illa romza

Because they did it with Snow Leopard and the MacBook, MacBook Pro, and MacBook Air in the summer of 2009.

Yup, exactly. I had purchased the 2009 MBPs in July, which came out in June....SL came out in August...Fortunately, Apple offered a nice grace period for new Mac purchases made a month before SL's release and I was able to get the upgrade for free.

I imagine the same will happen with Lion.

Yeah! Since this guy doesn't want it, neither do the rest of us!
Actually, he has a point. Bluray is not currently at a reasonable price, and doing away with combo drives would be a bigger deal than getting Bluray for at least 70% of users.

Air = composed of nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide, trace gases.


So the 4 products are


Macbook NITRO
Macbook OXYO
Macbook C02
Macbook GAS

?
.

In regards to the iTV, will Apple maybe release different versions?
1. Just stream and 802.11n Hub Device
2. With HD and EyeTv.
3. Mac Mini/iTv Combo Media Center

Just a thought.

Adding a printer has a new interface and you can now display a message on the screen if your screen is locked.

I had made a point that it seemed like they changed the promo pics on the website page last year with album covers from albums released that year

is it normal for Apple to go and do that?
change promo pics of products mid/end cycle?

seemed odd

Still cant see any sign of MBPs.*weeps*

Maybe next tuesday...

To cut the price of the Mini by $100, Apple better hope Intel are doing a "Half Price" cut which is extremely unlikely. How much would it hurt Apple to just double the height of the Mini and put a 1.83 GHz Conroe (Allendale) in there and a 3.5" Hard Drive? I'm pretty sure no-one would be whining about that. It would also get the price back down to $499 easy!

I've been saying since the mini came out that it's too small. Even if it had been twice as big it still would've been very small. Going bigger would have allowed a 3.5" HD and a more standard logic board. Such a mega-mini would really be the media storage machine people are dreaming about because a 250GB HD is about the same price as an 80GB notebook drive while offering much better performance.

Of course I've also been saying that Apple needs to have a machine in the iMac price range that doesn't include a display. Remove the LCD, put in a desktop CPU and an upgradable video card and you're back where you started cost wise. The Mac Pro is such a good deal for people who need that kind of power that having a mini tower or desktop with fewer drive bays at the 20" iMac price point wouldn't take away any Pro sales. I think such a machine would attract a significant number of current PC users who can't cope with the all-in-one, can't upgrade anything concept of the iMac.

Having another tower would also drive Cinema Display sales. Maybe not a huge amount given that Apple displays are significantly more expensive than the competition, but any increase would be good for Apple's bottom line.

So why don't I like iMacs? In 14 years of owning Macs I've upgraded, on average, every two years. It makes absolutely no sense to toss aside a perfectly good display every two years when I can simply plug a new computer into it. When there is a major improvement in display technology I can change on my own timetable. Oh and I recently upgraded my RAM without having to remove any first and installed a second HD in preparation for Time Machine. Try doing that with an iMac.

Hehehe no it's fine, I will post it in this thread however ;)

Just realised that 1 million is very possible for me.

Keep at it ;)

Guess why they are the only two removable apps?

http://cl.ly/5gbA/img.png

Were them two apps downloaded via the Mac App Store by any chance?

I have used Linux before, admit that I gave up with linux with Suse 9. The point I was trying to make with the package manager is that its not easy to go out and find something, every time you either have to find a package for your specific distribution or have it "built" for your distro. If you look at the way the mac works now I can drag the aduim icon to a remote drive, and from almost any machine that meets the basic specs I can then double click that app, even if its on a network drive, it will run, can you say the same for Linux?

Yes I can. Like I said, I just fire up the package-manager, find the app in question and click "Install". That really is all there is to it. No need to browse the web, looking for installers to download.

By unification I meant giving a constant user experience with singal points of administration, management ect. Some of my previous sessions with linux the applications did not always fully adhere to guidelines that were set out by KDE, whatever theme i choose, it didnt adapt to it for example.

Things are different these days. You are basing your judgement on SUSE9, which was released three years ago. During that three years, Linux has made HUGE progress. Things are chaning for the better, and they are changing FAST. I would say that Linux has changed more during the last three years than it did during the five years before 2003.

Note: that is NOT a bad thing for Apple. I bet that Apple would much rather co-exists with Linux than with Windows. There could never be a monopoly Linux could exploit to harm competitors, Microsoft could do that, and they have done it. Linux is open and follows established standards, Microsoft does not, if they can get away with it. Linux has no interest in destroying competitors, Microsoft does.

I fully admit im not a linux guru, and that things very likely have changed, but my perception is that every distro comes with a boat load of software on the DVD or via download, if you want to get something thats not listed it becomes a bit more difficult.

Well, SUSE does ship with tons of apps on the DVD (mainly so that it could be used wby people without broadband). But if you look at Ubuntu for example, it ships with relatively few apps. In a way, they have selected "best of breed"-apps for their distro. But if the user wants to have some additional piece of software, he can just fire up the package-manager, where he can choose from 16.000 pieces of software. The app the user is looking for is most likely listed there. If he's installing a piece of commercial software, they usually ship with nice installers that are not one bit harder to use than the ones in OS X or Windows.

There is the issue of building your own kernel

You have no need to do that. Seriously. I haven't built my own kernels in years. And when I did, it was because I wanted to do it, not because I had to do it.

Just because you CAN compile your own kernel does not mean that you are required to do so. The possibility is there for power-users.

