illa romza

Yeah it'll really be interesting to see what the res of the movies'll be. And SJ is only like, the biggest shareholder in Disney, so no, I did not expect them to be FULLY on board :rolleyes:

It may not be true that they broke even, it's just something I thought I heard on a tv interview...

Sony is selling the PS3 at a loss as well, Nintendo I'm sure is making money on the Wii...

There was also a lot of buzz for the 360 a launch & after, MS has sold over 15 million XBOX 360's in the last year, so I think they have done pretty well....

I don't think Sony has the best plan, if they did they would have launched earlier, had more units at launch & not be so overpriced...

Actually, I'll make some corrections for you:
Sony is losing $241 (source: iSuppli) on each PS3 at RETAIL pricing. We all know that Sony sells to distributors who sell to retailers, all of whom profit, so if you accept a 30% combined margin you are talking well over $300 loss per console. Their games are also in the $70 range to make up for it.

iSupply also states that the xbox 360 costs $323 for the premium unit to build; at $76 less than the retail price. After the channel margins are taken out, Microsoft is breaking even. Microsoft is already a year into things, and is about to release a cheaper xbox 360 using 65nm parts, which will save them even more. All in all, Microsoft is looking fairly good this time around for turning a profit. Infact, in an interview this past week I read that the Entertainment division would have turned a profit this year if it wasn't for the Zune.

As far as # of units sold:
XBox sold 27 million units
Xbox 360 has sold 7 million so far, and Microsoft expects to sell a total of 10 million by year end.
Sony has sold 200,000 units in the US, and won't hit 400,000 at year end.
Wii has sold 400,000 units, and will hit an estimated 4 million by year end.

The Xbox 360 and Wii also both have very high software attach rates (I've bought 5 titles already for my Wii); and Microsoft i'm sure is making a killing on Live.

I noticed that I had around 15.6gb on my 25gb partition just before installing the update. Afterward I have 17.32. It could be that some settings or cache or whatever in some places have been reset. I know that my Launchpad needs to have apps placed back into it, but that couldn't take up that much space(?). Could be something else I haven't seen yet.

All that I have on the Lion partition is the OS install. Even my Home directory is pointed to that on my Snow Leopard partition.

$299 are you out of your mind?

haha

so true

late entry to post of the year

may i suggest a case for when you're out on the road


:rolleyes: Wow, so you liked Surely's comment so much you had to pretend you came up with it? Ohhh, copykris, now I get it! :p

Let's get back to the purchases...

I bought 4 of these
261760

and some of this
261761

Just wanted to say thanks to MR for setting up a convenient keynote feed for us! Thanks!:cool:

But it's a Ferrari.

Exactly.

But it's a Pelican.

Ferrari > Honda

Pelican > Normal Eyeglasses Case

;) :p :D

At least our TV's aren't upside down :D :cool: ;)Touché?... ;-)
(I feel like the "I'm a PC" guy).

Actually, while 576i is good for standard def, our government has defined 576p as high def (or 720p, or 1080i... it's optional). 2 steps forward, 2 steps back.

I personally would love to see both formats fall flat on their asses. Both sides are way too stubborn to standardize and are expecting consumers to waste money on one side or the other, just to have their super-expensive players become paperweights when a standard is picked.

Not to mention, the DRM is so restrictive its not even funny. Especially on Blueray. It is rediculous that if you use an analog connection or a non-secured digital connection that blueray down-samples and then up-samples the video to distort it so you cannot somehow make a digital copy. Thats not how the professional pirates duplicate discs! Morons, all they are doing is once again hurting consumers. Blueray players even phone home to tell Sony what you've been watching and download new encryption keys incase someone broke the keys like they did with CSS. Sony has assumed way too much control with Blueray, so if I'd have to pick either format I'd go with HD-DVD. Lets not forget Microsoft is backing HD-DVD on the X-Box 360. Last week when I was at the game store, they said the add-on drive would be coming soon for around $100. Thats alot less than a blueray player. Heck, when combined with this fall's xbox price cuts (we all know its going to happen with the ps3 release), it will be significantly less than buying a PS3 for a blueray player.

We've seen it with Betamax, MiniDisc, MemoryStick, etc. Sony doesn't play well with others, they like their own formats. Heck, take a look at the Sony DRM fiasco from last year with the rootkit CDs. Do you really trust Sony to be checking in on what Blueray discs you are playing and verifying your encryption keys on a dailybasis? There are very few features in Blueray which are consumer friendly.

