direzz
Aug 16, 08:06 PM
i dont really think the ipod needs to be updated.
its great the way it is, and it hasnt even been a year since it was released!
why are you all on this idea of an ipod update?
the ipod isnt a computer that needs a new processor and faster components.
mp3 files just play.
its great the way it is, and it hasnt even been a year since it was released!
why are you all on this idea of an ipod update?
the ipod isnt a computer that needs a new processor and faster components.
mp3 files just play.
MauiMac
Dec 1, 10:10 PM
I HOPE!!!:confused: :) :) :) !!!
SchneiderMan
Nov 26, 08:48 PM
Just got done framing (: took me a minute too.
http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/4916/photore.jpg
http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/4916/photore.jpg
zombierunner
Apr 21, 04:45 AM
Performance and specifications determine whether or not it's a "Pro", not the people who use them. I'm not a professional race car driver, but my car has over 400hp. Does that mean that my car is not the high-performance sports car that the automotive world widely claims it to be?
And besides, how do you know those people aren't using heavy-duty applications? Is a thirty-second observation at Starbucks enough to justify such a statement?
dang .. afrwq just got burned lol
And besides, how do you know those people aren't using heavy-duty applications? Is a thirty-second observation at Starbucks enough to justify such a statement?
dang .. afrwq just got burned lol
Lollypop
Aug 7, 04:48 AM
Not too brag or anything :D but it works out great for us in UK. Get in from work 5.30pm / open a beer / macrumors / keynote 6pm / tears of joy / rob bank 9pm / buy mac pro :D
South Africa here, leave work-> go to gym and work up a sweat -> macrumors -> have dinner during keynote -> go to bed and have sweet dreams about new iphone! :D :D Life is good! LOL
South Africa here, leave work-> go to gym and work up a sweat -> macrumors -> have dinner during keynote -> go to bed and have sweet dreams about new iphone! :D :D Life is good! LOL
Thunderbird
Apr 2, 08:12 PM
Is this the same Narrator that does the Ken Burns films?
Not sure who does the Ken Burns doc narrations. But I'm pretty sure this voice over for the iPad 2 was done by Peter Coyote.
Not sure who does the Ken Burns doc narrations. But I'm pretty sure this voice over for the iPad 2 was done by Peter Coyote.
inkswamp
Aug 6, 09:53 PM
Blah, it should read "Mac OS X Leopard, introducing Panter 2.0"
No offense, my friend, but I'm glad Apple isn't taking any marketing cues from readers of MacRumors. ;)
No offense, my friend, but I'm glad Apple isn't taking any marketing cues from readers of MacRumors. ;)
Dmac77
Apr 11, 04:32 PM
What if it's not actually an automatic?
Seriously though, I do wonder if people take little things like this (being able to drive a stickshift) and pump up the importance of it, just to get some extremely minor satisfaction out of being "better" than other people.
Also, google "money shift" for the downside of having "full control."
I don't think people are pumping it up at all. I personally think that people who can't drive a standard transmission, are just lazy (and that goes for my mother, and her habit of doing her makeup while driving). People only get autos, because they don't want to have to "inconvenience" themselves with pushing down on the clutch and throwing the car into the next gear; because doing so requires them to stop shoving food down their face, or to get of the damn phone. I also hate to hear people moan about how inconvenient a standard transmission is during stop and go traffic; I mean it's not that bad, and I recently took my standard transmission accord to chicago and drove in stop and go traffic for over two hours, and it was not as annoying as some would make it out to be. People are just too willing to sacrifice the fun of driving for convenience.
-Don
Seriously though, I do wonder if people take little things like this (being able to drive a stickshift) and pump up the importance of it, just to get some extremely minor satisfaction out of being "better" than other people.
Also, google "money shift" for the downside of having "full control."
