illa romza

Got confused, makes sense :rolleyes:

Knowing that Apple doesn't pay listed prices, it's not unreasonable to assume that Apple could get the Yonah chips for less than Merom ones.

Also, Apple has historically liked to scale its product lineup to encourage buying then next item up the scale. Some have even referred to it as "crippling" the lower machines.Ahh crippling like using inferior Gpu's like in ProMac & Mini? Both GMA950 & 7300 are bottom tier.

Something like this, except on an iPod
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4115/4797522906_169bbce342.jpg


Like I said, get one where the inside has a pattern on it to avoid that or a matte one

I saw a youtube video of someone having that same problem. His tip was to use a very small pinch of baby powder and put it on your finger. Then rub it thoroughly all over the back of the iPod. Once you put on the case the watermarks should disappear.

Hmm... the Mini still has no Core 2 Duo? That does not sound too promising for MacBook (Pro) updates... unless Apple only wants to use the Core 2 Duo for the high end laptops (MacBook Pro) of course... Or are they waiting untill Leopard has been released?

We'll see it soon in the macbook pro, I'd guess the MB will be later on.

So are all the yonah naysayers ready for a big plate of crow?

Whre is FireWire 800?

At least two FireWire ports, please.

And a true 7200 rpm fast drive.

Thanks.

Uh, this comment is entirely wrong. With iOS, you can download something and move to another app and it will continue downloading in the background. The multitasking APIs have all the obvious backgrounding tasks covered and will likely include more if needed. Basically the goal is to allow background tasks when needed and when not needed let the app suspend and release resources to the apps you actually need. This method in iOS has proven to work far better than traditional operating systems like Mac OS X and Windows. That's why they are bringing it "Back to the Mac OS". The best parts of what they developed in iOS are being added in Lion.

I think most people's problem is that they mistakenly viewed iOS as inferior in every way to Mac OS X but in many ways it is cutting edge and far better than OS X and Windows have ever been. The way iOS multitasking works is the reason very powerful and memory hungry apps like iMove and GarageBand for iPad work so surprisingly well on such a limited memory device. The apps get to use a much larger percentage of the CPU, GPU, and RAM than they do on traditional OSes under normal usage where you have multiple apps open.

Yeah, it would work great for quick loading, full screen or minimized applications. I'm afraid it would fall apart most everywhere else... and they would have to have more background options than in iOS (can I listen on a socket for incoming connections in a daemon?). Anyway, I don't think they will get rid of the traditional <blank>top multitasking.


Right now I have a bunch of tabs open in Safari on my Mac and it's consuming a little over 1GB of RAM and lots of CPU. If I switch to Photoshop, Safari is still going to be using up all that RAM and CPU I really need for Photoshop when I don't plan on using Safari again until later today. And I don't want to shut it down because I have a bunch things in these tabs that I want to get back to later today including partially typed forum replies, halfway read articles, etc. On the iPad, Safari would suspend and release the RAM and CPU to my currently used RAM/CPU hungry app. That's what they need to bring to Lion.

Use Firefox and save tabs on exit...

Thus far, stability-wise, it is not too bad for a beta. A lot of the UI rendering errors from beta 1 have been ironed out. My bet would be that this will be a $29 upgrade, as it doesn't add much but rather refines what 10.6 started.

Don't get your hopes up for that $29 upgrade. Lion has many more "major" features than SL did.

-Launchpad
-Full Screen apps
-Mission Control
-Auto Save
-Versions
-Resume
-AirDrop
-Full Disk Encryption

Plus there may be unannounced features that could be unveiled at WWDC or a media event before that. Stacks, Cover Flow, and Back To My Mac were announced well after Apple started seeding Leopard to devs.

Snow Leopard's "What's New" pages talks about text selection in PDFs and ejecting disks. :rolleyes:

I say it'll cost $99.

I agree - sadly. I believe the 802.11n will be slower to market than I would like - but am somewhat excited that Bluray is on it's way. I don't look forward to the format wars, but think bluray is a step towards a much bigger trend in high capacity portable media technology.
As long as tech companies find a way to incorporate these technologies in the market place,,. in other words I think the biggest obstacle to the advances in portable storage media will be tech companies apprehension to adopt technology that makes current offerings or recent offerings obsolete... complicated market but it could be the biggest obstacle to advancement.

What i'm worried about is if this whole format war between HD-DVD and Blu-ray turns out to be really worthless and end up with neither format winning and instead having both supplanted by further formats. it would be like trying to put betamax up against laserdisc then having DVDs come to market :rolleyes: .

There are great things coming though- future discs, future mass storage too. HDs may be on their way out soon enough for speed reasons. one thing i'm keeping an eye on is ferroelectric memory, which might also make HD-DVD/Bluray etc. partly obsolete as a storage format- useful primarily for video media only.

So are their manual gearboxes.
;)
Kinda. They are manual gear boxes with no clutch pedal. Shifting is either automatic or manual.

Technically, it's a manual gearbox... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct-Shift_Gearbox)

If this sounds strange, I had an old Beetle with a stick shift automatic.

