tablo13
Sep 16, 04:52 PM
Perhaps, but it's also nearly 20 times as expensive.
But it also includes a stand, screen protector, and seems like most brand cases are around $20. But I do love the blue colour in the picture there. :D
But it also includes a stand, screen protector, and seems like most brand cases are around $20. But I do love the blue colour in the picture there. :D
Dont Hurt Me
Mar 19, 05:52 PM
I agree with your enterprise and gaming post. Apple is missing that market jxyama. consumer machines are simply poor gaming machines yet on the otherside gaming has been driving the market and that is why everyone is coming out with gaming machines. even Dell and gateway are getting into the act but those are the ugliest things I have ever seen. to many years on a mac i guess. Alienware's Aurora is a very interesting machine to say the least.
[Video] Justin Bieber Playing
Justin Bieber News - Mark Wahlberg: Justin Bieber amp; I Are Doing a Movie Together - Celebuzz
Fans watching Justin Bieber
Fans watching Justin Bieber
Justin Bieber. 4 of 12
Justin Bieber Stock Photos
Justin Bieber
Justin Bieber. 11 of 12
Justin Bieber. 8 of 12
justin bieber soccer in spain.
[Video] Justin Bieber Playing
Justin Bieber takes shirt off
Justin Bieber plays soccer
Justin Bieber#39;s Gone Dental
Justin Bieber Joined The Fc
Justin Bieber
Does Justin Bieber have what
Edge100
Sep 1, 12:47 PM
Hmm... the problem with that line-up is that when consumers see the shiny new advert saying "Meet the new iMacs" they'll look at the clock speeds and say "What new iMacs?". I think it would be reasonable for Apple to offer...
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,699 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,199 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
No way would I pay an extra $500 for an 8% faster machine and a slighly larger display, when for that money I can go with the 20" and buy a second widescreen 20" display and have a HUGE viewable area.
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,699 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,199 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
No way would I pay an extra $500 for an 8% faster machine and a slighly larger display, when for that money I can go with the 20" and buy a second widescreen 20" display and have a HUGE viewable area.
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
twoodcc
Sep 6, 09:57 AM
The Superdrive option in the base model has gone.
Earth to Apple: a Combo drive in 2002 was state of the art. A Combo drive in 2004 was a reasonably priced alternative to a DVD burner. A Combo drive in 2005 was an acceptable means of marketing differentiation. A Combo drive in 2006 (particularly with no option to buy a DVD burner) is an embarrassment...
i agree. i would never buy a computer that didn't have a dvd burner....and i'd never advise someone else to either
Earth to Apple: a Combo drive in 2002 was state of the art. A Combo drive in 2004 was a reasonably priced alternative to a DVD burner. A Combo drive in 2005 was an acceptable means of marketing differentiation. A Combo drive in 2006 (particularly with no option to buy a DVD burner) is an embarrassment...
i agree. i would never buy a computer that didn't have a dvd burner....and i'd never advise someone else to either
BJonson
Apr 26, 01:02 PM
trademarking app store. How pompous. What's next, trademarking computer store, book store, pet store? LOL.
rdowns
Apr 21, 12:43 PM
Amazing that a thread on whether or not a person CAN drive a stick shift car has turned into a full blown debate on the merits of automatic vs manual transmissions. Personally I think this argument is similar to the Mac vs PC argument that has gone on for years, ultimately they're different, and a person should be able to use whichever one (or both) they choose for their own personal reasons. In both cases, transmissions and personal computers, they have their good points and their bad points. To each their own...
This is MacRumors. Members will argue everything.
This is MacRumors. Members will argue everything.
09iMac=Fail
Mar 27, 08:44 PM
I assume that's what you meant. Because we've seen touchscreen devices advance by leaps and bounds since June 2007. In two years' time it will very likely be an entirely new ballgame with such devices being a dominant force in tech, including gaming.
This little demo is just barely scratching the surface.
Saying that touch screen devices will be the dominant force in gaming in 2 years is a bold statement. I'd love to see them advance that much in 2 years, but I have a hard time seeing them being superior to traditional systems.
LTD, do you own a PS3 or other similar system? We all know you don't own a 360. :) Just curious if you are much of a gamer or not. And no, gaming on cell phones or similar devices is not what I'm talking about.