I don't think people are pumping it up at all. I personally think that people who can't drive a standard transmission, are just lazy (and that goes for my mother, and her habit of doing her makeup while driving). People only get autos, because they don't want to have to "inconvenience" themselves with pushing down on the clutch and throwing the car into the next gear; because doing so requires them to stop shoving food down their face, or to get of the damn phone. I also hate to hear people moan about how inconvenient a standard transmission is during stop and go traffic; I mean it's not that bad, and I recently took my standard transmission accord to chicago and drove in stop and go traffic for over two hours, and it was not as annoying as some would make it out to be. People are just too willing to sacrifice the fun of driving for convenience.
-Don
grouse
Jul 20, 08:35 AM
If desktops sales are down 23%, is that revenue or units?
If it's revenue, then it's hardly surprising. If the most expensive models are essentially stalled waiting on new chips/new enclosures/new universal binary apps from Quark and Adobemedia, as backed up by reports that apple store staff in the last quarter have actually been advising punters NOT to buy the G5 towers, then actually that's pretty much as expected I'd have thought.
If new Mac Pro models are just around the corner then you'd expect a big leap for the 4th quarter. I, for one, am part of the higher spend pent-up demand sector. And don't forget, bureaux, design studios, architects, 3D motion design/modeller etcs have big budgets and if they pause on buying it is going to skew the Apple market. As everyone says, expect a big leap in the Desktop Pro market over the next two quarters.
If it's revenue, then it's hardly surprising. If the most expensive models are essentially stalled waiting on new chips/new enclosures/new universal binary apps from Quark and Adobemedia, as backed up by reports that apple store staff in the last quarter have actually been advising punters NOT to buy the G5 towers, then actually that's pretty much as expected I'd have thought.
If new Mac Pro models are just around the corner then you'd expect a big leap for the 4th quarter. I, for one, am part of the higher spend pent-up demand sector. And don't forget, bureaux, design studios, architects, 3D motion design/modeller etcs have big budgets and if they pause on buying it is going to skew the Apple market. As everyone says, expect a big leap in the Desktop Pro market over the next two quarters.
leosaysfosho
Sep 27, 01:59 PM
so i saw griffin cases shown on the weekly ad, does anyone own them? If so, comments about it would be nice before purchasing!
Link2999
Sep 11, 05:55 PM
Update: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRmI98mNZEM
Bestbuy supposedly has the new GripVue for the iPod Touch.
Bestbuy supposedly has the new GripVue for the iPod Touch.
Mattsasa
Mar 24, 02:49 PM
Please don't put an AMD 5XXX series into the new iMacs! :(
Why not????
Why not????
MacRumors
Jul 19, 03:40 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Apple posted their (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/jul/19results.html) 3rd Quarter 2006 financial results today.
Apple posted revenue of $4.37 billion and a net quarterly profit of $472 million or $.54 per diluted share. For reference, the year-ago quarter brought in $3.53 billion in revenue, net profit of $320 million or $.37 per diluted share.
Apple shipped 1,327,000 Macintosh computers and 8,111,000 iPods during this quarter which represents a 12% growth in Macs and 32% growth in iPods year-over-year.
- 75% of Macs sold during the quarter used Intel processors.
- 2nd highest quarterly sales and earnings in Apple's history
- International sales accounted for 39 percent of the quarter’s revenue.
- iPod continued to earn a US market share of over 75 percent
- Desktops: 529,000, down 14% from previous quarter
- Portables: 798,000, up 60% from previous quarter
- iPods: 8,526,000
Live streaming of the results conference call will be broadcast at 5pm EST (http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/earningsq306/).
Updates:
- Mac: 55% of revenue. Increased sales to 1.327 million.
-- Pleased with Intel transition. "Solidly" on track to update Xserve and PowerMac by end of this year.
-- Over 2900 Universal Applications.
-- Most "critical" applications will be converted by September
-- MacBook very well received
-- Happy with the Mac ad campaign, feel that it is contributing to Apple's momentum
- iPod
-- NPD: 75% of market share US (MP3)
-- Other music product revenue up 90% year over year
-- Strong sales of iTunes and iPod accesories
-- iTunes Music Store - 85% marketshare.
-- Enthusiastic about upcoming iTunes/iPod products in the pipeline
- Retail
-- 146 stores open during quarter.
