SplinterCell
Nov 28, 12:33 PM
Heh.
Suck it, Microsoft :cool:
I watched a television show on the history of video games a couple of weeks ago. I forget what channel it was on...History or Discovery or something like that, but I specifically remember them saying that Microsoft lost a lot of money on the xbox, but that they didn't care...they just wanted to get their foot in the door.
I think it was this show:
http://games.ign.com/articles/744/744878p1.html
Just last week I was watching Larry King interview Bill Gates & one the topics was the first gen xbox & Bill Gates said they broke even on the xbox but still considered it a success because they had a good position in the market.
Suck it, Microsoft :cool:
I watched a television show on the history of video games a couple of weeks ago. I forget what channel it was on...History or Discovery or something like that, but I specifically remember them saying that Microsoft lost a lot of money on the xbox, but that they didn't care...they just wanted to get their foot in the door.
I think it was this show:
http://games.ign.com/articles/744/744878p1.html
Just last week I was watching Larry King interview Bill Gates & one the topics was the first gen xbox & Bill Gates said they broke even on the xbox but still considered it a success because they had a good position in the market.
dorramide7
Oct 17, 11:48 PM
I don't know of anyone having a problem with the new iphone! I know that it is possible to make the reception problem happen, but I could also "make" reception problems happen on every cell phone I've ever owned.
Does Consumer Reports stop recommending automobile purchases? Because you know if there is an issue with a car, the manufacturer will issue a recall. If you are affected, you have to take it into a dealer where it will be fixed. The onus is on the owner of the car, for crying out loud! The auto manufacturers should go house to house providing the fix for free to all cars, whether their owners report a problem or not!
Wait, you mean Consumer Reports does not hold the auto manufacturers to the same artificial standard they hold Apple to? How amazing...
Does Consumer Reports stop recommending automobile purchases? Because you know if there is an issue with a car, the manufacturer will issue a recall. If you are affected, you have to take it into a dealer where it will be fixed. The onus is on the owner of the car, for crying out loud! The auto manufacturers should go house to house providing the fix for free to all cars, whether their owners report a problem or not!
Wait, you mean Consumer Reports does not hold the auto manufacturers to the same artificial standard they hold Apple to? How amazing...
Lukeit
Mar 31, 08:49 PM
Just a quick question: how to make a full, clean installation of Lion preview 2 starting from the app downloaded from Appstore?
Do you have to restore it as dmg on a external drive to boot from or is there any other way?
Thanks guys!
Do you have to restore it as dmg on a external drive to boot from or is there any other way?
Thanks guys!
mozmac
Jul 14, 02:43 AM
Apple is frequently the first to incorporate new technologies. USB, ditching the floppy drive, airport wireless networking, firewire. I remember when I had my iBook on campus back in 2002. I was one of the ONLY people that had wireless. A few buildings offered it, and I didn't see many other people sitting around on their laptops, unless they had an illuminated Apple shining on their lap.:)
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple was one of the first to use Blu-Ray, especially seeing they are a contributing company. They have a tendency to take new technologies and make them mainstream. They did it with the Apple II, the original Mac, and they continue to do it today.
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple was one of the first to use Blu-Ray, especially seeing they are a contributing company. They have a tendency to take new technologies and make them mainstream. They did it with the Apple II, the original Mac, and they continue to do it today.
ccunning
Jul 14, 11:28 AM
I just saw this and though it was pretty interesting:
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
syklee26
Sep 1, 01:05 PM
Wow, this would be amazing. Screw my plan to buy an ACD if this happens. A MacBook and a 23" iMac would look awesome on my new glass desk. ;)
It needs:
Glossy Screen (Even if it's only an option)
Up to 3GB RAM (at least; 4GB would be nice)
Merom (Obviously)
Extras that would be cool:
Option for Black
No Chin
That's all I can think of as the iMac is a quite capable, beautiful looking machine already. :)
This price range would seem fair to me:
17" iMac $1299
20" iMac $1499
23" iMac $1699
noway Apple sells 23 inch one at 1699, especially only $200 difference. from 20inch ACD and 23inch ACD there is $300 difference to begin with. I am expecting 23 inch one to come no less than at $1999.
of course it would come with more goodies, such as more RAM and better GPU
It needs:
Glossy Screen (Even if it's only an option)
Up to 3GB RAM (at least; 4GB would be nice)
Merom (Obviously)
Extras that would be cool:
Option for Black
No Chin
That's all I can think of as the iMac is a quite capable, beautiful looking machine already. :)
This price range would seem fair to me:
17" iMac $1299
20" iMac $1499
23" iMac $1699
noway Apple sells 23 inch one at 1699, especially only $200 difference. from 20inch ACD and 23inch ACD there is $300 difference to begin with. I am expecting 23 inch one to come no less than at $1999.
of course it would come with more goodies, such as more RAM and better GPU
MattDell
Sep 6, 08:46 PM
It is already far to easy for me to get the $9.99 per month Netflix account and burn every disk that I get in the mail. Also, it is very easy for me to download HD quality movies from Bit Torrent any old time I please. I don't do it because I am honest but I don't think it is right for the movie industry to not offer a viable alternative for electronic downloads as well. (and no I don't think that "Movielink" is a viable alternative) The ability to pirate things from the iTMS is no greater than any other form of distribution IMO.
