Drew n macs
Apr 8, 02:16 PM
Was at Best Try the other day and saw them selling styluses for the iPad...39.00
A Pogo Sketch on Amazon is $7.00...
And people wonder why retail is hurting...
A little off topic, how about 25-100 dollar hdmi cables. you might burn a consumer once or twice before they realize there are other alternatives (aka the internet and 3 dollars).
A Pogo Sketch on Amazon is $7.00...
And people wonder why retail is hurting...
A little off topic, how about 25-100 dollar hdmi cables. you might burn a consumer once or twice before they realize there are other alternatives (aka the internet and 3 dollars).
applekid
Mar 23, 11:20 AM
Hahaha! Wow! I thought I would never have a reason to share my media on a 360, but for security purposes, I should :) That is amazing and stupid on your neighbor's part. See, there's reason to invest in the $100 WiFi dongle. :D
Please do keep us posted. That may not enough for a warrant, but maybe having a cop visit either homes may be enough for someone to break. It is only down to two houses after all.
Wow, stealing WiFi AND a X-Box 360? Any laws in your area about stealing an internet connection? :D
Please do keep us posted. That may not enough for a warrant, but maybe having a cop visit either homes may be enough for someone to break. It is only down to two houses after all.
Wow, stealing WiFi AND a X-Box 360? Any laws in your area about stealing an internet connection? :D
Willis
Jan 9, 05:30 PM
god damn... got to 35 mins... then it stopped. tried to re-open it, failed due to high demand.
ah well, its 23:30 anyway, and I have an exam in the morning, better go do some last minute revision.
ah well, its 23:30 anyway, and I have an exam in the morning, better go do some last minute revision.
mmmcheese
Oct 2, 02:56 PM
"Unnamed company"
We all know who that is....Real.
We all know who that is....Real.
otaku.com
Sep 30, 05:20 AM
This is just like a plan from a Frank Lloyd Wright 1950's house.
He called it the "Inline Plan"
A long house feels bigger than a square shaped house.
Even with the same floor area.
He called it the "Inline Plan"
A long house feels bigger than a square shaped house.
Even with the same floor area.
InTheUnion
Mar 24, 03:21 PM
I'm so proud to say that I share the same birthday as an operating system :p
Jay42
Oct 14, 09:36 AM
Just noticed something at work (large retailer). The iPod case is unusually empty of iPod videos. We may have 15 total when the case usual has 50-100. The iPod Nanos on the other hand are completely stocked full. Usually this only happens when Apple is going to release a new version and stops sending the store product. I know it sounds weird because they just upgraded the 5G but it was a very insignificant update. Just thought I'd add that to the rumor mill.
Mmmm, they're not replacing the current iPod-With-Video models. If anything, they will add another model "on top" of the ipod family. Not sure if your shortage of iPods really means anything.
If Apple really is going to release something, it is already in full production as we speak. They will need to announce it and get it into stores by November to make the holiday season and that would still be last minute. After October, I'm not holding my breath.
Mmmm, they're not replacing the current iPod-With-Video models. If anything, they will add another model "on top" of the ipod family. Not sure if your shortage of iPods really means anything.
If Apple really is going to release something, it is already in full production as we speak. They will need to announce it and get it into stores by November to make the holiday season and that would still be last minute. After October, I'm not holding my breath.
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
Brocktoon
Jan 8, 11:27 PM
Macbook Nano
Carbon fiber "gun metal" enclosure
12" LCD screen
1GB RAM (2GB BTO)
32GB Solid State drive (64GB BTO)
Core 2 Duo Penryn 2.1 GHz (2.4 GHz BTO)
802.11n
8+ hour battery life
Multi-touch trackpad
External Optical drive
Default configuration $1499
Maxed out BTO configuration $1999
Probably no dedicated GPU, but that can't be helped...
That's what MBPs are for :rolleyes:
Carbon fiber "gun metal" enclosure
12" LCD screen
1GB RAM (2GB BTO)
32GB Solid State drive (64GB BTO)
Core 2 Duo Penryn 2.1 GHz (2.4 GHz BTO)
802.11n
8+ hour battery life
Multi-touch trackpad
External Optical drive
Default configuration $1499
Maxed out BTO configuration $1999
Probably no dedicated GPU, but that can't be helped...
That's what MBPs are for :rolleyes:
iBug2
Apr 30, 10:04 PM
Me and most everyone I know owns a truck..