-- 50% of buyers are new to Mac.
- Outlook:
-- "Very excited about and confident in the products in our pipeline."
Q&A
Q: How important is it to hit the holiday season. and how innovative can innovative be [w/ respect to iPods]?
A: We don't talk about unannounced products, but "very confident" in products in our pipeline.
Q: Markets: Consumer, Education, Pro
A: The MacBook was in high demand in both consumer and education. Pro market has been slow - thought to be due to wait in PowerMac with Intel and some Universal apps. Education market did very well. Higher edu grew 31% year to year. Very well poised in going into school season.
Q: Assuming any contribution from Leopard for the September [next] quarter?
A: We've not announced the ship date for Leopard, but will show the new features at WWDC.
Q: Does the fact that Intel rolls our processors more quickly and drops prices affect you? Will you be adjusting prices more frequently or same as you have been with new product releases?
A: We're very pleased to be working with Intel. A great partner. They have the best processor by far in our current and upcoming products. Pleased with the new products, but as you know we don't discuss our unannounced products. don't want to comment on how we'll be changing our pricing.
Q: Will there be any surprises at WWDC?
A: [Laughter, then Openheimer:] Well, you will have to come and attend.
Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Apple_s_Q3_2006_Financial_Results_Are_In!_2nd_Best_In_Company_History!)
Apple posted their (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/jul/19results.html) 3rd Quarter 2006 financial results today.
Apple posted revenue of $4.37 billion and a net quarterly profit of $472 million or $.54 per diluted share. For reference, the year-ago quarter brought in $3.53 billion in revenue, net profit of $320 million or $.37 per diluted share.
Apple shipped 1,327,000 Macintosh computers and 8,111,000 iPods during this quarter which represents a 12% growth in Macs and 32% growth in iPods year-over-year.
- 75% of Macs sold during the quarter used Intel processors.
- 2nd highest quarterly sales and earnings in Apple's history
- International sales accounted for 39 percent of the quarter’s revenue.
- iPod continued to earn a US market share of over 75 percent
- Desktops: 529,000, down 14% from previous quarter
- Portables: 798,000, up 60% from previous quarter
- iPods: 8,526,000
Live streaming of the results conference call will be broadcast at 5pm EST (http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/earningsq306/).
Updates:
- Mac: 55% of revenue. Increased sales to 1.327 million.
-- Pleased with Intel transition. "Solidly" on track to update Xserve and PowerMac by end of this year.
-- Over 2900 Universal Applications.
-- Most "critical" applications will be converted by September
-- MacBook very well received
-- Happy with the Mac ad campaign, feel that it is contributing to Apple's momentum
- iPod
-- NPD: 75% of market share US (MP3)
-- Other music product revenue up 90% year over year
-- Strong sales of iTunes and iPod accesories
-- iTunes Music Store - 85% marketshare.
-- Enthusiastic about upcoming iTunes/iPod products in the pipeline
- Retail
-- 146 stores open during quarter.
-- 50% of buyers are new to Mac.
- Outlook:
-- "Very excited about and confident in the products in our pipeline."
Q&A
Q: How important is it to hit the holiday season. and how innovative can innovative be [w/ respect to iPods]?
A: We don't talk about unannounced products, but "very confident" in products in our pipeline.
Q: Markets: Consumer, Education, Pro
A: The MacBook was in high demand in both consumer and education. Pro market has been slow - thought to be due to wait in PowerMac with Intel and some Universal apps. Education market did very well. Higher edu grew 31% year to year. Very well poised in going into school season.
Q: Assuming any contribution from Leopard for the September [next] quarter?
A: We've not announced the ship date for Leopard, but will show the new features at WWDC.
Q: Does the fact that Intel rolls our processors more quickly and drops prices affect you? Will you be adjusting prices more frequently or same as you have been with new product releases?
A: We're very pleased to be working with Intel. A great partner. They have the best processor by far in our current and upcoming products. Pleased with the new products, but as you know we don't discuss our unannounced products. don't want to comment on how we'll be changing our pricing.
Q: Will there be any surprises at WWDC?
