alent1234
Apr 22, 09:43 AM
Why would Apple release an iMac refresh a couple of months before a new OS debuts? Also, this would be the FASTEST REFRESH IN APPLE HISTORY at 9 months.
You all fell for the hype and made Bri@n T0ng (eat that SEO) and Sea-NET advertising revenue. :rolleyes:
because a lot of people will buy the iMac and then 10.7 for another $29 or so. more money in their pockets
You all fell for the hype and made Bri@n T0ng (eat that SEO) and Sea-NET advertising revenue. :rolleyes:
because a lot of people will buy the iMac and then 10.7 for another $29 or so. more money in their pockets
xelavelobos
Jan 1, 07:29 PM
I am very excited about this year, but apple will be smart not to do too much in one show. I mean how many surprises and new products can they release at one time before the public gets overwhelmed or exhausted (i.e. the dinosaur sequence in king kong)? I think they will focus on a few special things, probably not the phone though.
roland.g
Sep 1, 01:21 PM
knowing Apple they may put a $1,999 price on it at intro, since they know there will be a mad rush of faithful. Then after a month or two when sales settle, drop the price to $1,899 for the holiday season. Both those prices could be $100 lower, depending on what the base config offers.
mlayer
Apr 2, 07:07 PM
Juxtaposition of medical apps to a simple preschool numbers trace shows the broad appeal and power. Sorry competitors, if you think this is just about a web browser on a tablet you clearly have no vision. Apple is yet again skating to where the puck is going.
Also - Peter Coyote's voice always adds gravitas.
Also - Peter Coyote's voice always adds gravitas.
innominato5090
Mar 31, 04:27 AM
Talking about new "features": have you noticed the Fuji wallpaper is different?
The new one has clouds at the base...
can you upload that, please :)
The new one has clouds at the base...
can you upload that, please :)
snberk103
Apr 10, 07:21 PM
....
Really, is there even someone who doesn't know how to drive an automatic ? It's pretty self-explanatory, not much of a learning curve shifting from Park to Drive and hitting the gas. ...
When I was in University my buddy told me the following story - he swore it was true.
His mom drove a manual (and had only every driven manuals), and he had an automatic. One day he was driving her back from the garage where she had left her car for servicing and mom asked if she could drive his car because she wanted to see what it was like.
Naturally, it took her all of 30 seconds to figure it out (though he did note that mom kept trying to depress the clutch, even if she wasn't trying to shift.) Everything was fine, they were sailing through the traffic, and then mom wanted to stop at a store and run some errands. This meant parallel parking since they were still in town. He was a bit worried, because trying to parallel park a strange car is always a bit challenging, and sons always think their mothers are not the best parkers.
And this is what she did. She pulled up right next to an open spot, put on her turn signal, and put the car into (P)ark. She then started goosing the gas. My buddy was looking at his mom, quizzically. Mom was staring at the open spot next them intently, and revving the engine. Finally he asked her what she was doing. It seems she thought that the (P)ark meant that the car 'automatically parked' itself by moving 90� to the side. You told the car which way to go (left or right) via the turn signals.
My buddy explained that that was not how it worked. Mom sighed - pulled up a 1/2 car length, popped it into (R)erverse and parked his car smooth as butter - turned to him and commented that if an "automatic" car with (P)ark couldn't park itself, then what was the point.
Far as know, she drove a manual for the rest of her life. I don't know if he was ever sure whether is mom was pulling his leg or not.
Really, is there even someone who doesn't know how to drive an automatic ? It's pretty self-explanatory, not much of a learning curve shifting from Park to Drive and hitting the gas. ...
When I was in University my buddy told me the following story - he swore it was true.
His mom drove a manual (and had only every driven manuals), and he had an automatic. One day he was driving her back from the garage where she had left her car for servicing and mom asked if she could drive his car because she wanted to see what it was like.
Naturally, it took her all of 30 seconds to figure it out (though he did note that mom kept trying to depress the clutch, even if she wasn't trying to shift.) Everything was fine, they were sailing through the traffic, and then mom wanted to stop at a store and run some errands. This meant parallel parking since they were still in town. He was a bit worried, because trying to parallel park a strange car is always a bit challenging, and sons always think their mothers are not the best parkers.
And this is what she did. She pulled up right next to an open spot, put on her turn signal, and put the car into (P)ark. She then started goosing the gas. My buddy was looking at his mom, quizzically. Mom was staring at the open spot next them intently, and revving the engine. Finally he asked her what she was doing. It seems she thought that the (P)ark meant that the car 'automatically parked' itself by moving 90� to the side. You told the car which way to go (left or right) via the turn signals.
My buddy explained that that was not how it worked. Mom sighed - pulled up a 1/2 car length, popped it into (R)erverse and parked his car smooth as butter - turned to him and commented that if an "automatic" car with (P)ark couldn't park itself, then what was the point.
