a move to a new set of frequencies would mean world domination for Apple. It doesn't. But it does open up the option of the iPhone on carriers that support these, which is good for consumers (more carriers = more competition for plans).
Brilliant.
Prediction: In 5 years only a few will have a fleeting memory of what Android was. Like the Palm Pilot.
I doubt it. If you don't have a US Centric view and look elsewhere, you'll see Android is gaining and passing the iPhone even in markets where both platforms are available on the same carriers. Here, Rogers sells a metric ton of Android devices, Bell pushes them out and Telus too. I see tons of Nexus One and HTC Desires around, tons of Motorola Milestones and even more Captivates.
Yet all these people had a choice of getting an iPhone too. They opted for Android.
So let's not get ahead of ourselves with all the Apple cheerleading and think a move to a new set of frequencies would mean world domination for Apple. It doesn't. But it does open up the option of the iPhone on carriers that support these, which is good for consumers (more carriers = more competition for plans).
hulugu
Dec 2, 06:56 PM
I voted "yes" becuase I'm concerned what this will do PR-wise for Apple, not so much about actual security concern. "LMH" may claim he's not an Apple-hater but a few things poke out from the interview:
What I read from this passage is:
HTC seeks EVO View 4G
HTC-EVO-View-4G-Tablet-1.jpg
HTC Evo View 4G confirm
What I read from this passage is:
blow45
Apr 28, 04:35 PM
1mm thicker, but the 30 or so people voting negatively are waaaaayyy thicker, and that rating system on the front page is colossally thick... and it's not enough that pretty much everyone hates that rating system, now we even have a rating system for posts... talk about anal retentiveness... :mad::apple:
kvizzel
Apr 23, 09:30 PM
iPhone 4G on T-Mobile????
4G SPEEDS DATTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA :cool:
4G SPEEDS DATTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA :cool:
Frosties
Mar 31, 10:44 AM
Still no way to show week number in the calendar. It makes planning a bother for many people world wide. We need our week numbers! it's just one parameter called week Apple. And it's already there in language and text under format .
Add it already to our PIM, please Mr. Jobs. It's time.
Add it already to our PIM, please Mr. Jobs. It's time.
MattInOz
Aug 15, 09:38 PM
Making the entire computer experience simple, easy and fun is what Apple has always been about, and this is a natural continuation of those ideals. In fact, I hope they expand this functionality to include upgrading ram and hard disks (as long as they don't go overboard with the prices like in the b.t.o. options at the apple store).
Really this is a wonderful new breakthrough in Apple's quest for computing easiness.
While their at it, the same feature could not only order the ram or hard drive for you, but using the the new iCal server features could have at look at the nearest Apple Store and give you list of free booking times to drop in and have the upgrade done for you.
Really this is a wonderful new breakthrough in Apple's quest for computing easiness.
While their at it, the same feature could not only order the ram or hard drive for you, but using the the new iCal server features could have at look at the nearest Apple Store and give you list of free booking times to drop in and have the upgrade done for you.
WhiteShadow
Aug 15, 10:16 PM
top secret can also mean surprise. they didn't show us all the things they mentioned are improved.
SkippyThorson
Apr 13, 03:22 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
Will it be a cinema display with receiver?
That's absolute rubbish. How could you ever make a statement like that?
OBVIOUSLY, it'll be a cinema display, with a built in AppleTV and receiver. :)
Seriously, this is the one Apple product I'd have no interest in. I've always been an advocate of "Why get a good monitor when you can hook up to a nicer HD TV"... but... Apple would easily make this a 2 grand adventure which I would never drop my money on.
Will it be a cinema display with receiver?
That's absolute rubbish. How could you ever make a statement like that?
OBVIOUSLY, it'll be a cinema display, with a built in AppleTV and receiver. :)
Seriously, this is the one Apple product I'd have no interest in. I've always been an advocate of "Why get a good monitor when you can hook up to a nicer HD TV"... but... Apple would easily make this a 2 grand adventure which I would never drop my money on.
toddybody
Apr 25, 01:02 PM
Thanks for that, already have the U3011 ;)
You display czar devil you! :p
You display czar devil you! :p
tigres
Apr 22, 09:34 AM
Many get garbage 3G speeds on AT&T in many areas anyway, so what's the point of having a 4G iPhone that GSM provider (insert AT&T) in the US can't even support on a mass basis?
No comments:
Post a Comment