A: [Laughter, then Openheimer:] Well, you will have to come and attend.
Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Apple_s_Q3_2006_Financial_Results_Are_In!_2nd_Best_In_Company_History!)
PowerFullMac
Jan 12, 09:56 AM
Subtract keyboard. Add multi-touch and WiMax. Thin as an iPhone.
Nope, more powerfull with real OS X.
Nope, more powerfull with real OS X.
milo
Aug 29, 05:49 PM
Huh? What happened there? Didn't Think Secret used to be the place to go for the most accurate rumors? I definitely trust macrumors and appleinsider a lot more than think secret now though.
They used to be pretty good, but they've been consistently wrong (or make worthlessly vague predictions) for a couple years now.
I don't know that I'd say I trust macrumors. They don't really report any rumors, they just link to rumors on other sites. The trustiness completely depends on who they link to.
They used to be pretty good, but they've been consistently wrong (or make worthlessly vague predictions) for a couple years now.
I don't know that I'd say I trust macrumors. They don't really report any rumors, they just link to rumors on other sites. The trustiness completely depends on who they link to.
econgeek
Apr 12, 09:03 PM
The trailers in '11 were cute, but beyond that, it's not nearly good enough for polished output. If you want am, there's your option.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. You feel that you get to dictate arbitrary standards that you cannot articulate with any specifics, and then belittle those who point out that another way of doing something can lead to superior results for them.
All I'm asking is they leave final cut PRO to the pros who know how to use it and like the interface.
Pro is not a code word for "stuck in the 1940s".
This is exactly what I'm talking about. You feel that you get to dictate arbitrary standards that you cannot articulate with any specifics, and then belittle those who point out that another way of doing something can lead to superior results for them.
All I'm asking is they leave final cut PRO to the pros who know how to use it and like the interface.
Pro is not a code word for "stuck in the 1940s".
lOUDsCREAMEr
Jul 19, 06:41 PM
Here are historical Mac sales by quarter.
1Q2000 - 1,377,000
2Q2000 - 1,043,000
3Q2000 - 1,016,000
4Q2000 - 1,122,000
1Q2001 - 659,000
2Q2001 - 751,000
3Q2001 - 827,000
4Q2001 - 850,000
1Q2002 - 659,000
2Q2002 - 813,000
3Q2002 - 808,000
4Q2002 - 734,000
1Q2003 - 743,000
2Q2003 - 711,000
3Q2003 - 771,000
4Q2003 - 787,000
1Q2004 - 743,000
2Q2004 - 749,000
3Q2004 - 771,000
4Q2004 - 787,000
1Q2005 - 1,046,000
2Q2005 - 1,070,000
3Q2005 - 1,182,000
4Q2005 - 1,236,000
1Q2006- 1,254,000
2Q2006- 1,112,000
3Q2006- 1,327,000
what happened exactly in between 2000-Q4 and 2001-Q1?
1Q2000 - 1,377,000
2Q2000 - 1,043,000
3Q2000 - 1,016,000
4Q2000 - 1,122,000
1Q2001 - 659,000
2Q2001 - 751,000
3Q2001 - 827,000
4Q2001 - 850,000
1Q2002 - 659,000
2Q2002 - 813,000
3Q2002 - 808,000
4Q2002 - 734,000
1Q2003 - 743,000
2Q2003 - 711,000
3Q2003 - 771,000
4Q2003 - 787,000
1Q2004 - 743,000
2Q2004 - 749,000
3Q2004 - 771,000
4Q2004 - 787,000
1Q2005 - 1,046,000
2Q2005 - 1,070,000
3Q2005 - 1,182,000
4Q2005 - 1,236,000
1Q2006- 1,254,000
2Q2006- 1,112,000
3Q2006- 1,327,000
what happened exactly in between 2000-Q4 and 2001-Q1?
iW00t
Jan 7, 12:45 AM
But the screen on the 17in MBP (1680x1050) by definition can't do HD (1920x1080). I don't care how well it can scale down, scaling down is not playing at true native resolution, and with most new content heading toward 1080i (and eventually 1080p), getting anything less than that now is just heading toward a dead end media wise IMO.