Weird, I don't know anyone who owns a truck. But that's irrelevant anyway. You can't really think that there are as many trucks as there are automobiles around. :)
Weird, I don't know anyone who owns a truck. But that's irrelevant anyway. You can't really think that there are as many trucks as there are automobiles around. :)
BeyondtheTech
Sep 28, 12:20 PM
Maybe when his house is all put together, he'll realize that the next AppleTV should be more like Windows Media Center, with dual ATSC tuners, DVR capability, and expandable storage space. That's the only thing tainting my beautiful almost-all-Apple home network.
leekohler
May 5, 05:00 PM
We can do both at the same time. Refusing to have very strict gun control is a result of the culture problem you described. Guns are enablers for our worse instincts in our culture. Why enable them to have such destructive consequences?
I never said anything about control, I'm talking about bans, which accomplish nothing. Many of the reasons we have huge problems with drugs are the same reasons we have problems with guns. I'm all for regulations, not for bans.
I never said anything about control, I'm talking about bans, which accomplish nothing. Many of the reasons we have huge problems with drugs are the same reasons we have problems with guns. I'm all for regulations, not for bans.
jz1492
Dec 13, 03:37 PM
There are two powerful reasons for Verizon to push for an LTE/CDMA iPhone at this time:
1) Fear of the iPhone data hogs. What better way to avoid saturation in large cities than to channel iPhone users to their highest-BW unused spectrum.
2) Voice + Data. After so much pressure from AT&T and Apple's marketing in this regard, there is no way the new Verizon's iPhone could be introduced successfully without top notch V+D functionality. CDMA is a no go, even with the latest upgrade.
On the other hand, this could be a false rumor slipped by the competition to hurt Christmas time sales of the iPhone 4.
1) Fear of the iPhone data hogs. What better way to avoid saturation in large cities than to channel iPhone users to their highest-BW unused spectrum.
2) Voice + Data. After so much pressure from AT&T and Apple's marketing in this regard, there is no way the new Verizon's iPhone could be introduced successfully without top notch V+D functionality. CDMA is a no go, even with the latest upgrade.
On the other hand, this could be a false rumor slipped by the competition to hurt Christmas time sales of the iPhone 4.
TheNewDude
Sep 28, 12:03 PM
Oh i'm sure there will be LOTS of technology in the house.
I bet he'll be able to control everything via an app on his iPhone.
The house itself doesn't need to be HUGE. He can still apply a lot of technology into the house making it worth millions!
I bet he'll be able to control everything via an app on his iPhone.
The house itself doesn't need to be HUGE. He can still apply a lot of technology into the house making it worth millions!
Amazing Iceman
May 5, 01:07 AM
The "Only way" ?
What, you could not use a laptop?
And how would an iPad only owner read the CD in the 1st place?
Yes the iPad made a nice easy to use picture viewer once you had put the images on it from your real computer at home is what you are saying.
You could just of easy taken a laptop which read the CD images off directly onto the screen and no needed this new device whatsoever.
Just place the CD on any PC nearby, open either ReaddleDocs or GoodReader on the iPad and place it in WiFi mode, open your browser on your PC to access the iPad, and upload the images to it.
What, you could not use a laptop?
And how would an iPad only owner read the CD in the 1st place?
Yes the iPad made a nice easy to use picture viewer once you had put the images on it from your real computer at home is what you are saying.
You could just of easy taken a laptop which read the CD images off directly onto the screen and no needed this new device whatsoever.
Just place the CD on any PC nearby, open either ReaddleDocs or GoodReader on the iPad and place it in WiFi mode, open your browser on your PC to access the iPad, and upload the images to it.
UberMac
Jan 5, 11:41 AM
we can set this up...
stay tuned.
arn
Thanks arn - you're a star! :)
Uber x
stay tuned.
arn
Thanks arn - you're a star! :)
Uber x
mike5411
Apr 5, 03:08 PM
they should allow users to like or dislike iAds to help cater the iAds that are sent to the user :cool:
aswitcher
Sep 12, 07:54 AM
What do these clowns do to us aussies, 3am, so not fair, everytime
Yeah. I am off to bed for 4 hours. iTunes will just be frustrating given its not going to be for us I think. Maybe there will be some juciy hardware in 4 hours or so.
Yeah. I am off to bed for 4 hours. iTunes will just be frustrating given its not going to be for us I think. Maybe there will be some juciy hardware in 4 hours or so.
lazyrighteye
Oct 6, 04:03 PM
I have used every major U.S. carrier except Sprint. I have used every iteration of iPhone since the original's launch date - which also represented my 1st experience with AT&T.
