twoodcc
Mar 6, 10:29 AM
this is the error i get. if you guys cant help at all ill make a new thread :)
not sure just off of that info. what system are you running it on? tell us what you did to get it going
I'm almost there! 50k left to go!
nice! keep it up!
not sure just off of that info. what system are you running it on? tell us what you did to get it going
I'm almost there! 50k left to go!
nice! keep it up!
MacMan86
Apr 23, 12:56 PM
An undocumented source proves your point, but Apple makes no reply to the allegations? I thought it was a "bug" in the software? And some police departments have known about it for a while too.
Who needs an undocumented source when you could watch WWDC 2010 Session 115 'Using Core Location in iOS 4' at 14 minutes and 30 seconds in and hear Morgan Grainger, a man partly responsible for the Core Location framework in the iPhone SDK (read: all location functionality on iPhone) describe how the iPhone caches nearby cell tower information to help the device find its location in the circumstances above.
Given that we have the engineer partly behind this framework explain that the iPhone caches this information, we know that the iPhone has to be storing this information somewhere. This 'consolidated.db' matches the words in the video perfectly, making it no great assumption that this is the file which fulfils this purpose.
Granted you don't sound like a developer and so won't have access to these videos, but any other developer could do the same and corroborate this.
It being a bug is simply a rumour which has no links to an official source. I'm far more inclined to believe the words of a guy who wrote the code that collects this information in the first place
Who needs an undocumented source when you could watch WWDC 2010 Session 115 'Using Core Location in iOS 4' at 14 minutes and 30 seconds in and hear Morgan Grainger, a man partly responsible for the Core Location framework in the iPhone SDK (read: all location functionality on iPhone) describe how the iPhone caches nearby cell tower information to help the device find its location in the circumstances above.
Given that we have the engineer partly behind this framework explain that the iPhone caches this information, we know that the iPhone has to be storing this information somewhere. This 'consolidated.db' matches the words in the video perfectly, making it no great assumption that this is the file which fulfils this purpose.
Granted you don't sound like a developer and so won't have access to these videos, but any other developer could do the same and corroborate this.
It being a bug is simply a rumour which has no links to an official source. I'm far more inclined to believe the words of a guy who wrote the code that collects this information in the first place
smithrh
Apr 10, 06:01 PM
Harley-Davidson doesn't make automatics. I never learned to drive automatic anyhow, I wouldn't have the first clue what to do in one of them. What does P R N D 2 1 even mean ?
OK, so apparently you don't have experience with automatics...
Actually, you're wrong on both premise. On crowded roads, manuals are better. No need to constantly hit the brakes, you can better control a car's speed with a manual with compression and clutch manipulation. In traffic, I hardly ever touch the brakes.
But yet you have an opinion on how superior your choice of manuals is.
OK, so apparently you don't have experience with automatics...
Actually, you're wrong on both premise. On crowded roads, manuals are better. No need to constantly hit the brakes, you can better control a car's speed with a manual with compression and clutch manipulation. In traffic, I hardly ever touch the brakes.
But yet you have an opinion on how superior your choice of manuals is.
Lollypop
Aug 7, 06:46 AM
Not really. I just moved to Mac and i was surprised by the intuitive networking in OSX. However, i agree that it still could be better. Why the aliases? Why won't it connect to the PC when i type its local IP adress? Why is it so hard to have a permanently mounted network drive on your mac? I keep loosing it, having to re-mount it everytime i have taken my MacBook out of WiFi-range. Such things. Maybe most of it is me being a newbie, but still, that proves that it is not intuitive enough.
Networking in the Finder is one of the biggest complaints people seem to have. Said it before and will say it until its done, FTFF! :cool:
Networking in the Finder is one of the biggest complaints people seem to have. Said it before and will say it until its done, FTFF! :cool:
dashiel
Nov 28, 12:52 PM
microsoft loses money on pretty much every product segment they have except office and windows. though xbox does look like it will be profitable soon enough.
Foxer
Mar 19, 03:41 PM
this is exactley why marketshare has dwindled for Mac, they tell you its our way ( powermac) or if you dont submit then we will cripple the Hell out of the othermacs and leave you wanting, so the worlds says screw you Apple and buys a PC with everything they want in it and makes do with a OS that is less then perfect. This is why Apples new computer sales went to 1.7% of all new sales. Apple is a dictator mini monopoly.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Apple's biggest problem is that most of those in market aren't even aware of the Mac option, or if they are they suspect that you can't get on the internet, or use Word files, or things like that. I know this, because I was one of them only two years ago. I'm not an idiot, I was just never presented with the Mac option. Had I not wandered into the new Apple Store at the mall while waiting for my wife I may never had.