Far as know, she drove a manual for the rest of her life. I don't know if he was ever sure whether is mom was pulling his leg or not.
mowogg
Jan 3, 02:12 PM
I don't read too much into the Apple home page image. I think it only means that the transition to Intel is over and now Apple can concentrate on other efforts.
I think the keynote will yield few surprises. I foresee a lengthy demonstration of Leopard, giving the consumer POV, and how great it will be. Maybe a few more features will be leaked out, but probably the focus will be on the consumer-level stuff like stationary in mail.app. Also, iChat will take up a lot of time.
I think we'll see some upgrades to the MacPro line. Maybe more cores or processors or something, but what you might expect. Likely Blu-ray BTO option.
iLife will get an update, with most of the changes in iWeb, which will support multiple site construction. It will be more robust and Steve will make a couple of sites with it. iWork will see some more templates and transitions, but no spreadsheet app will be shown. They may offer further integration with iApps and address book/mail (Leopard-only)
iTV (whatever it's called) will make a minor appearance, and some more details will emerge, but other than front row integration, it won't be a big deal.
No phone of any kind will be presented. Steve will publicly quash the rumor saying that Apple has looked at the existing market and can't find a value-add there. After that, a bluetooth iPod/cell phone interface will be presented that allows your iPod to show caller ID and shut off when a call comes in. It also allows for initiating calls from the iPod address book.
iPods will get a HD bump to 100Gb & 60Gb at the same price point, Nano & Shuffles may also get larger storage, but not likely.
No wide screen iPod will be shown. Steve will say it saps too much battery life, and will point to the Zune as the example of "what not to do". Steve will note that most cars sold in the US have iPod integration and how 2007 will be a banner year for iPod integration in home & car.
A Mighty Mouse MKII will debut in both wired and BT form, with a better track ball (non-analog) and industry-leading battery life on the BT version.
I think that'll be about it.
I think the keynote will yield few surprises. I foresee a lengthy demonstration of Leopard, giving the consumer POV, and how great it will be. Maybe a few more features will be leaked out, but probably the focus will be on the consumer-level stuff like stationary in mail.app. Also, iChat will take up a lot of time.
I think we'll see some upgrades to the MacPro line. Maybe more cores or processors or something, but what you might expect. Likely Blu-ray BTO option.
iLife will get an update, with most of the changes in iWeb, which will support multiple site construction. It will be more robust and Steve will make a couple of sites with it. iWork will see some more templates and transitions, but no spreadsheet app will be shown. They may offer further integration with iApps and address book/mail (Leopard-only)
iTV (whatever it's called) will make a minor appearance, and some more details will emerge, but other than front row integration, it won't be a big deal.
No phone of any kind will be presented. Steve will publicly quash the rumor saying that Apple has looked at the existing market and can't find a value-add there. After that, a bluetooth iPod/cell phone interface will be presented that allows your iPod to show caller ID and shut off when a call comes in. It also allows for initiating calls from the iPod address book.
iPods will get a HD bump to 100Gb & 60Gb at the same price point, Nano & Shuffles may also get larger storage, but not likely.
No wide screen iPod will be shown. Steve will say it saps too much battery life, and will point to the Zune as the example of "what not to do". Steve will note that most cars sold in the US have iPod integration and how 2007 will be a banner year for iPod integration in home & car.
A Mighty Mouse MKII will debut in both wired and BT form, with a better track ball (non-analog) and industry-leading battery life on the BT version.
I think that'll be about it.
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@
Mattsasa
Apr 2, 07:54 PM
did you see the backlight bleeding?!? :rolleyes:
your kidding right?
your kidding right?
lynziwow
Nov 25, 10:16 PM
I'm a manager at an eyewear boutique. This is not Sunglasses Hut. We do not carry Oakley. We specialize in high-end, independent, mostly European designers that most people haven't heard of.
$400 is average for a pair of frames. The average pair of rx glasses without insurance is between $700 and $900.
I have never seen a case as intense as that gun case used to protect eyewear, ever! But don't take offense, each to his own.
Just wanted to raise awareness to all these people stating that $200-$400 is "expensive" for eyewear when they are spending $$$$$$ on phones, computers, tvs, etc; which are probably replaced more frequently than the glasses which help them see and are the first accessory others see on them.
Glasses should be as important of an investment as your fancy electronics.
Check out these brands if you're interested: ic! Berlin, Face a Face, Orgreen, Bevel, undostrial, strada del sol, historie du voire, theo, and so many more.
- eyewear nerd:cool:
$400 is average for a pair of frames. The average pair of rx glasses without insurance is between $700 and $900.
I have never seen a case as intense as that gun case used to protect eyewear, ever! But don't take offense, each to his own.