Dale

Yes, it's a company that makes it's own decisions and it's own products. They choose what they will allow and won't allow. If you are a car company you choose to make a mini van or not. Apple chooses what they want, we accept what they give us. If you don't, dont download it or get it, no one is forcing you to have it!

I actually agree. But would you still think this if they didn't allow "Gay B-Gone." Or would you cry that gays always get their way?

i question the need for this since apple did make quite a bit of money last quarter.

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) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)

amazing commercial that gets to the core of why the apple experience is so good. kudos marketing team.

Perhaps, though I suspect for some people, the MAS will be the only way they interact with apps on the Mac.

Let's hope it doesn't give Apple any ideas. You know... lowest common denominator ideas... :(

I received an email from Avid yesterday offering FCP owners an opportunity to buy Media Composer for $995. If I had the cash, I'd probably jump on it.

I work professionally on both and I would never get MC for personal use. If given a choice I'd pick FCP every time. AVID (5.5, the latest) crashed on me 3 times today - I've found FCP extremely stable on my systems.

when marketshare is almost 0 % you are close to dying, look a 1 % of all new machines built is not giving me any confidence in the platform. sure we have 10 % in a installed platform but are loosing everywhere( thank you motorola for holding up the ass end. Fact is Pcs are running away from Mac and when a 500 dollar machine kicks a new $2000 Imac its time to say so long to Jobs and his croonies. Supported you guys way to long at my expense.

Layman's version:

When you CEASE TO MAKE A PROFIT then you are dying*. Until then, it doesn't matter what your market share is.

If 1% of the world's population gave me a dollar, I'd be very rich. If 50% of the world's population gave you 1 cent, you'd also be rich, but not as rich as me... even though you have a greater market share. Its all about margins!

For those who are actually interested in understanding the world of business:

*Well, possibly dying... You have to continue to lose money and do it over a period of time before you are dying. Even then, that may be a result of mismanagement, rather than the company itself being dead -- there may still be the potential for money to be made. Really, the only time a company is dead is when its bankrupt and/or when its taken over and its assets stripped (because its been mis-valued).

To give two recent examples. Gateway has been losing money for some time. It has gone from a all time high in 1997 of $61 per share to its current price of around $6 (which it has been at for over the last year). In other words, its been devalued by a magnitude of 10. (They may have refinanced during that time and devalued the price per share, while increasing their overall market value... but I can't remember them doing that. Gateway may have greater marker share, but Apple is valued at around $28 per share. Just to make the comparison properly fair, Gateway has a market value of $1,999 Million, while Apple's market value is around $10,000 million. In other words, Apple is worth ten times as much as Gateway, despite their smaller market share. (Admittely, Apple's share price flucates like crazy, but thats arguably a result of the FUD of uninformed gits, like those at C|Net). Nonetheless, Gateway is likely to be around for some time. Until it continues to burn through money and its share price drops even lower, and it becomes the target of a hostile takeover... which will result in (1) a merger/total buyout/absortion; (2) a massive corporate governance change because the hostile company thinks there's money to be made; and (3) its bought out, its assets stripped and resold.

Example 2 is Media 100. They were also burning through money. Unlike Gateway, however, they weren't generating much gross revenue. Their technology was good, but not that good, and their management was baaad. They weren't generating much gross revenue, which is why no one was really interested in buying them or giving them a loan. They just didn't seem capable of even making a profit (and thats what matters). They were a dying company (unlike Gateway, which is just troubled). So they were forced to file for bankruptcy. Now their assets are being bought by Optibase -- when that deal is complete, they will be dead.

Point is, corporate finance is a very convuluted world. They're like stars. The bigger they are, the longer it usually takes them to die. Sometimes there are corporate "supernovas" (like Enron or HIH or OneTel) in which the whole corporate structure implodes, but thats because of criminal negligence, lack of transparency, and dodgy account practices. (All of which render the mechanisms of the market for corporate control to be rather useless. Noone wants to touch a company when you don't want to know what you're buying).

The most important thing to the world of corporate finance -- the one in which a company lives or dies -- is profit per share, then revenue. Both of which Apple has. Thus it is healthy. Oh, and its debt free. This is a good thing, because it signals to potentially future creditors that it pays off it loans... thus they're likely to bail it out, if it finds itself in trouble again. (Of course, there are mitigating factors there, but thats true of anything).

The only reason that Apple's market share is an issue is because uninformed gits in the IT press (tautology that) scream about it being an issue. This creates information asynchronicity (imnsho) and distorts the market (both the share market and the IT market). Personally I reckon that if people didn't think market share was an issue, Apple would actually be increasing its marketshare. Of course, thats exactly the reason companies like C|NET do scream about it, so it becomes a quasi self-fulfililng prophercy.

Here endeth the lesson on "Introduction to Corporate Financing 101"

I don't quite get your comment. What was humourous about my age exactly ?

It's my age, in comparison.

I still love driving. :D

I would love a Mac like that if it was the same price as the current MacBooks.