Until the 1st iPhone 3G, I had no issues with AT&T and their Edge network - namely because it's speed (or lack there of) was all we iPhone users knew at the time. Often calling AT&T my favorite service provider to date. And at the time, that was true. But once the 1st iPhone 3G hit, it started to become apparent that AT&T's network was not up to task. And as the popularity of the device grew, so too did my frustration with AT&T's network.
Living in Denver, CO, my (and several other users I know) 3G experience has been so poor, my dropped call frequency so high, that I had (yes, past tense - I'm getting there) disabled 3G most of the time. Of the two places I spend 80% of my life - work & home - neither offered a scenario that allowed me to use my iPhone for sending/receiving phone calls (let alone data). Zero bars of 3G and maybe a nub of Edge. At best. And that's having a giant AT&T logo'd tower in line-of-sight of my house and STILL can't send/receive phone calls form home. And mine and my wife's iPhones our only phones, this has been a really big problem for us. and what's been almost more frustrating than dropping all of my calls has been that all along I have upheld my end of the bargain. Every month, in full & on time, I pay our 2-iPhone Family Plan. But AT&T has not upheld their end of the bargain. A major aspect of the device, 3G, is virtually unusable to users in Denver (and other major markets). Dozens of fairly cordial calls (yes, I've been told by an AT&T rep that I'm "always polite" and that "yes, we do denote callers' behavior") to AT&T yielded the same, "we're sorry" replies. One even crediting my account for a full month of service. Nice, but that doesn't make my phone work any better. Another call to AT&T, that dropped, saw the rep called back to leave me a 4-minute message about how sorry she was about my horrible experience. Saying, on record, that their network "sucked," that they receive "a lot of calls about this from their iPhone customers." Even offering me the option to walk from my contract sans penalty. And that's when it hit me... wow - if one of AT&T's contingency plans is to bad mouth their own network and then allow iPhone customers to break their contracts, then this was a much larger issue than I realized.
And all of that set up was meant to paint a picture. One that many of you are all too familiar with. Same story, different city. So, with as much AT&T bashing as I have done over the past couple of years, I think it only fair/I'm happy to report that it appears AT&T has fixed their 3G issue in Denver. Monday morning, I woke to 5 glorious bars of 3G at home. I even shut down my iPhone & rebooted to make sure it was really there. Sure enough, glory! And from work I was able to make several phone calls with no issue. Confused by a functional AT&T network, I called AT&T and asked why everything was working. With a chuckle, the rep sad it appeared the network was upgraded in my area (seemed a canned line, but hey - I'll take it.). So here I am - day 2 of full 3G service at home, at work, all over town. Sounds silly, but it's really nice when your network... works. Considering my only gripe with my iPhone experience has been the service provider (yeah, a big gripe), it now appears the Denver's coverage is finally working as advertised. While the rep wasn't able to uncover exactly what "your network was updated" meant, I wonder if it's the new spectrum upgrade we've been hearing/reading about? Any other Denver (or other troubled markets) users notice the improved, read: functinoal, AT&T network? Pretty nice, eh?
So when I saw the Verizon "Coverage Maps" commercial Monday eve, it was oddly refrehing to find I wasn't yelling "YEAH! STUPID AT&T!" while waving my fist at the tv and instead able to turn off said tv and call my recently widowed mother who lives 2,000 miles from Denver - something I hadn't been able to do, from home, in 2 years. Ahh the simple pleasures...
Here's hope others' coverage improves as well.
Until the 1st iPhone 3G, I had no issues with AT&T and their Edge network - namely because it's speed (or lack there of) was all we iPhone users knew at the time. Often calling AT&T my favorite service provider to date. And at the time, that was true. But once the 1st iPhone 3G hit, it started to become apparent that AT&T's network was not up to task. And as the popularity of the device grew, so too did my frustration with AT&T's network.
Living in Denver, CO, my (and several other users I know) 3G experience has been so poor, my dropped call frequency so high, that I had (yes, past tense - I'm getting there) disabled 3G most of the time. Of the two places I spend 80% of my life - work & home - neither offered a scenario that allowed me to use my iPhone for sending/receiving phone calls (let alone data). Zero bars of 3G and maybe a nub of Edge. At best. And that's having a giant AT&T logo'd tower in line-of-sight of my house and STILL can't send/receive phone calls form home. And mine and my wife's iPhones our only phones, this has been a really big problem for us. and what's been almost more frustrating than dropping all of my calls has been that all along I have upheld my end of the bargain. Every month, in full & on time, I pay our 2-iPhone Family Plan. But AT&T has not upheld their end of the bargain. A major aspect of the device, 3G, is virtually unusable to users in Denver (and other major markets). Dozens of fairly cordial calls (yes, I've been told by an AT&T rep that I'm "always polite" and that "yes, we do denote callers' behavior") to AT&T yielded the same, "we're sorry" replies. One even crediting my account for a full month of service. Nice, but that doesn't make my phone work any better. Another call to AT&T, that dropped, saw the rep called back to leave me a 4-minute message about how sorry she was about my horrible experience. Saying, on record, that their network "sucked," that they receive "a lot of calls about this from their iPhone customers." Even offering me the option to walk from my contract sans penalty. And that's when it hit me... wow - if one of AT&T's contingency plans is to bad mouth their own network and then allow iPhone customers to break their contracts, then this was a much larger issue than I realized.