Just wanted to raise awareness to all these people stating that $200-$400 is "expensive" for eyewear when they are spending $$$$$$ on phones, computers, tvs, etc; which are probably replaced more frequently than the glasses which help them see and are the first accessory others see on them.
Glasses should be as important of an investment as your fancy electronics.
Check out these brands if you're interested: ic! Berlin, Face a Face, Orgreen, Bevel, undostrial, strada del sol, historie du voire, theo, and so many more.
- eyewear nerd:cool:
EagerDragon
Jul 19, 08:42 PM
Actually Vista is rather good in various areas in comparison to Windows XP SP2 and it is getting better as MS nears release (I use is it on various Windows developer systems I do work on and note my primary work is Mac development on Mac OS X). Don't discount Vista...
Of course with that said... even if Vista is amazing (in comparison to Tiger/Leopard) the fact that Vista will often require users to upgrade older computers to make it usable will play to Apple's advantage. The upgrade (hardware and software) disruption that Vista is going to cause is a perfect point for folks thinking about switching to a Mac to make the jump... they have to spend the money anyways so why not get a Mac (especially since if they don't like Mac OS X they can fallback on running Vista or XP on it).
Did you noticed you compared Vista to XP and said it was "rather good and getting better?
I agree with most of what you stated, but..... With all the carving that M$ performed on Vista, IMHO there is little reason to drive the current XP users to switch to Vista. Besides as you stated, it is likely to need a large numbers of users to upgrade in order to see some eye candy that looks cool.
You are using it, what will drive the sales?
Compare that to the % of users that upgraded to Tiger in the first and secon year and % wise Tiger was a lot more attractive that Vista will be to upgraders.
Leopard will be an even bigger hit.
But yes I agree with most of what you stated, but it sucks compared to Tiger and Leopard.
Of course with that said... even if Vista is amazing (in comparison to Tiger/Leopard) the fact that Vista will often require users to upgrade older computers to make it usable will play to Apple's advantage. The upgrade (hardware and software) disruption that Vista is going to cause is a perfect point for folks thinking about switching to a Mac to make the jump... they have to spend the money anyways so why not get a Mac (especially since if they don't like Mac OS X they can fallback on running Vista or XP on it).
Did you noticed you compared Vista to XP and said it was "rather good and getting better?
I agree with most of what you stated, but..... With all the carving that M$ performed on Vista, IMHO there is little reason to drive the current XP users to switch to Vista. Besides as you stated, it is likely to need a large numbers of users to upgrade in order to see some eye candy that looks cool.
You are using it, what will drive the sales?
Compare that to the % of users that upgraded to Tiger in the first and secon year and % wise Tiger was a lot more attractive that Vista will be to upgraders.
Leopard will be an even bigger hit.
But yes I agree with most of what you stated, but it sucks compared to Tiger and Leopard.
AlphaDogg
Feb 25, 05:34 PM
http://i884.photobucket.com/albums/ac50/tadziodlu/IMG_1442.jpg
What stand is that (under the iMac)? What lamp is that? What external HDD is that and what interface does it use? What speakers are those? What iPod/iPhone stand is that?
What stand is that (under the iMac)? What lamp is that? What external HDD is that and what interface does it use? What speakers are those? What iPod/iPhone stand is that?
andrew.gw
Apr 3, 10:02 AM
What does the iOS scrollbar look like on pages with a black background?
http://cl.ly/3W1u1A3X0K0K1w0q3N2J/ScrollBar.png
http://cl.ly/3W1u1A3X0K0K1w0q3N2J/ScrollBar.png
*LTD*
Mar 27, 04:13 PM
There is a difference between being realistic about devices and having your head in the clouds. I LOVE my apple gear and can't wait to get an ipad, but I am realistic in it's current capability
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.
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.
skiltrip
Oct 22, 05:49 AM
iPhone 4 is so new on the market that their cases are not easy to find, I think.
Huh? iPhone 4 cases are all over the place.
Huh? iPhone 4 cases are all over the place.
gameface
Apr 12, 08:28 PM
I was at an NAB supermeet in maybe 2003? There was all of 30 of us there. That pictures is insane.
wordoflife
Nov 26, 05:44 PM
Swatch New Gent "black Rebel"
http://www.kstreetwear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Swatch-New-Gent-Watches-03.jpeg
Where did you buy that watch and for how much? I really like it :o
__________________________________________________________
Last purchase:
http://www.i-mockery.com/minimocks/candycane-report/5.jpg
http://www.kstreetwear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Swatch-New-Gent-Watches-03.jpeg
Where did you buy that watch and for how much? I really like it :o
__________________________________________________________
Last purchase:
http://www.i-mockery.com/minimocks/candycane-report/5.jpg
gnagy
Jun 23, 01:54 AM
Imagine you lived in the 1500s and someone showed you two computers. If you had zero prior computer experience, would you pick a touch based computer... or would you pick one where you move some arrow shaped icon with a 2nd device called the mouse.