Why do you need HD on such a small device?
People have been watching TV on 640*480 28" TV sets for decades just fine. Likewise your Macbook Pro at 17" is doing as good as it possibly can at 17 inches, not like that extra 30 pixels vertically will make some difference.
My main concern with the Macbook Pros getting higher resolution displays is that there may be a possibility that Apple will break away from the current crop of low quality grainy displays and drop something else better in. Perhaps when Leopard is released we may even get the option to BTO in a higher resolution display.
Why do you need HD on such a small device?
People have been watching TV on 640*480 28" TV sets for decades just fine. Likewise your Macbook Pro at 17" is doing as good as it possibly can at 17 inches, not like that extra 30 pixels vertically will make some difference.
My main concern with the Macbook Pros getting higher resolution displays is that there may be a possibility that Apple will break away from the current crop of low quality grainy displays and drop something else better in. Perhaps when Leopard is released we may even get the option to BTO in a higher resolution display.
Epsilon88
Oct 23, 10:32 PM
Just subscribed online w/ Consumer Reports. I've always trusted their advice, and it's led me well.
840quadra
Nov 28, 02:35 PM
I don't think I'd hold up Sony as an example of how to innovate and market -- they lost their focus decades ago. Aside from the walkman, let's see what products has Sony pushed in the last 30 years...
Beta
MiniDisc
Memory Stick
ATRAC
Now we sit back and see if the PS3 and Blu-Ray follow the recent trend. If we're comparing Microsoft to Sony that's what you have to look forward to.
Sorry to have to say this, but the Playstation and PS2 (early years) were a great success.
The PS3 was late, but it is still too early ( like the Zune) to discount it as a good device or threat.
Beta
MiniDisc
Memory Stick
ATRAC
Now we sit back and see if the PS3 and Blu-Ray follow the recent trend. If we're comparing Microsoft to Sony that's what you have to look forward to.
Sorry to have to say this, but the Playstation and PS2 (early years) were a great success.
The PS3 was late, but it is still too early ( like the Zune) to discount it as a good device or threat.
snebes
Apr 19, 04:37 PM
Nothing mind-blowing there...but forget about Lion, it's coming later in June.
No, its coming in the "Summer". Expect it in August. Be surprised if it is early.
No, its coming in the "Summer". Expect it in August. Be surprised if it is early.
Apple OC
Apr 23, 10:46 AM
Not just wrong but probably illegal in several countries.
My own country belgium for example its illegal to store such data without consent of the person itself.
No iPhones in Belgium?
My own country belgium for example its illegal to store such data without consent of the person itself.
No iPhones in Belgium?
Earendil
Nov 28, 10:32 AM
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs?
*snip*
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20".
*snip*
But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
And that percentage shoots up when you take into account only the Pro style Towers. And it's a shame your Cinema display is showing age sooner than I would think it should. Still, in my own experience with color reproduction and accuracy in Photography, the cinema displays I have used have exceeded my Dell 2005. In regular computer use I wouldn't be able to tell them apart (aside from the back light bleed on the Dell).
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Do you see any fan boys making posts here? I see some people here that are ignorant of the way monitors work and yet are trying to pass opinions on Apple/Dell/LCD market as gold though.
That's the issue though, currently Apple doesn't sell a consumer computer that either doesn't already come with a monitor, or where you aren't supposed to already have a monitor.
the MacBook and iMac both have screens built in, the MacMini, if you saw any of it's advertisements or presentation, is meant as a direct replacement for a PC box. i.e. bring your own mouse, keyboard and monitor. I as well as another guy have already said this though.
It's a problem, still, I want too want Apple to sell a consumer level monitor. But Apple certainly doesn't have to enter that market if they don't want to. Besides, the market for a cheap 17" monitor is TINY. You're talking Mini owners (who don't already have a monitor) maybe a few laptop owners, and...? G5 owners? If you're plugin a $150 LCD up to a G5 you should be shot :P Unless you are running three at once or something.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
Many professionals run Duel 20" screens. In fact I see this setup far more often that a 30" screen.