Why not offer both a subscription and an a-la-carte system? The rental movies could be cheaper, lesser quality and last for only a certain amount of plays/days while the ones you buy to own can be of higher quality, more expensive and you get to keep it.

I think you are on to something here. I believe it will work like this:

!) Rent a movie from the ITMS and it will download (not stream) to your computer. It will be in a less than DVD quality format, most likely in whatever format plays on 6G ipod. Let's face it, the 6G ipod and the iTunes Movie service will both be announced at the same time, and that time is not WWDC. The movie sales will drive 6G ipod sales, therefore they must play on 6G ipods, therefore they will not be DVD quality.

2) Movies will have a limited number of plays, rather than a limited number of time to view. Or, alternately, you will pay-per-view (literally).

3) The movie rentals will be cheap (under $5). If you like the movie you will have the option to buy the DVD. Buying the DVD through iTMS will "unlock" the rented copy of the movie on your hardrive, allowing you to own it forever and also to burn it to DVD if you choose (although, again, it will be in less than DVD quality). The real copy of the DVD will be full price plus shipping and the hard copy of the DVD will arrive in the mail a few days later. It will be the same as the retail copy.

This means money for Apple from movie rentals, plus money for Apple from 6G ipod sales (and perhaps Mac Minis if Frontrow gets added in to this), plus money for the BIG STUDIOS for the rentals AND the DVD sales.

It is a win-win-win for the consumer, Apple, and the movie studios... thus I think this is the only way it will happen. What do you guys think? :)

The prices in CompUSa will be dropped on Friday for what they may actually have in stock. They have been constraining them for the past couple weeks. All I have is the display core duo and one box stock core solo. Alot of the apple employees who work in the CompUSAs had extra days off this week due to the holiday (much needed) so they may not have been back into CUSA to let the staff know.

Kevin

I checked around at comp usa, best buy and even the apple store to see if the mini's they had in stock would be reduced in price because of the new ones that came out.

Best buy and Comp USA had no clue that new models were released and would not budge in price. I dont know what the apple store policy is.

Shouldnt comp usa and best buy reduce the price of the core solo minis they have left?

I think this rumor should be taken with a grain of salt. It seems highly unlikely a 23 inch imac would emerge (or even should emerge). ;)


I couldn't disagree with you more.

This size represents the iMac that can display Full resolution 1080p HD content. If they introduce this and then eventually throw a Blu-ray in there they've got the killer combination. Front Row is already setup to be a home-theatre replacement. I mean come on, it's basically an HDTV...it's 1080p, it's got a remote, and it's got front row... This will sell like crack... Digital crack...

A Little OT but mini TV related: Someone here made a post I can't find that said the EyeTV hybrid HDTV tuner was only relevant to less than 5% of the market. So I did a little Google and found out we are already at 20% HD penetration in USA (http://www.screendigest.com/reports/06highdeftv/readmore/view.html). So I thought I'd just let you all know the Mac mini as an HDTV + Tivo with a 24" display can be set up for about $1300. With the cheapest Dual Link DVI 15" MBP you can find would drive a 30" display for a total of about $2900 soon.

I have a 2GHz Dual Core G5 that can support a 30" Display only paid $900 for. When Dell puts the 30" up on the 20% off block it will only cost $1900 - $380 = $1520. So we are looking at Mac TVs in the 24" - 30" size for as little as $1450 - $2500. That seems pretty amazing to me.

$599 Mac mini Core 2 Duo + EyeTV hybrid $150 + 24" Dell $700 (20% off Sale Price) = $1450 new.

Used any solo or dual G5 PM with a Dual Link Video Card + 30" Dell $1520 (20% off Sale Price) = $2500 or less.

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Apple has updated the Mac Mini to include all Core Duo models. Other than the processor upgrade, there does not appear to be any differences between the previous Mac Mini and today's release. The Mac Mini is available in two offerings:

1.66 GHz Mac Mini
60 GB 5400-rpm SATA Hard Drive
Combo Drive

1.83 GHz Mac Mini
80 GB 5400-rpm SATA Hard Drive
Superdrive

Both models feature:
-2MB Shared L2 Cache
-512 MB 667 MHz DDR2 RAM standard (up to 2 GB supported)
-GMA 950 Integrated graphics
-1 Firewire 400, 4 USB 2.0
-Optical Digital/Analog Audio In/Out
-Gigabit ethernet
-Airport Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0+EDR standard

Of note, the Mac Mini still uses Core Duo (Yonah), not the more advanced Core 2 Duo "Merom" chip found in today's iMac announcements (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060906091309.shtml).

Hereis a picture of my weekend ride:


GordonLotus Europa Twin Cam was my favorite car as a young teen. :)

Demanding a larger hard drive so that large size songs that are uncompressed and run at a higher bit rate becomes a moot point. A person's ears are only going to be able to tell the difference in quality up to a certain point. And that threshold becomes even more insignificant with more headphone listening time depending on how loud the individual listens to their music.

There will always be people that say that they can tell the difference, but in all honesty, they can't.