Like I said, HD-DVD and Blueray both suck in my opinion, too many DRM controls, too expensive, not enough difference really over DVD for most people....

So.......back to the main topic, what do I want Apple to do?
Nothing, don't include either. I knew someone who felt very betrayed when he purchased a PowerMac with DVD-RAM drive. He was convinced because Apple chose that drive that it was where the industry was headed. A year later he could barely find media for it and he couldn't use the discs on anyone elses machines. He actually has always been a pro-mac person, preaching to everyone, but that absolutely infuriated him.

Until there is a standard, Apple should stay out of the way. It doesn't matter if they put it in the highend mac or not, people say people spending that much don't care.........thats not true. They do care, they usually spend that much extra to get a job done with extra features they need. Compatibility and future proofing is a BIG DEAL to these people.

So......apple should not put Blueray in anytime soon. BTO option? MAYBE....BUT......they should put lengthy and wordy warnings when selected informing users that it may be a paperweight in a year.

This is exactly what I predicted would happen when Apple went Intel. Now that Macs can be compared component for component with Wintel machines and new hardware is coming out every month, everyone is worked up about keeping up with latest thing at the best possible price and getting increasingly frustrated with Apple's unwillingness to create a product line with 10000 different machines that each compete with dollar for dollar and component for component with every other machine on the market. Meanwhile, we have people talking about $299 machines with DVD burners (AND Windows? I'd like to see THAT!).

If you're so concerned about keeping up with the Jones, just buy a Dell, already.

I find this amusing as well, all these complaints about how apple is too slow, has outdated hardware, etc etc. Now suddenly that apple's have comparable hardware suddenly they have to follow the same upgrade path as the rest of pc manufactures so they're not obsolete. Remember the g4 powerbooks? They were not only completely underpowered compared to its pc counterparts but also still ridiculously overpriced for what they were performance wise. That can be seen considering the current macbook pros have been proven to be 5x faster in some areas. Now that merom is coming out with a marginal (compared to the g4 to intel transition) 10-15% performance increase many people are complaining that the current yonah processors are just too slow. I just find this amusing considering people bought the underpowered overpriced powerbooks for so long. Apple just has a different business model, whether it is always executed properly is up for debate. They just have different priorities. Who knows when apple will put out the next revision of macbooks but if you're worring about it from a performance perspective you should probably consider buying a pc.

EDIT:
Of course I could be completely wrong and with the whole intel transition apple could put out rapid upgrades to its lines just like the rest of the pc world. I was just going with history, just because apple uses intel chips doesn't mean they'll adopt them like the other companies.

1. Apple doesn't pay those prices.
2. No way is Apple going to keep shipping any Yonah processors.
3. Any speed Solo Yonah will be history with this refresh.
4. It's gonna be 1.66GHz Core 2 Duo T5500 and 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo T5600 minis.
5. I expect the iMac to sport faster Conroes in a completely new designed enclosure that can deal with the additional heat a Conroe setup will generate.
6. I also think there's a chance for a 23" iMac 1920 x 1200 all-in-one model. That is, after all, the proper resolution to display native HDTV.
7. iMacs will get:

Core 2 Duo E6700 - 2.67 GHz (4 MiB L2, 1066 MHz FSB) and
Core 2 Duo E6600 - 2.40 GHz (4 MiB L2, 1066 MHz FSB)

They only have TWO Cores. You think Apple isn't going to let iMac owners have half as many cores as the Mac Pro owners at comparable speeds and L2 cache?1. Of course Apple isn't going to pay the per/1000 prices. They're getting better deals then that.

2. After Leopard's "64-bit" announcement I have to agree.

3. Even a "slow" Duo is worth much more then any Solo.

5. Hopefully they'll put Conroe in. The 965 chipset is hard to get. The current enclosure can handle a G5. I don't see the need for a redesign needed for Conroe. At worst it'll need a slight bump in the power supply wattage.

6. Possible, the price on the 20" model is rather low. (For education anyways) Just $1450 for me after selling my free iPod.

Well about time :eek:

i was starting to think this was not coming at all

Hope Apple surprises us... And not just a Sandy Bridge upgrade alongside Thunderbolt.

Nothing mind-blowing there...but forget about Lion, it's coming later in June.