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one.
wow wow wow. You just me on that logic jump. Apple sells some high end systems to Professions in industry that demand at least a certain standard. Apple also sells other computers. Apple Sells monitors that are aiming at (hitting is another matter) those professionals that demand a certain standard. Apple doesn't currently sell any other monitors. How is that proof that Apple is trying to personally screw you out of your cash?
Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
Yeah, there is a gap, and I do see it as a problem. No one in the entire thread is disagreeing with that. You ideas on why there is a gap is viewed a little bit more negative than I would, but whatever.
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper.
Another huge jump in logic based on no facts and stretched assumptions. Do you know what Apple takes home at the end of the day from each monitor sale, each iMac sale, and each Mini sale? Can you provide that data to back up any of your conclusions? It sure would go a long way in getting anyone to side with you on that point. However, until you do, I'm going to say this one more time:
Cinema Display = Pro quality Display (I don't give a hoot if your eyes can't see it, the components alone show it, and that is what cost money to make not your eye sight)
Pro Quality = not cheap, don't go looking for a $200 monitor for pro work.
And for the last time, I'm still waiting for someone to show me a display that matches the Cinemas tech specs and qualifications and also cost downwards in the $400 range that people keep speaking about. Because until someone does, I'm inclined to believe, based on my own looking, that Apple is right with the industry on this one (or close) and all our whining on cost means jack.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it.
In light of that little sarcastc jab, the irony is that you are one of, if not the only user, to have admitted to owning a 20" Cinema display in this thread so far :rolleyes:
[quote]I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right?
I'll just quote myself on this one...
[QUOTE=Earendil]You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in back lighting and change in color based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benefits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level monitor for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
But if you had been following the thread you'd know that about me already...
But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
No, you are asking for two very different things here.
1. You are asking Apple to produce a consumer level monitor that you can afford and falls in line with the market. I think everyone agrees with this idea, whether there is a large enough market for Apple to justify it (only Aple costumers would consider them) is up for debate.
and...
2. You are asking Apple to drop the price on their Pro displays without giving a reason (all your reasons apply to a consumer LCD), nor have you provided a similarly speced display to show that Apple is out of line with it's pricing.
There are large difference between a Mini and a G5. Just because most people wouldn't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. Just relax and trust me that in two properly functioning displays, Apple's monitors are very good, and imho should never be compared to Apple's displays unless you are trying to convince a consumer (who can't tell the difference) not to buy it and buy an alternative display. I have done this before. Just like you'd never compare a Mini and a G5 unless grandma was thinking about buying a G5 to surf the web with...
~Tyler
*snip*
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20".
*snip*
But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
And that percentage shoots up when you take into account only the Pro style Towers. And it's a shame your Cinema display is showing age sooner than I would think it should. Still, in my own experience with color reproduction and accuracy in Photography, the cinema displays I have used have exceeded my Dell 2005. In regular computer use I wouldn't be able to tell them apart (aside from the back light bleed on the Dell).
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Do you see any fan boys making posts here? I see some people here that are ignorant of the way monitors work and yet are trying to pass opinions on Apple/Dell/LCD market as gold though.
That's the issue though, currently Apple doesn't sell a consumer computer that either doesn't already come with a monitor, or where you aren't supposed to already have a monitor.
the MacBook and iMac both have screens built in, the MacMini, if you saw any of it's advertisements or presentation, is meant as a direct replacement for a PC box. i.e. bring your own mouse, keyboard and monitor. I as well as another guy have already said this though.
It's a problem, still, I want too want Apple to sell a consumer level monitor. But Apple certainly doesn't have to enter that market if they don't want to. Besides, the market for a cheap 17" monitor is TINY. You're talking Mini owners (who don't already have a monitor) maybe a few laptop owners, and...? G5 owners? If you're plugin a $150 LCD up to a G5 you should be shot :P Unless you are running three at once or something.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
Many professionals run Duel 20" screens. In fact I see this setup far more often that a 30" screen.