I agree with you that it's very easy to pirate movies from Netflix, but by already having the movie file on your computer makes it that much more likely that you will pirate it.
Rented movies in a digital form just take away some of the steps required to pirate a movie, it makes it that much easier, and will invite more people to do it. (this is from the view of the movie executives, of course)
I just do not see it happening.
-Matt
I agree with you that it's very easy to pirate movies from Netflix, but by already having the movie file on your computer makes it that much more likely that you will pirate it.
Rented movies in a digital form just take away some of the steps required to pirate a movie, it makes it that much easier, and will invite more people to do it. (this is from the view of the movie executives, of course)
I just do not see it happening.
-Matt
Jay42
Nov 27, 07:25 PM
http://www.convert-video-dvd.com/images/tutorial/apple-ipod-classic-120gb.jpg
Silver iPod Classic 160 gb to replace the one I left in the bus seat pocket 6mo ago. $228 on Amazon.
http://i.testfreaks.com/images/products/600x400/215/shure-srh440.3260631.jpg
Shure SRH440 headphones to replace my broken Grado's but I needed something without leakage... $72 on Amazon.
Both with free 2-day shipping with a "free trial" of Amazon Prime.
Silver iPod Classic 160 gb to replace the one I left in the bus seat pocket 6mo ago. $228 on Amazon.
http://i.testfreaks.com/images/products/600x400/215/shure-srh440.3260631.jpg
Shure SRH440 headphones to replace my broken Grado's but I needed something without leakage... $72 on Amazon.
Both with free 2-day shipping with a "free trial" of Amazon Prime.
Prom1
Nov 29, 10:05 PM
Imagine this if you will for a moment....
iPHONE in hand you snap a photo. take a video, update a contact or just want to send the video to your blog or .MAC Account.....
You do so with ONE click or 2 but no more than 3 for a FLICKR account.
BUT wait. Your .MAC account is integrated to your Mac so not only does your .MAC account have the video but so does your Mac! Now you get home and can use iMovie to edit that video. :D
Or better yet use a nice easy Menu system to "Remotely USE iMovie" to edit that movie you've just recorded, and uploaded to your .MAC or to your Mac (via iTV) or just show a preview to those at home - kinda like file sharing or say to other Macurmors.com members!!!
That would KILL ANYTHING out on the market!
iPHONE in hand you snap a photo. take a video, update a contact or just want to send the video to your blog or .MAC Account.....
You do so with ONE click or 2 but no more than 3 for a FLICKR account.
BUT wait. Your .MAC account is integrated to your Mac so not only does your .MAC account have the video but so does your Mac! Now you get home and can use iMovie to edit that video. :D
Or better yet use a nice easy Menu system to "Remotely USE iMovie" to edit that movie you've just recorded, and uploaded to your .MAC or to your Mac (via iTV) or just show a preview to those at home - kinda like file sharing or say to other Macurmors.com members!!!
That would KILL ANYTHING out on the market!
roland.g
Sep 1, 12:56 PM
I was going to do a Mac Mini with a Ministack. I didn't like the idea of the iMac because of the integrated aspect. I already have a 19" display and would upgrade to a 23" ACD when iSight gets added. However my two hangups on the Mini were the 5400 RPM drive and integrated GPU - I want to use it for a lot of iMovie and eventually Final Cut Express. The 23" comes out and I am all over that. So, please please please make it in reduced chin aluminum. Sexy sells.
projectle
Aug 6, 09:09 PM
Why have a picture when they can have the Governator himself pay a visit?
JGowan
Jan 13, 01:03 AM
I think it's going to be a tablet that slaps the crap out of the Kindle. It'll be a full on computer tablet that does eBooks, too and is totally wireless like Kindle and can surf the internet like Kindle (free, like Kindle) but, again gives Kindle a sound beating in every single way known to man.
lordonuthin
Feb 10, 04:43 PM
congrats to whiterabbit for 8 million points!
Thanks.
Thanks.
Link2999
Sep 26, 11:41 AM
Try using the griffin website. :)
It isn't on there. Just as some of the Grip Vue colors are unavailable.
It isn't on there. Just as some of the Grip Vue colors are unavailable.
deputy_doofy
Sep 6, 09:07 AM
Maybe i am alone on this one....
I think the 24" iMac G5 is the beginning of the end of the G5 iMac. We all watched as the outstanding G4 iMac grew from a 15" to a 17" and finally to 20". While the stunning design remained the same, the 20" just didn't look as good as the 2 previous models. The proportions were wrong and it looked top-heavy.
I am sitting in front of an original 23" Apple Display (plastic rather than aluminium). The new iMac cannot be much smaller than it. I firmly believe that the 24" will be, and should be, as big as it gets. I just hope that heat doesn't become a problem with the Core 2 Duo chips else the G5 iMac may have to evolve into a new enclosure.