Thus, most people never get to the point of saying, "These computers aren't expandable." It is hard for people on a Mac web board to understand the average computer user, but I will site my parents. They want internet, they want to mess with music and e-mail, maybe some photo printing. Every Mac on the market can do all of this perfectly, no need to worry about expansion. Apple has to find a way to inform the public - and slipping another PowerBook onto some TV show ain't the answer, I never noticed them until I became a Mac head. I have to sit through a Dell commercial every 10 seconds, why am I not sitting through an Apple commercial - and NOT and iPod commercial. They are advertising the only product that doesn't need additional pub.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Apple's biggest problem is that most of those in market aren't even aware of the Mac option, or if they are they suspect that you can't get on the internet, or use Word files, or things like that. I know this, because I was one of them only two years ago. I'm not an idiot, I was just never presented with the Mac option. Had I not wandered into the new Apple Store at the mall while waiting for my wife I may never had.
Thus, most people never get to the point of saying, "These computers aren't expandable." It is hard for people on a Mac web board to understand the average computer user, but I will site my parents. They want internet, they want to mess with music and e-mail, maybe some photo printing. Every Mac on the market can do all of this perfectly, no need to worry about expansion. Apple has to find a way to inform the public - and slipping another PowerBook onto some TV show ain't the answer, I never noticed them until I became a Mac head. I have to sit through a Dell commercial every 10 seconds, why am I not sitting through an Apple commercial - and NOT and iPod commercial. They are advertising the only product that doesn't need additional pub.
Earendil
Nov 27, 09:49 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.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
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.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
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,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
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.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
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.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
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.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
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.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
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.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
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,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
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.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
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.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
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.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
aLoC
Nov 17, 12:09 PM
FB-DIMM are likely the future... it will truly start to will shine when they make available more channels out of the memory controllers allowing bandwidth to scale and it hides memory specifics from the memory controller allowing advancements in DIMMs to remain compatible with existing systems.
It's not the future... these kind of over-architected solutions never win. I predict CPUs, memory and memory controllers will become more tightly integrated over time, not less. FB-DIMM will be gone is a few years.
It's not the future... these kind of over-architected solutions never win. I predict CPUs, memory and memory controllers will become more tightly integrated over time, not less. FB-DIMM will be gone is a few years.
Squonk
Oct 23, 07:02 AM
... and here we go again!
I hope they come out soon. And then I really, really hope that whatever it is, that people do not start moaning about that one too! I cannot guarantee that I won't be sharing my opinion....
Steve - pull the trigger, but only when it's ready for primetime!
I hope they come out soon. And then I really, really hope that whatever it is, that people do not start moaning about that one too! I cannot guarantee that I won't be sharing my opinion....
Steve - pull the trigger, but only when it's ready for primetime!
twoodcc
Nov 27, 04:59 PM
well it depends on the resolution of the monitor. i don't really see this a big deal affecting me, but i can see alot of people buying them though. maybe it's good for Apple, but unless the 20" price comes down, doesn't really help me any
imnotatfault
Aug 19, 06:49 AM
Anyway, would you mind sharing why you want it so bad as I asked above?
I don't think it's really all that necessary until we have a much more prominent wireless infrastructure that isn't T-Mobile trying to charge you 7.99/hr to log on. Until then, it's nearly pointless unless you live in NYC, Boston, Chicago, etc.
I don't think it's really all that necessary until we have a much more prominent wireless infrastructure that isn't T-Mobile trying to charge you 7.99/hr to log on. Until then, it's nearly pointless unless you live in NYC, Boston, Chicago, etc.
SciFrog
Mar 23, 06:06 PM
Hopefully the bigadv will switch very soon to SMP2, they have much better restart rates. I also loose the unit almost everytime if I stop it or reboot...
PlipPlop
Mar 27, 05:15 AM
http://itunes.apple.com/ca/app/dead-space/id396018321?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/ca/app/dead-space-for-ipad/id396019894?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ultimate-mortal-kombat-3/id408070814?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/infinity-blade/id387428400?mt=8&v0=WWW-NAUS-ITSTOP100&ign-mpt=uo%3D2
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/contract-killer/id406351386?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/ca/app/hunters-episode-one-hd/id415284093?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/n-o-v-a-2-near-orbit-vanguard/id400901088?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/modern-combat-2-black-pegasus/id394443824?mt=8
I could go one, but the list would be too long.