This little demo is just barely scratching the surface.
Saying that touch screen devices will be the dominant force in gaming in 2 years is a bold statement. I'd love to see them advance that much in 2 years, but I have a hard time seeing them being superior to traditional systems.
LTD, do you own a PS3 or other similar system? We all know you don't own a 360. :) Just curious if you are much of a gamer or not. And no, gaming on cell phones or similar devices is not what I'm talking about.
-aggie-
Sep 14, 09:21 AM
Consumer Reports says "we still think the same thing" for the third time and that's first page news? Sounds more like they're fishing for free publicity.
Anyway, when a reviewing organization "doesn't recommend" what I consider the best phone I've ever owned, it sounds more like I shouldn't bother paying attention to that reviewing organization. Their taste just isn't relevant to mine.
This is exactly what I thought when I read the OP. They stated they couldn't recommend the iPhone 4, even if it had bumpers, and now without bumpers they can't recommend it, because it won't have bumpers.
Anyway, when a reviewing organization "doesn't recommend" what I consider the best phone I've ever owned, it sounds more like I shouldn't bother paying attention to that reviewing organization. Their taste just isn't relevant to mine.
This is exactly what I thought when I read the OP. They stated they couldn't recommend the iPhone 4, even if it had bumpers, and now without bumpers they can't recommend it, because it won't have bumpers.
BRLawyer
Apr 19, 02:05 PM
[SIZE=1]
Back on topic....... Supposedly, Ivy Bridge (next year?) will support USB 3. I wonder if it will be possible to have some sort of a Thunderbolt to USB 3 interface. I would hate to buy a new iMac now and not be able to take advantage of the USB 3 speed when it becomes more widely used in the next few years. Or is that not something to worry about?
Why would you want to use a SLOWER interface in the first place? As far as ports are concerned, TB should be able to work with everything (USB, FW etc.) anyway, provided the right adapters are used...
Back on topic....... Supposedly, Ivy Bridge (next year?) will support USB 3. I wonder if it will be possible to have some sort of a Thunderbolt to USB 3 interface. I would hate to buy a new iMac now and not be able to take advantage of the USB 3 speed when it becomes more widely used in the next few years. Or is that not something to worry about?
Why would you want to use a SLOWER interface in the first place? As far as ports are concerned, TB should be able to work with everything (USB, FW etc.) anyway, provided the right adapters are used...
rxse7en
Nov 29, 03:48 PM
Its outputs are HDMI and component video. It is designed for HD content.
I learned to drive on a '79 RX-7. Brilliant automobile.
Would be cool if it could upscale streaming video to 1080i at least. I may forgo the iTV if there's ever a solution to stream vid from the Mac to the XBox 360 though. I must say, the 360 is a great piece of hardware at it's current price point. As others have pointed out, would be nice if the iTV supported 1080p over HDMI.
I loved my first car--'79 RX7 and have had several since. My current one is a heavily modified '91 Turbo II. Hopefully we'll see a 4th gen 7 some day.
B
I learned to drive on a '79 RX-7. Brilliant automobile.
Would be cool if it could upscale streaming video to 1080i at least. I may forgo the iTV if there's ever a solution to stream vid from the Mac to the XBox 360 though. I must say, the 360 is a great piece of hardware at it's current price point. As others have pointed out, would be nice if the iTV supported 1080p over HDMI.
I loved my first car--'79 RX7 and have had several since. My current one is a heavily modified '91 Turbo II. Hopefully we'll see a 4th gen 7 some day.
B
Unspeaked
Sep 6, 02:30 PM
i know this is off topic but are they ever gonna do anything about the outrageous cost of .Mac subscription?
No.
::sigh::
No.
::sigh::
mattcube64
Feb 8, 06:39 PM
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4055/4705439388_f0fef97f94.jpg
Loving every second I drive her.
DAMN nice ride, man! Any mods?
Loving every second I drive her.
DAMN nice ride, man! Any mods?
cecildk9999
Nov 28, 10:03 AM
I know that it's not quite fair to compare the two right out of the launch (a baby product versus a mature one), but MS didn't help themselves by setting up this product to compete directly with the iPod. If they had tried to target a different market (maybe primarily video as opposed to music), they might have more success, and let the hype build from there. But the way they seem to be playing it now, they're going to just throw a lot of money into something that will be in Apple's shadow. It'll offer a compelling alternative to some, but will not necessarily convince too many to become switchers. :p
BlizzardBomb
Sep 1, 12:41 PM
My Guess:
iMac 17" - 1299
1.83 GHz
512MB RAM
160 SATA
8x DL
ATI x1600 - 128
iMac 20" - 1699
2.0 GHz upgradable to 2.16
512MB RAM
250 SATA
8x DL
ATI x1600 128 upgradable to 256 (As is already)
iMac 23": 1900 x 1200 - 1999
2.16 GHz upgradable to 2.33
1 GB Standard
250 SATA upgradable to 500 (as 17" and 20" is)
8x DL
ATI x1600 256
FW 800
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't say upgradable on 17" and 20" hard drives because we already know that.
In a dream world I'd say the 23" vCard would go to the x1800 or something
Hmm... the problem with that line-up is that when consumers see the shiny new advert saying "Meet the new iMacs" they'll look at the clock speeds and say "What new iMacs?". I think it would be reasonable for Apple to offer...
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,599 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,099 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
iMac 17" - 1299
1.83 GHz
512MB RAM
160 SATA
8x DL
ATI x1600 - 128
iMac 20" - 1699
2.0 GHz upgradable to 2.16
512MB RAM
250 SATA
8x DL
ATI x1600 128 upgradable to 256 (As is already)
iMac 23": 1900 x 1200 - 1999
2.16 GHz upgradable to 2.33
1 GB Standard
250 SATA upgradable to 500 (as 17" and 20" is)
8x DL
ATI x1600 256
FW 800
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't say upgradable on 17" and 20" hard drives because we already know that.
In a dream world I'd say the 23" vCard would go to the x1800 or something
Hmm... the problem with that line-up is that when consumers see the shiny new advert saying "Meet the new iMacs" they'll look at the clock speeds and say "What new iMacs?". I think it would be reasonable for Apple to offer...
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,599 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,099 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
OdduWon
Nov 28, 10:00 PM
lol i expect a large number of zune related auto crashes.
it takes so long to get to where you want to go and to see what it is your picking you have tp serch for some visual heirachy that is not productive. ipod has this lower coeficecnt of visual digestion.
it takes so long to get to where you want to go and to see what it is your picking you have tp serch for some visual heirachy that is not productive. ipod has this lower coeficecnt of visual digestion.
The.316
Nov 26, 06:52 AM
Logitech diNovo Mac Edition Keyboard
I finally decided that I couldn't put up with not having a number pad any longer. Feels good to have a full sized keyboard again.
Ive been contemplating this keyboard because of the same reasons. I have a question for anyone that can answer this...I use the new Logitech Performance MX, which uses the same mini usb connector, can I use that to connect the keyboard as well, or do I have to add a second USB connector for the keyboard?
I finally decided that I couldn't put up with not having a number pad any longer. Feels good to have a full sized keyboard again.
Ive been contemplating this keyboard because of the same reasons. I have a question for anyone that can answer this...I use the new Logitech Performance MX, which uses the same mini usb connector, can I use that to connect the keyboard as well, or do I have to add a second USB connector for the keyboard?
Tonsko
Jan 6, 10:14 AM
If properly maintained, mileage holds no bounds! BMW's will go to 250k easy.
The engines will, no problem. It's all the expensive bits around them that can't!
The engines will, no problem. It's all the expensive bits around them that can't!
chuckles:)
Jan 12, 05:01 PM
Apple would never call a computer a "macbook air".
its a stupid name that says nothing about the product.
its a stupid name that says nothing about the product.
notjustjay
Apr 21, 12:19 PM
Viruses collecting data on iOS?
... :confused:
It doesn't exist now, but that's not to say it might never happen in the future.