We're very used to using a mouse, but it's definitely not the most natural way to interact with a computer. It's not easy either. I've seen old people that never could figure out how to double click without moving the cursor 50 pixels from where they wanted to click.
We're very used to using a mouse, but it's definitely not the most natural way to interact with a computer. It's not easy either. I've seen old people that never could figure out how to double click without moving the cursor 50 pixels from where they wanted to click.
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.
RebootD
Apr 12, 09:20 PM
Basically: "You Wait While I Render."
New one will apparently let you keep working while it renders in the background.
Which was understandable back in 2003 but with today's machines it was downright sad you had to 'wait while rendering'.
New one will apparently let you keep working while it renders in the background.
Which was understandable back in 2003 but with today's machines it was downright sad you had to 'wait while rendering'.
TheBobcat
Nov 29, 03:57 PM
My guess would be too much cost for such a small market. There's not a lot of 1080p content out there and even less 1080p displays. For a first gen device, I think 720p would be good enough. Maybe even 480p if it's cheap enough.
Although, in the end it'll probably depend on bandwidth limitations. They never said what protocol they'll be using. Some are assuming 802.11n, but that would limit them to the newest Intel Macs with a firmware upgrade.
True, but two things with that. First, 1080p is expanding rapidly, and it would seem unApple to not go all out with supporting an emerging standard.
Second, didn't iTV have an ethernet jack? If it was wired, they could stream whatever they wanted at almost any res if you had a fast enough network.
Maybe it would limit or upconvert if you were wireless only.
Although, in the end it'll probably depend on bandwidth limitations. They never said what protocol they'll be using. Some are assuming 802.11n, but that would limit them to the newest Intel Macs with a firmware upgrade.
True, but two things with that. First, 1080p is expanding rapidly, and it would seem unApple to not go all out with supporting an emerging standard.
Second, didn't iTV have an ethernet jack? If it was wired, they could stream whatever they wanted at almost any res if you had a fast enough network.
Maybe it would limit or upconvert if you were wireless only.
apb3
Aug 17, 11:49 AM
I don't really see the demand behind adding wireless functionality into the iPod. I think wireless is the buzz word right now and investment managers and industry analysts don't even know what it means.
Bluetooth headphones, if they sound good, and bluetooth syncing is the only function people might use out of this. However, most people charge as they sync, so they would need to connect the iPod to the computer anyway. Bluetooth headphones would need to be charged too, and that is a nuisance.
The only thing semi-useful out of 802.11 is sending audio to airport express. But I use my laptop for that already, so does this really add any functionality? No one I know will be typing in a 256-bit WPA key into their iPod so they can play their iPod music over their friend's airport express, either. At work, I can view and sample my coworker's library on my computer - even when they leave for lunch. And if I like it, I can buy it on iTunes right there. Again, where is the usefulness of a wireless iPod?
I can see how XM radio might be useful to many, even though it doesn't appeal to me. However, I would think Apple would want an exclusive deal if they were to offer this feature.
A man (almost - I think XM blows as compared to Sirius, seriously) after my own heart.... ;)
and so much more succinct.:D
Bluetooth headphones, if they sound good, and bluetooth syncing is the only function people might use out of this. However, most people charge as they sync, so they would need to connect the iPod to the computer anyway. Bluetooth headphones would need to be charged too, and that is a nuisance.
The only thing semi-useful out of 802.11 is sending audio to airport express. But I use my laptop for that already, so does this really add any functionality? No one I know will be typing in a 256-bit WPA key into their iPod so they can play their iPod music over their friend's airport express, either. At work, I can view and sample my coworker's library on my computer - even when they leave for lunch. And if I like it, I can buy it on iTunes right there. Again, where is the usefulness of a wireless iPod?
I can see how XM radio might be useful to many, even though it doesn't appeal to me. However, I would think Apple would want an exclusive deal if they were to offer this feature.
A man (almost - I think XM blows as compared to Sirius, seriously) after my own heart.... ;)
and so much more succinct.:D
Father Jack
Jan 12, 04:27 AM
Maybe Apple's poster actually says more but we can't see the bottom?
Something like: "There's something in the air... blow it out your ass Microsoft" :p
Now that would be cool .. :cool:
Something like: "There's something in the air... blow it out your ass Microsoft" :p
Now that would be cool .. :cool:
Yakuza
Nov 24, 10:08 AM
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41C0o2GAJGL._SS500_.jpg
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
i would say Indidana Jones, but i'm not sure
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
i would say Indidana Jones, but i'm not sure