And all of that set up was meant to paint a picture. One that many of you are all too familiar with. Same story, different city. So, with as much AT&T bashing as I have done over the past couple of years, I think it only fair/I'm happy to report that it appears AT&T has fixed their 3G issue in Denver. Monday morning, I woke to 5 glorious bars of 3G at home. I even shut down my iPhone & rebooted to make sure it was really there. Sure enough, glory! And from work I was able to make several phone calls with no issue. Confused by a functional AT&T network, I called AT&T and asked why everything was working. With a chuckle, the rep sad it appeared the network was upgraded in my area (seemed a canned line, but hey - I'll take it.). So here I am - day 2 of full 3G service at home, at work, all over town. Sounds silly, but it's really nice when your network... works. Considering my only gripe with my iPhone experience has been the service provider (yeah, a big gripe), it now appears the Denver's coverage is finally working as advertised. While the rep wasn't able to uncover exactly what "your network was updated" meant, I wonder if it's the new spectrum upgrade we've been hearing/reading about? Any other Denver (or other troubled markets) users notice the improved, read: functinoal, AT&T network? Pretty nice, eh?
So when I saw the Verizon "Coverage Maps" commercial Monday eve, it was oddly refrehing to find I wasn't yelling "YEAH! STUPID AT&T!" while waving my fist at the tv and instead able to turn off said tv and call my recently widowed mother who lives 2,000 miles from Denver - something I hadn't been able to do, from home, in 2 years. Ahh the simple pleasures...
Here's hope others' coverage improves as well.
Popeye206
Jan 15, 04:16 PM
One thing I think people need to keep in mind about the MB Air... it's NOT a replacement laptop or a replacement workstation!
Stop looking for the big power and flexibility! It's a product designed for the road warrior. Someone that is always on the road and needs a light but functional laptop will find the Air useful and not a bad value compared to others on the market in the category.
People should look at the MB Air as a technology demonstration of whats possible and what will come in the future to more laptops... I'm guessing the next MB's and MB Pros are going to be thinner and have solid state drives as an option.
All I'm saying is keep it in perspective... the MB Air is NOT FOR EVERYONE!
Stop looking for the big power and flexibility! It's a product designed for the road warrior. Someone that is always on the road and needs a light but functional laptop will find the Air useful and not a bad value compared to others on the market in the category.
People should look at the MB Air as a technology demonstration of whats possible and what will come in the future to more laptops... I'm guessing the next MB's and MB Pros are going to be thinner and have solid state drives as an option.
All I'm saying is keep it in perspective... the MB Air is NOT FOR EVERYONE!
TomCondon
Apr 5, 03:26 PM
Well, then I'm a complete moron.
Some people are actually interested in marketing, and would love to have a centralized place to view how large companies are advertising on one of the largest mobile spaces in the world.
By all means, go back to playing Doodle Jump.
gladly, be boring.
Those ads are not exactly the pinnacle of creativity
MCRIB BACK
Some people are actually interested in marketing, and would love to have a centralized place to view how large companies are advertising on one of the largest mobile spaces in the world.
By all means, go back to playing Doodle Jump.
gladly, be boring.
Those ads are not exactly the pinnacle of creativity
MCRIB BACK
Neodym
Oct 3, 05:28 PM
Unfortunately this is EXACTLY why Apple ISN'T producing a headless mid-range Mac. They will lose out tremendously on display sales. They either want to sell you a display within the unit (iMac, MacBooks) or sell you a display with the unit (Mini, Pro). Mini users will buy one because A. they're in the store and B. don't know any better. Pro users will buy one because they are top-of-the line, beautiful screens and they, generally, have money to burn. Mid-range users (and prosumers) know well enough that they can get a cheap, good-enough monitor for $200 from NewEgg or eBay (for the daring). Instead, we prosumers either have to settle for the iMac or splurge on the Mac Pro.