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one.
wow wow wow. You just me on that logic jump. Apple sells some high end systems to Professions in industry that demand at least a certain standard. Apple also sells other computers. Apple Sells monitors that are aiming at (hitting is another matter) those professionals that demand a certain standard. Apple doesn't currently sell any other monitors. How is that proof that Apple is trying to personally screw you out of your cash?
Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
Yeah, there is a gap, and I do see it as a problem. No one in the entire thread is disagreeing with that. You ideas on why there is a gap is viewed a little bit more negative than I would, but whatever.
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper.
Another huge jump in logic based on no facts and stretched assumptions. Do you know what Apple takes home at the end of the day from each monitor sale, each iMac sale, and each Mini sale? Can you provide that data to back up any of your conclusions? It sure would go a long way in getting anyone to side with you on that point. However, until you do, I'm going to say this one more time:
Cinema Display = Pro quality Display (I don't give a hoot if your eyes can't see it, the components alone show it, and that is what cost money to make not your eye sight)
Pro Quality = not cheap, don't go looking for a $200 monitor for pro work.
And for the last time, I'm still waiting for someone to show me a display that matches the Cinemas tech specs and qualifications and also cost downwards in the $400 range that people keep speaking about. Because until someone does, I'm inclined to believe, based on my own looking, that Apple is right with the industry on this one (or close) and all our whining on cost means jack.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it.
In light of that little sarcastc jab, the irony is that you are one of, if not the only user, to have admitted to owning a 20" Cinema display in this thread so far :rolleyes:
[quote]I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right?
I'll just quote myself on this one...
[QUOTE=Earendil]You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in back lighting and change in color based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benefits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level monitor for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
But if you had been following the thread you'd know that about me already...
But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
No, you are asking for two very different things here.
1. You are asking Apple to produce a consumer level monitor that you can afford and falls in line with the market. I think everyone agrees with this idea, whether there is a large enough market for Apple to justify it (only Aple costumers would consider them) is up for debate.
and...
2. You are asking Apple to drop the price on their Pro displays without giving a reason (all your reasons apply to a consumer LCD), nor have you provided a similarly speced display to show that Apple is out of line with it's pricing.
There are large difference between a Mini and a G5. Just because most people wouldn't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. Just relax and trust me that in two properly functioning displays, Apple's monitors are very good, and imho should never be compared to Apple's displays unless you are trying to convince a consumer (who can't tell the difference) not to buy it and buy an alternative display. I have done this before. Just like you'd never compare a Mini and a G5 unless grandma was thinking about buying a G5 to surf the web with...
~Tyler
MaenXe
Apr 26, 01:33 PM
trademarking app store. How pompous. What's next, trademarking computer store, book store, pet store? LOL.
App is shorthand for Application, it's been in use for almost 20 years: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=app
App Store is a descriptive term for a shop selling a specific product. Such as Pet Store rather than Domestic Animal Store, or PC Store rather than Computer Store. By Apple's reasoning, the first person who used the term Pet Store should have Trademarked it and cornered the market. But since several companies started selling Pets at their Pet Stores without a Trademark, then the term was considered common place.
Personally, I think that the terms iPhone App Store, iTunes App Store, and Mac App Store should be trademarked and would be respected by the general industry.
Also, in Amazon's defense, there usage is Amazon "AppStore", not Amazon "App Store". So, splitting hairs, it's not the same.
M@
App is shorthand for Application, it's been in use for almost 20 years: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=app
App Store is a descriptive term for a shop selling a specific product. Such as Pet Store rather than Domestic Animal Store, or PC Store rather than Computer Store. By Apple's reasoning, the first person who used the term Pet Store should have Trademarked it and cornered the market. But since several companies started selling Pets at their Pet Stores without a Trademark, then the term was considered common place.
Personally, I think that the terms iPhone App Store, iTunes App Store, and Mac App Store should be trademarked and would be respected by the general industry.
Also, in Amazon's defense, there usage is Amazon "AppStore", not Amazon "App Store". So, splitting hairs, it's not the same.
M@