So what's it like being stuck in two years ago? Is the Palm Pre still a hot item? LOL
As far as implementing new tech to enhance the gaming experience, I'm perfectly happy to leave it it Apple and their partners. I'm pretty sure they've got it all planned out (and easily paid for) for the next 2-3 years.
Apple has this weird habit of continuing to develop the landmark products they release. Shocking, I know.
On screen buttons and dpads are terrible. Street fighter on the iphone was really hard to control. Buttons are a requirement for any gaming console.
http://itunes.apple.com/ca/app/dead-space-for-ipad/id396019894?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ultimate-mortal-kombat-3/id408070814?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/infinity-blade/id387428400?mt=8&v0=WWW-NAUS-ITSTOP100&ign-mpt=uo%3D2
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/contract-killer/id406351386?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/ca/app/hunters-episode-one-hd/id415284093?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/n-o-v-a-2-near-orbit-vanguard/id400901088?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/modern-combat-2-black-pegasus/id394443824?mt=8
I could go one, but the list would be too long.
So what's it like being stuck in two years ago? Is the Palm Pre still a hot item? LOL
As far as implementing new tech to enhance the gaming experience, I'm perfectly happy to leave it it Apple and their partners. I'm pretty sure they've got it all planned out (and easily paid for) for the next 2-3 years.
Apple has this weird habit of continuing to develop the landmark products they release. Shocking, I know.
On screen buttons and dpads are terrible. Street fighter on the iphone was really hard to control. Buttons are a requirement for any gaming console.
boncellis
Sep 6, 07:35 PM
There has to be something in the cards that Apple plans to implement that will trump Amazon. I just don't think it will be the iPod this time. What's in store, I wonder...
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 02:08 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
That is exactly what I'm thinking! Seriously there is no need for that many GPUs in the Pro and IMac requires a custom card. So where would all of these cards go - XMac is my guess.
Or it could simply be a sign of a unified driver from AMD. That would make sense as it is a smarter approach than the highly targeted drivers of the past.I don't see why Apple would want to start supporting older 5000 cards for said machine? *shrug*
How is it silly ? We're talking about a GPU. Even at 1280x800, the Intel GPU sucks, why would it be silly to want to run games on high settings
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/8
It outperforms the 320M under OS X. It certainly doesn't "suck" as much as you make it out to be.
That is exactly what I'm thinking! Seriously there is no need for that many GPUs in the Pro and IMac requires a custom card. So where would all of these cards go - XMac is my guess.
Or it could simply be a sign of a unified driver from AMD. That would make sense as it is a smarter approach than the highly targeted drivers of the past.I don't see why Apple would want to start supporting older 5000 cards for said machine? *shrug*
How is it silly ? We're talking about a GPU. Even at 1280x800, the Intel GPU sucks, why would it be silly to want to run games on high settings
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/8
It outperforms the 320M under OS X. It certainly doesn't "suck" as much as you make it out to be.
aricher
Nov 28, 09:49 AM
Those numbers are horrible for a holiday season launch.
From Zune to Ruin - the Microsoft Story, coming to book stores soon.
From Zune to Ruin - the Microsoft Story, coming to book stores soon.
cube
Mar 24, 05:20 PM
Actually, you are just confused and trying to back peddle:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12245564&postcount=105
You are talking DirectX version numbers(which already has nothing to do with what we're talking about and has no bearing under OS X) in relation to OpenCL when OpenCL has nothing to do with DirectX? Something doesn't add up here.
I am not trying to back pedal, I was talking about OpenCL before, I've been talking about that and graphics for a while now.
With respect to your objection, what does DirectX 10.1 mean in OpenCL terms? 1.0? 1.1?
All I can see about Sandy Bridge regarding OpenCL is conflicting information. As of now, it has no true OpenCL.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12245564&postcount=105
You are talking DirectX version numbers(which already has nothing to do with what we're talking about and has no bearing under OS X) in relation to OpenCL when OpenCL has nothing to do with DirectX? Something doesn't add up here.
I am not trying to back pedal, I was talking about OpenCL before, I've been talking about that and graphics for a while now.
With respect to your objection, what does DirectX 10.1 mean in OpenCL terms? 1.0? 1.1?
All I can see about Sandy Bridge regarding OpenCL is conflicting information. As of now, it has no true OpenCL.
rmwebs
Mar 25, 03:39 PM
The original iPad is only just hitting 1 year old. At least put in the article the status of the game for the iPad 1...does it work...doesnt it?