The mac advantage is that its a bit easier to get, install and run applications than windows, and IMO linux as well.

I disagree. In Linux all the apps I could even want were just few mouse-clicks away. On OS X (and on Windows) I have to hunt for those apps in internet, only to find out that I'm expected to pay for them. I had none of those problems in Linux.

why is there a few big distros out there after years of linux development, why are there so many niche ones, and why do linux users argue with others over their favorite distro?

There are several distros, because one distro can't do it all. Want an OS that can be tweaked and customized to your exact needs and for your specific hardware? Obviously Ubuntu is not ideal then, but Gentoo is. Want a distro that "just works"? Ubuntu would be a good choice then. Want a distro with rock-solid reliablity? Try Debian. Want to run Red Hat servers, but don't want to pay for support? Use CentOS.

All those distros exist because there are users who find them to be better for their needs than the other distros are. And there's nothing wrong with that, since one size does not fit all. No-one could tell the users that "from now on, there will be just one distro". And even if someone could say that, the users who were unhappy with the "one true distro" could start their own distro if they wanted to.

Why do users argue which distro is best? For the same reason why Mac-users tell Linux and Windows-users that OS X is the best? For the same reason why BMW-drivers tell others that BMW is better than Merc is? People like to rationalise their choice of OS.

Diversity and flexability is one of the strenghts of Linux, its users know that, and having a single distro that does everything will counter that strength, they also know that.

They know that there can't be one distro that "does everything". Ubuntu wants to be easy to use OS that just works. Gentoo wnts to be as customizable, flexible and powerful as possible. It would be very, very hard for single OS to offer both of those ideoogies in one package. It would en up being "jack of all trades, master of none".

Take Mandrake (Mandiva these days) and Red Hat for example. Years ago Red Hat decided to use GNOME as their default desktop. There were bunch of Red Hat users who liked the distro, but liked KDE more than GNOME. So they took Red Hat, replaced GNOME with KDE and voila: Mandrake was born. From that point te two started to diverge. as independted OS'es.

If we let Quadafi "win" which he would, by slaughtering or not...heck it's civil war right? They have a right to kill eachother in war and then the loser will face crimes for it as usual.
.

They do not have the right to kill each other.

Also why do we need two threads, one with a over the top title which implies allot before anything has happened?

If this was about Microsoft or Google it would already be 20 pages long.

A good idea, just poorly executed.
Actually makes more sense than the system we have now.

Yes, everything should be given to everyone, no one has to work for it.

A good idea?! What, work hard so you can give it away to someone else who's to lazy to work hard? Wont give anything us shortterm for longterm returns?

It makes no sense, period.

Why do you think the roles of Welfare in the US are so huge? It's overflowing with the lazy ones who wont get off thier a###s therefore taking away from the the people who truly need that welfare.

Assuming the rumor is correct (really the core duo is just fine for such a machine at this point in time)... it may allow Apple to drop prices on the mini which not only makes it available to more potential switchers but makes a little more room in their product line up for a mini tower.

A mini tower in the 1000-1600 dollar range would allow us to buy Macs for developers (as a second system often) and QA folks since they can run Windows, Linux and Mac OS X natively. It would allow the maximum flexibility to our teams and at a price point that matches with the Dell crap desktops systems we currently purchase.

We would still of course purchase Mac Pros for the developers that need them the most (as a primary system) but a mini tower would easily double or triple what we would purchase.

The Mac mini does work in the space but it is just a little underpowered on the IO and expansion front to be fully useful as a secondary developer system.

Looks like I'll be taking my lunch break at 1PM tomorrow:p

I don't know how credible this particular Digitimes story is...

You must be new here.
[ducking]

I couldn't resist the old joke.

dun get excited it is just routine maintanace. The new mbk will will be released late november
sorry

ooooh. the rare red-crested triple-post!

I'm hoping they release a mini laptop. That's the only thing I really care about. Which means they probably won't.

I try not to expect too much so I'm not disappointed.

There are more details here - http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060719/sfw089.html?.v=60

At the end of the page is a breakdown in the sales figures.

Desktop sales are down 14% on last quarter, and 23% on a year ago, but laptop sales are up a whopping 60% on last quarter and 61% on a year ago.

Definitely not. There's too much branding in the iMac name. For consumers, it means ease and simplicity with power and looks. Additionally, just calling it Mac would be confusing for everyone, especially when they ask what kind of mac you own?

"I own a Mac."
"Yeah? What kind?"
"A Mac."
"I know. You just said that. But what kind of mac?"
"A Mac. You know. A Mac."
"I'm going to kill you now, sir."

Heh that's a great name for the next iMac, an aMac. No longer the 'information' Mac but the 'all' Mac, the Mac that does everything to go with the new aPod.

Thanks and I'll be expecting you to blow past me then, in about a month :rolleyes: or so...

Well, I won't get back the #7 spot from you ;) unless these 12 cores Gulftown Mac pros come out at MWSF...

Who thinks that they'll eliminate Final Cut Express and lower the price of Final Cut Pro? iMovie seems to serve the "express crowd" while FCP would be within reach of the semi-pro demographic if the price were around $300.

That would be a good move, but I'm not convinced Apple would do it. I think it's fairly likely that Final Cut Express goes away, perhaps replaced with mid-priced Final Cut components (ie, pieces of the Final Cut Studio package).

Should know soon enough though (at least on FCP pricing structure; FCE has always lagged behind FCP since it first came out).