Anyone else have thoughts similar?
I don't know whether you're right or wrong about a possible design change in the near future, but your terminology is wrong.
The G5 iMac is not a model. The G5 is a CPU. The iMac has not been a "G5" (or, to be more correct, has not had a G5) since January.
It's just "iMac." A G5 with a Core 2 Duo chip is like spouting off how you have a great "Intel Pentium Athlon machine made by AMD." People will see right through the ignorance.
I think the 24" iMac G5 is the beginning of the end of the G5 iMac. We all watched as the outstanding G4 iMac grew from a 15" to a 17" and finally to 20". While the stunning design remained the same, the 20" just didn't look as good as the 2 previous models. The proportions were wrong and it looked top-heavy.
I am sitting in front of an original 23" Apple Display (plastic rather than aluminium). The new iMac cannot be much smaller than it. I firmly believe that the 24" will be, and should be, as big as it gets. I just hope that heat doesn't become a problem with the Core 2 Duo chips else the G5 iMac may have to evolve into a new enclosure.
Anyone else have thoughts similar?
I don't know whether you're right or wrong about a possible design change in the near future, but your terminology is wrong.
The G5 iMac is not a model. The G5 is a CPU. The iMac has not been a "G5" (or, to be more correct, has not had a G5) since January.
It's just "iMac." A G5 with a Core 2 Duo chip is like spouting off how you have a great "Intel Pentium Athlon machine made by AMD." People will see right through the ignorance.
jsm4182
Feb 27, 02:39 PM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5292/5482714927_dde07ab2f6.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsm382/5482714927/)
I thought its about time I post my home setup.
Just bought the 27" Cinema Display, its connected to my 13"MBP running in clamshell,sitting on the shelf on a cooling pad.
Apple bluetooth keyboard, Magic Trackpad and Magic Mouse. Have 2 Apple battery chargers(not pictured) to power those 3.
1TB Seagate GoFlex with firewire 800 upgrade kit for backups using Carbon Copy Cloner sitting behind the lamp.
Creative Xmod that I use with my Bose OE headphones(headphones not pictured).
Also not pictured is my table at the other end of that wall with a Brother laser printer and Crosley radio, both hooked up to an Airport Express. And in a cabinet in another room I have an Airport Extreme with 2 Seagate 1TB drives for Time Machine and old file storage.
I thought its about time I post my home setup.
Just bought the 27" Cinema Display, its connected to my 13"MBP running in clamshell,sitting on the shelf on a cooling pad.
Apple bluetooth keyboard, Magic Trackpad and Magic Mouse. Have 2 Apple battery chargers(not pictured) to power those 3.
1TB Seagate GoFlex with firewire 800 upgrade kit for backups using Carbon Copy Cloner sitting behind the lamp.
Creative Xmod that I use with my Bose OE headphones(headphones not pictured).
Also not pictured is my table at the other end of that wall with a Brother laser printer and Crosley radio, both hooked up to an Airport Express. And in a cabinet in another room I have an Airport Extreme with 2 Seagate 1TB drives for Time Machine and old file storage.
danielwsmithee
Nov 27, 03:28 PM
If Apple wasn't satisfied with the number of units they were moving, and had a markup far above their (real) competitors, I would think Apple would lower it's prices, don't you? That would be the only way to make money if they weren't actually selling the monitors.Exactly that is why Apple needs a refresh to the prices. We both see eye-to-eye on the quality of their product and it's superiority. I'm just stating that their prices are stale and need a refresh. Something on the order of $499 (20"), $899 (23"), and $1699 (30").
CIA
Apr 12, 09:11 PM
What the hell are you talking about? I use iMovie for home videos and I use Final Cut at work. If you don't use something then you shouldn't be bitching about it.
This all started just because I said I hope Final Cut doesn't turn into iMovie. Somehow that turned into iMovie is pro and Final Cut is the Model T of editing.
This all started just because I said I hope Final Cut doesn't turn into iMovie. Somehow that turned into iMovie is pro and Final Cut is the Model T of editing.
prady16
Aug 29, 08:58 AM
A "FEW" weeks!!!!!!!
That too for a Core Duo and not even a Core 2 Duo!
Thats disappointing!!!
And what about the MBP?
That too for a Core Duo and not even a Core 2 Duo!
Thats disappointing!!!
And what about the MBP?
Evangelion
Jul 20, 11:36 AM
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.
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.
skunk
Mar 27, 04:57 AM
Well, the US controls the AWACSThe AWACS involved are owned and operated by NATO. There may not even be US personnel on board.
NATO
Aug 16, 07:35 AM
If they use WiFi with the new iPods, they'll need a chunky battery. When I still used a PDA, the battery life nose dived when you turned on the WiFi. . .
Apple Corps
Jul 19, 06:42 PM
does it mean mac's desktop market share is climbing? 5%?
No - they are actually losing market share.
No - they are actually losing market share.
noservice2001
Jul 14, 03:06 AM
this is sweet!
No comments:
Post a Comment