No, its coming in the "Summer". Expect it in August. Be surprised if it is early.

Got these from eBay for $1 each, good quality.
Link (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=290471004347&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT#ht_3465wt_913)

The Incipio DermaSHOT would have better quality, right?

As far as I know the "App Store" trademark hasn't been granted to Apple yet, therefore Amazon can use it for now. On the other hand Apple just cannot sit there and do nothing about it, they must deffend the trademark they are trying to register even if it hasn't been registered yet.

They should also be careful with their quotes in their financials. Tim Cook in the last conference call basically gave Microsoft and Amazon ammunition when he said things "We have the largest app store", making the term quite generic and descriptive. This doesn't help their case at all.

Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!

220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.

Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.

WHY?? I bought a ipod touch 8GB with my new macbook pro... but I should've got a classic I have 70GB of music and videos. The only reason I got a touch is because I like the games but if I get a iphone 5 I will also get a classic .
Also I have a old ipod video and you can use it as a 80GB portable harddrive. I will also email steve jobs.... is it sjobs@apple.com or steve@apple.com?

I think it's way to early to make any judgments regarding Zune sales. Let's see what the numbers look like after Christmas.

5 years ago, Zune, in it's current form, might have been a hit.. but not in todays market. Especially considering folks who have lots of money tied up in MP3's aren't going to be real interested in throwing them away, and starting all over again.. or spend countless hours converting thousands of files.

I don't find it ugly, but I sure don't care for the brown color. What I noticed most about the Zune is that it feels and looks cheap in person. Like what i'd expect a mockup or prototype unit to look and feel like. From a distance, it looks fine.. you get close up, and.. well.. not so nice.

Almost like they rushed it to market in time for the '06 Holiday buying season.

Apple has the portable MP3 player market locked up.. with models in all but the lowest price ranges.. and the Zune sure is no immediate threat.

Comparisons of the Zune to the Xbox are not really fair.. they are two entirely different products.

Microsoft (as well as Sony and Nintendo) can sell the unit itself for at or below their actual cost, because where they make the real money isn't in selling the game console, but in selling the games and accessories.

With MP3 players, you have to make money on the product sale, because there is no guarantee the end user will buy all their music from your 'store'.

Zune specs are subject to change.. as are most retail products. Don't forget that when the iPod was first introduced, it only worked with Macs.. then they made a Windows version.. then finally they made an iPod that worked with either computer.

I expect a new version of the Zune by spring.. with new features, and less restriction.

I don't think we are going to see Core Duos in Apples for much longer, though it is possible that the base Mini will offer a Core Duo, and the better model a Core 2 Duo.

Still, I think it much more likely that with this revision, both Minis will sport Core 2 Duos, probably Meroms to keep them quiet and lower-powered, and will feature the 965 graphics chipset which frankly is a very nice and inexpenisve graphics solution.

What I am really hoping is that there will be an add-on base module in a similar form factor to turn any Mini into a full-blown HD/Audio media centre. Now that could really be exciting. While Tivos and Sky+ boxes are welcome in my home, we are just aching for someone to really rethink the entire home media experience. I'd love to see Apple take a shot at that.

It's like Christmas Eve:D

I think the $599 model, now with the core duo of course, is a good deal. I can't really say the same thing about the $799 model.

Although, a refurb core solo can now be had for $479. :)

The $799 model isn't a very good deal compared to the iMac, definitely. Add memory to get up to 1GB, and put in a 160GB HD like the $1199 iMac model, and you're already up to $1074 for the mini. For that $125 extra dollars you get a graphics card, a significantly faster processor, faster HD, a bit more expandability, and of course a screen.

Unless you specifically want the mini form factor, or have specific limit intentions for its use, it's not that good deal as a computer. If it were $100, that'd make a huge difference.

I read about the new iCal before updating, and actually saved the old iCal from DP1 and copied it over after updating to DP2. It worked just fine, though it's interesting to note that the 'ugly' DP2 version was much smaller in size than the original DP1 version. DP1 iCal was over 40mb, while the new & ugly iCal was only around 13mb.

Oh well, I still happily sacrificed the extra space for a more usable interface.

this is crap,

no one in their right mind would make something with 0 ports, you have to at a bare minimum have an audio out.

Bluetooth headphones?

It May Be Time For A Mac For My Entertainment Center