Mmmh - i see it a little different:
Why shouldn't the so-called "prosumers" be interested in beautiful and top-of-the-line monitors as well as the "pros"? Even worse - the target clientel for a Pro computer often earn their living on those machines and they might need raw power, but not necessarily a "beautiful" screen - especially if the old one would still do its work.
Thus i would suspect prosumers to be more willing to "burn some money" for a nice Apple screen just because it fits their lifestyle, than someone who has to invest to earn money on it. And don't forget how Apple introduced the mini - it was targetted at users who ALREADY OWN a monitor (and keyboard and mouse).
So one of the main target groups for Apple monitors would be exactly the clientel which currently is not able to find something proper: A more powerful computer than the mini, but less pricey than a Mac Pro.
Therefore the gap between a mini and a Mac Pro is a little big indeed! Not only because of the initial purchase cost, but also because of the cost following when you have to buy "pro" equipment (like e.g. memory) at "pro" prices as well...!
The iMac aims at a completely different audience here and is a good complement, but never a replacement for a mid-class machine.
If Apple wants to continue to grow they HAVE to differentiate their lineup a little more! Personally i would not mind if they would do it in the stylish area and bring up some acrylic beauty again or even introduce some really new (or at least different) ideas. But it is not that important as long as the they eventually close that huge gap!
Regards
Neodym
Mmmh - i see it a little different:
Why shouldn't the so-called "prosumers" be interested in beautiful and top-of-the-line monitors as well as the "pros"? Even worse - the target clientel for a Pro computer often earn their living on those machines and they might need raw power, but not necessarily a "beautiful" screen - especially if the old one would still do its work.
Thus i would suspect prosumers to be more willing to "burn some money" for a nice Apple screen just because it fits their lifestyle, than someone who has to invest to earn money on it. And don't forget how Apple introduced the mini - it was targetted at users who ALREADY OWN a monitor (and keyboard and mouse).
So one of the main target groups for Apple monitors would be exactly the clientel which currently is not able to find something proper: A more powerful computer than the mini, but less pricey than a Mac Pro.
Therefore the gap between a mini and a Mac Pro is a little big indeed! Not only because of the initial purchase cost, but also because of the cost following when you have to buy "pro" equipment (like e.g. memory) at "pro" prices as well...!
The iMac aims at a completely different audience here and is a good complement, but never a replacement for a mid-class machine.
If Apple wants to continue to grow they HAVE to differentiate their lineup a little more! Personally i would not mind if they would do it in the stylish area and bring up some acrylic beauty again or even introduce some really new (or at least different) ideas. But it is not that important as long as the they eventually close that huge gap!
Regards
Neodym
srxtr
Jul 22, 04:01 PM
But Apple admitted that it DOES drop more calls than 3GS.
They spun it as "less than 1 per 100", but assuming all 3,000,000 iPhone 4 users make about 5 calls per day, that's over ONE MILLION dropped calls per week MORE than iPhone 3GS.
It's a problem.
It's been reproduced by CNET, Consumer Reports, NYT, and many others.
The debate here is not whether there's a problem, but why Apple is obfuscating, rather than fixing it, pretending that bridging the gap of their electrically exposed antenna is equivalent to attenuating an antenna by completely covering it with one's meaty hand.
(seems like moving this gap to the bottom edge of the phone where it's far less likely to be touched, would be an easy fix).
ONE MILLION dropped calls per week = less than one dropped calls per week per iPhone 4 user.
I haven't had a single dropped call yet though, same with all the other iPhone 4 owners I know.
They spun it as "less than 1 per 100", but assuming all 3,000,000 iPhone 4 users make about 5 calls per day, that's over ONE MILLION dropped calls per week MORE than iPhone 3GS.
It's a problem.
It's been reproduced by CNET, Consumer Reports, NYT, and many others.
The debate here is not whether there's a problem, but why Apple is obfuscating, rather than fixing it, pretending that bridging the gap of their electrically exposed antenna is equivalent to attenuating an antenna by completely covering it with one's meaty hand.
(seems like moving this gap to the bottom edge of the phone where it's far less likely to be touched, would be an easy fix).
ONE MILLION dropped calls per week = less than one dropped calls per week per iPhone 4 user.
I haven't had a single dropped call yet though, same with all the other iPhone 4 owners I know.
Bubba Satori
Apr 6, 05:49 PM
Who likes looking at ads?
iEnthusiasts?
http://media1.break.com/dnet/media/2008/1/34jan29-fanboy.jpg
iEnthusiasts?
http://media1.break.com/dnet/media/2008/1/34jan29-fanboy.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment