gkarris
Nov 27, 09:04 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
CRAZYBUBBA
Jan 11, 07:59 PM
added a line to the article...
"- It will be called the MacBook Air"
arn
worst-name-ever. i hope that it's anything but "macbook air"
"- It will be called the MacBook Air"
arn
worst-name-ever. i hope that it's anything but "macbook air"
bagelche
Apr 12, 10:28 PM
Wow, looks like the rumours WERE true after all! Apple killed the Pro of Final Cut Pro. That guy who turned the much admired iMovie into garbage has done it again. All they had to do was rewrite the engine with 64 bit support, had proper file handling, rendering titling tools amongst other necessary pro features and keep the same F*&$#@*&& interface as pro users of ANY pro software don't want to re-learn an interface for no reason! It takes YEARS before you really know a software under the hood.
We'll now see FCPx turn into a hit with amateurs and will be completely abandoned by pro users who will all return to avid.
Yawn...'cause if it ain't kludgy, it ain't pro.
We'll now see FCPx turn into a hit with amateurs and will be completely abandoned by pro users who will all return to avid.
Yawn...'cause if it ain't kludgy, it ain't pro.
islanders
Dec 28, 01:20 AM
I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly.
Here is your quote SeaFox.
You are an condescending individual and take my post out of context.
Here is your quote SeaFox.
You are an condescending individual and take my post out of context.
Benjy91
Mar 25, 03:55 PM
The Future of video games?
In the future, your controller will cost �400, require a 10ft HDMI cable, a �25 adapter, and have the graphics of a PS2.
In the future, your controller will cost �400, require a 10ft HDMI cable, a �25 adapter, and have the graphics of a PS2.
Ping Guo
Apr 21, 11:45 AM
If this were Google or M$ you apologists would be foaming at the mouth. Nice fallacious argument - just because we can be tracked in our cars with traffic cams, or GPS devices, etc, doesn't mean this, or those instances are legal.
This is clearly in violation of EU law, for those of you who are interested:
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/information_society/l14012_en.htm
We should at least be given the choice to opt-out, and the purposes and disclosure policies should be clearly stated, not buried in a 30-page ToS.
This is clearly in violation of EU law, for those of you who are interested:
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/information_society/l14012_en.htm
We should at least be given the choice to opt-out, and the purposes and disclosure policies should be clearly stated, not buried in a 30-page ToS.
mrgreen4242
Aug 31, 07:47 AM
Yes I agree that is what you would expect as would I. But it doesn't work that way. They are more than likely to stay just where they are.
Look at how old some of that stuff is from 2005 - a few even from 2004 - there and how they are still priced as if they hadn't long ago been replaced by more powerful models. Makes no sense. But there it is to study and see. :confused: :eek:
They're still selling Quad G5's for $2799 which is rediculous.
Er... The quad G5 isn't available new anymore, so it costs what it costs (there's nothing in the regular store to compare it to - the Mac Pro is NOT a one for one replacement)... IF this rumor is true, then the current lineup is just getting shuffled down with a new top end added, then they would have to drop refurb prices or it wouldn't make any sense.
Now if they just shuffle the CPU down (so the base mini still has a Combo drive and 60gb HDD, but gets a 1.66 Core Duo) they will STILL have to drop the refurb price... A new regular price Solo with SD and 80gb HDD is currently $699, which is the current Core Duo refurb price.
If they completely revamp the lineup then they may keep the same pricing, but seems highly unlikey as noone would buy them and keeping uneeded inventory on hand is bad business.
Look at how old some of that stuff is from 2005 - a few even from 2004 - there and how they are still priced as if they hadn't long ago been replaced by more powerful models. Makes no sense. But there it is to study and see. :confused: :eek:
They're still selling Quad G5's for $2799 which is rediculous.
Er... The quad G5 isn't available new anymore, so it costs what it costs (there's nothing in the regular store to compare it to - the Mac Pro is NOT a one for one replacement)... IF this rumor is true, then the current lineup is just getting shuffled down with a new top end added, then they would have to drop refurb prices or it wouldn't make any sense.
Now if they just shuffle the CPU down (so the base mini still has a Combo drive and 60gb HDD, but gets a 1.66 Core Duo) they will STILL have to drop the refurb price... A new regular price Solo with SD and 80gb HDD is currently $699, which is the current Core Duo refurb price.
If they completely revamp the lineup then they may keep the same pricing, but seems highly unlikey as noone would buy them and keeping uneeded inventory on hand is bad business.
Surely
Nov 25, 11:12 PM
^^^^^Could I recommend a case for that?
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_qOspc7lt4co/SphSBsZ2uPI/AAAAAAAAAOA/Ll7qyPM-Fgo/IMG_2784.JPG
:D
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_qOspc7lt4co/SphSBsZ2uPI/AAAAAAAAAOA/Ll7qyPM-Fgo/IMG_2784.JPG
:D
jkmakesmusic
Jan 13, 02:44 AM
Bluetooth headphones?
being a bit of an audiophile, bluetooth headphones being my only option would definitely cause me not to buy this. if only for that one reason. i didn't buy $250 in-ears to sit around while i use the junk apple provides with their ipod, only wirelessly.
and knowing that jobs himself is a bit of an audiophile, he'd never sign off on this.
this thing is going to have ports. even the iphone and ipod touch do. sorry guys.
being a bit of an audiophile, bluetooth headphones being my only option would definitely cause me not to buy this. if only for that one reason. i didn't buy $250 in-ears to sit around while i use the junk apple provides with their ipod, only wirelessly.
and knowing that jobs himself is a bit of an audiophile, he'd never sign off on this.
this thing is going to have ports. even the iphone and ipod touch do. sorry guys.
calcvita
May 3, 03:46 AM
apple needs to do something about this whole uninstallation process. apps like appcleaner exist and they do exist for a very good reason. if i uninstall an app, i want it to completely be gone.
and what if you have a corrupted .plist file which causes the application to misbehave? by simply drag & drop the app into the trashcan leaves its associated files untouched and re-installing the app won't fix the problem.
on many troubleshooting guides a very common suggestion is to remove the preference file, located in the user (in most cases) library folder, but in lion this folder is hidden and if you ask me, this will confuse newbies even more. i'm sure there will be comments like "but i don't have a library folder" and so on.
and what if you have a corrupted .plist file which causes the application to misbehave? by simply drag & drop the app into the trashcan leaves its associated files untouched and re-installing the app won't fix the problem.
on many troubleshooting guides a very common suggestion is to remove the preference file, located in the user (in most cases) library folder, but in lion this folder is hidden and if you ask me, this will confuse newbies even more. i'm sure there will be comments like "but i don't have a library folder" and so on.
Benjamin
Mar 31, 06:13 AM
Please sign it !! For our sakes
http://www.petitiononline.com/rumi04/petition.html
Thanks
you know that marketshare doesn't matter right? it is just a ratio what matters is that apples stock is climbing to almost 30 and is gaining profit to be yet again a 10 billion dollar company.. however.. if you read this thread, yeah apple is so dying :cough:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=65964
ell amp; nikki running scared.
ell amp; nikki running scared.
ell amp; nikki running scared
ell amp; nikki running scared
Azerbaijan: Ell/Nikki
ell amp; nikki running scared
ell amp; nikki running scared
ell amp; nikki running scared.
http://www.petitiononline.com/rumi04/petition.html
Thanks
you know that marketshare doesn't matter right? it is just a ratio what matters is that apples stock is climbing to almost 30 and is gaining profit to be yet again a 10 billion dollar company.. however.. if you read this thread, yeah apple is so dying :cough:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=65964
KnightWRX
Apr 10, 06:52 PM
And two-seaters?? :eek: Well, let's not go there.
Hey, my Street Bob is a 2 seater. :mad:
Hey, my Street Bob is a 2 seater. :mad:
alecmcmahon
Feb 1, 09:10 AM
my rides
2010 dodge ram 1500 hemi
99 jeep wrangler
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4004/5130546008_dce479858d_b.jpg
2010 dodge ram 1500 hemi
99 jeep wrangler
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4004/5130546008_dce479858d_b.jpg
appleguy123
Mar 19, 11:29 PM
I used it. It didn't work for me ):
You need to pray harder, and hate yourself more.