... :confused:
It doesn't exist now, but that's not to say it might never happen in the future.
chutch15
Sep 13, 09:05 AM
There is certainly space.
aussie_geek
Oct 23, 10:37 PM
I'll grant you some slack on a lot of the points you've made, but I simply can't sit here and read your smug comments about people waiting for the C2D without pointing out at least one thing you are missing. Just exactly how do you expect your Core Duo MBP to support 64-bit instructions when Leopard comes out? Oh, that's right. It won't. You're severely misguided if you think that won't make a difference.
yes, my macbook pro will not support 64 bit instructions. i was fully aware of that when i bought it.
leopard is confirmed to be 64 bit all the way through -ie the user interface is as well. i do agree that 64 bit GUI applications will surface but you can't say that all 32 bit machines will be massively disadvantaged and become redundant.
what you have implied is that the 64 bit thing will be so massive and make so much of a difference to your computing experience that a 64 bit notebook computer is essential.
btw - the g5 has been out for years. umm wait. it's 64 bit too :rolleyes: where are the MAINSTREAM apps that utilise the 64 bit facility of tiger??
aussie_geek
yes, my macbook pro will not support 64 bit instructions. i was fully aware of that when i bought it.
leopard is confirmed to be 64 bit all the way through -ie the user interface is as well. i do agree that 64 bit GUI applications will surface but you can't say that all 32 bit machines will be massively disadvantaged and become redundant.
what you have implied is that the 64 bit thing will be so massive and make so much of a difference to your computing experience that a 64 bit notebook computer is essential.
btw - the g5 has been out for years. umm wait. it's 64 bit too :rolleyes: where are the MAINSTREAM apps that utilise the 64 bit facility of tiger??
aussie_geek
Fabio_gsilva
Jul 19, 08:42 PM
Made possible by paying 10c for each Mac constructed with a high quality and proficient workforce.
Well, if you discovered this just now: welcome to the real world.:rolleyes:
Well, if you discovered this just now: welcome to the real world.:rolleyes:
Storm9
Oct 13, 10:54 PM
Thanks! I'll try it on my work computer, its a quad.
AppliedVisual
Oct 23, 11:11 AM
I've read that even the current MBP supports 4gigs.
Apple just doesn't offer it in their store since the CPU can only address around 3,2gigs (like every other 32bit cpu).
Unfortunately, the current MBP is restricted to about 3.2GB because of the 32bit CPU *AND* the 32bit i945 chipset. Intel won't have a 64bit mobile chipset until they ship Crestline (the i965 mobile chipset for Santa Rosa). So, unless Crestline is ready early and Apple has some sort of exclusive agreement, the updated MBP still will not allow anyone to use more than approximately 3.2GB of RAM.
In a 32bit system, the 32bit CPUs and/or chipsets can address a total memory capacity of 4GB. But this 4GB address window must account for all memory I/O addresses, BIOS/ROM as well as video memory in addition to the actual RAM heap. That is why when you install 4GB of RAM, you essentially miss out on the last 600 to 800 MB. Also why the C2D/Merom iMac systems can only be configured with up to 3GB of RAM. Apple probably figured they didn't need to sell people RAM that they can't use. Some PC vendors still sell 4GB installed into such systems even though it can't all be used because by installing two matched 2GB modules, the dual-channel performance benefits are there, just not the last 800MB.
Apple just doesn't offer it in their store since the CPU can only address around 3,2gigs (like every other 32bit cpu).
Unfortunately, the current MBP is restricted to about 3.2GB because of the 32bit CPU *AND* the 32bit i945 chipset. Intel won't have a 64bit mobile chipset until they ship Crestline (the i965 mobile chipset for Santa Rosa). So, unless Crestline is ready early and Apple has some sort of exclusive agreement, the updated MBP still will not allow anyone to use more than approximately 3.2GB of RAM.
In a 32bit system, the 32bit CPUs and/or chipsets can address a total memory capacity of 4GB. But this 4GB address window must account for all memory I/O addresses, BIOS/ROM as well as video memory in addition to the actual RAM heap. That is why when you install 4GB of RAM, you essentially miss out on the last 600 to 800 MB. Also why the C2D/Merom iMac systems can only be configured with up to 3GB of RAM. Apple probably figured they didn't need to sell people RAM that they can't use. Some PC vendors still sell 4GB installed into such systems even though it can't all be used because by installing two matched 2GB modules, the dual-channel performance benefits are there, just not the last 800MB.