You need to pray harder, and hate yourself more.
sord
Aug 6, 11:12 PM
I certainly hope Leopard isn't like Vista 2.0 - it (Vista 2.0) will be horrible as usual!
haravikk
Jun 22, 02:49 PM
While it'd be kind of cool to have a touch-enabled iMac screen, the only people who will really benefit from this are museums that like to use iMacs as all-in-one systems for an interactive, but then they tend to just buy add-on touch sensors or those rollerball things instead.
kelving525
Sep 14, 11:29 PM
Thanks!
Says it's available, but from working in retail in the past in a store with online checking of stock I know that what is listed as "available" is not always accurate. But I will walk over there tomorrow and check it out, not far to go anyhow. :)
I haven't noticed that case today, they were all Griffin. They may have it there tmr, so who knows? :)
Says it's available, but from working in retail in the past in a store with online checking of stock I know that what is listed as "available" is not always accurate. But I will walk over there tomorrow and check it out, not far to go anyhow. :)
I haven't noticed that case today, they were all Griffin. They may have it there tmr, so who knows? :)
Multimedia
Sep 1, 01:33 PM
Says who? AppleInsider is now confirming this story. They have been dead-on accurate all year. Read 'em and weep (I'd like to see Conroe instead of Merom, but it ain't happenin').If iMacs don't get Conroe inside that is going to be SO WEAK. The Power GAP between all Macs and the Mac Pro would be so wide you could drive a truck through it. Makes no sense to me for Conroe to not go into something. Right now that's only iMac. Market for Conroe headless Mac has got to be huge. :confused: :eek: :(
2.33GHz is the top of Merom folks. How can that be the best Apple can offer non Mac Pro customers? Seems rediculous. There has got to be a home for Conroe Processors in iMacs or a new mid-tower.
2.33GHz is the top of Merom folks. How can that be the best Apple can offer non Mac Pro customers? Seems rediculous. There has got to be a home for Conroe Processors in iMacs or a new mid-tower.
Sodner
Apr 3, 07:54 AM
Sweet commercial! Damn I want an iPad 2 after seeing that!! :D
Wait, I already have one. ;)
Wait, I already have one. ;)
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!
ham_man
Jul 13, 10:38 PM
If they do decide to add it, it better be BTO only. I don't wanna buy a computer that's $500 more because of a Blu-Ray drive I don't want...
imnotatfault
Aug 19, 08:29 AM
You step into your car. The bluetooth receiver in your dashboard automatically detects the presence of your iPod. The finger controls on the steering wheel switch from controlling radio stations to stepping through playlists etc. It "just works". No cables. No need to even take the iPod out of your pocket or bag.
Yea, imagine this scenario if you will. Michael spends $20k on a 2006 Honda Civic EX with supposed iPod integration. He comes to find out that "integration" apparently means a plug that costs $250 + installation fee to play iPod through speakers and does NOT integrate with his CD player that reads mp3 CD ID3 tags. Instead, a crappy synthesized voice "reads" the track titles to him.
God, the sad thing is that that is real life.
Yea, imagine this scenario if you will. Michael spends $20k on a 2006 Honda Civic EX with supposed iPod integration. He comes to find out that "integration" apparently means a plug that costs $250 + installation fee to play iPod through speakers and does NOT integrate with his CD player that reads mp3 CD ID3 tags. Instead, a crappy synthesized voice "reads" the track titles to him.
God, the sad thing is that that is real life.
AFPoster
Mar 22, 01:05 PM
You opinion may be true of some people- not all. I did not choose to be attracted to guys. I also could never have sex with a woman. It's not physically possible for me, if you get my meaning. Stop telling other people that you know everything about them. You don't. Not everyone is the same.
In any of my comments I never said I new anything about them. I am speculating from pure observation. I am basing everything I know off of my friends experiences and what I've heard from them and what they saw to communities and towns during there speeches. No, I don't get your meaning either. So many ways to guess that meaning that I wouldn't be right if I guessed.
In any of my comments I never said I new anything about them. I am speculating from pure observation. I am basing everything I know off of my friends experiences and what I've heard from them and what they saw to communities and towns during there speeches. No, I don't get your meaning either. So many ways to guess that meaning that I wouldn't be right if I guessed.
skunk
Mar 21, 02:10 PM
I suppose this begs the question 'How would you prefer they quantify the No Fly Zone?'Perhaps square miles would be a more useful measure. ;)
What country hasn't been used as "target practice"Gotta keep your eye in, I suppose...
What country hasn't been used as "target practice"Gotta keep your eye in, I suppose...