QuantumLo0p
Mar 6, 02:23 PM
Why do Americans harbor hate for diesel? I'm not very familiar with the differences between the fuels, other than gasoline is more refined.
There are a lot of old perceptions about diesel. I love diesel; they are inherently more efficient than gasoline engines.
I could say something like- "there are a lot of people in the US stuck on old tech, out dated, dirty, inefficient, gas powered cars that don't last as long as diesels nor have as good as ROI as diesels" but I wouldn't want to upset anyone who owns a technically inferior vehicle so I will keep my thoughts to myself.
:D
There are a lot of old perceptions about diesel. I love diesel; they are inherently more efficient than gasoline engines.
I could say something like- "there are a lot of people in the US stuck on old tech, out dated, dirty, inefficient, gas powered cars that don't last as long as diesels nor have as good as ROI as diesels" but I wouldn't want to upset anyone who owns a technically inferior vehicle so I will keep my thoughts to myself.
:D
DewGuy1999
Feb 22, 07:39 PM
I wish I could find a Mini DisplayPort to DVI cable, but those don't seem to exist.
MonoPrice.com> CABLES > Video Cables - DisplayPort > Mini DisplayPort to DVI Cables (http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10246&cs_id=1024604)
MonoPrice.com> CABLES > Video Cables - DisplayPort > Mini DisplayPort to DVI Cables (http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10246&cs_id=1024604)
Irishman
Apr 20, 07:32 AM
I'm sure it's been done to death, but I spent some time actually thinking about realistic-ish speculations of what the new line could look like. I think they're going to get rid of one SKU ( the step up 27" without the quad i7), because it's kind of redundant, and for the $100 price difference, I can't imagine anyone NOT spending the extra modey to get the quad core). The only spec that is more of a wishful thinking piece is the inclusion of the HD6800M 1GB card in the 27" quad i7. THAT would be a beast!
Common Upgrades
1. Thunderbolt port
2. HDMI out
3. Sandybridge
Now, here's the model breakdown:
21.5" (1920x1080) display
2.8 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
500 GB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1199.99
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.2 GHz i5 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.2 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 5870 (512MB)
HDMI out
$1699.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.5 GHz quad i7 processor
8 GB RAM
2 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 6970 (1 GB)
HDMI out
$1999.99
Common Upgrades
1. Thunderbolt port
2. HDMI out
3. Sandybridge
Now, here's the model breakdown:
21.5" (1920x1080) display
2.8 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
500 GB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1199.99
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.2 GHz i5 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.2 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 5870 (512MB)
HDMI out
$1699.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.5 GHz quad i7 processor
8 GB RAM
2 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 6970 (1 GB)
HDMI out
$1999.99
kingtj
Sep 7, 02:24 PM
I thought this was a great idea too, except when I mull it over - I'm not so sure Apple will really go there. With the larger variety of Intel iMacs available now, it looks like Apple's really trying to build one for every possible home-user or small office user's need. I agree that it'd be nice to have an expandable, upgradable Mac with no display built-in that doesn't carry the price tag of the Mac Pro line -- but think about users like us who say that. We're in the minority of "power users" or "more advanced users". Apple has made it pretty clear that if you're in that category, they want you to invest in one of their "Pro" systems. Otherwise, they cater to folks who see their computer as an appliance or tool and just want something they can pretty much plug in and use. These customers are not interested or comfortable doing things like opening up a system and upgrading video cards.
The Mini is Apple's answer to any remaining "casual users" who throw a fit because they just want a new computer to plug into their existing keyboard, mouse, monitor, and maybe USB hub they bought before.....
The "void" you talk about in Apple's product line is one I *think* Apple leaves there willfully.
cmon apple. get a clue.
these little mini's are nice but not great. there is a real void in your product lineup.
we need something with like a intel conroe chip, larger case, the ability to put in a better graphics card, and the basics like more ram, bigger hard drive and stuff.
give us a bigger mid sized tower type computer.
we all don't want to buy something with a screen. nor do we want some tiny puny non-upgradeable thing like the mac mini.
give us better options.
The Mini is Apple's answer to any remaining "casual users" who throw a fit because they just want a new computer to plug into their existing keyboard, mouse, monitor, and maybe USB hub they bought before.....
The "void" you talk about in Apple's product line is one I *think* Apple leaves there willfully.
cmon apple. get a clue.
these little mini's are nice but not great. there is a real void in your product lineup.
we need something with like a intel conroe chip, larger case, the ability to put in a better graphics card, and the basics like more ram, bigger hard drive and stuff.
give us a bigger mid sized tower type computer.
we all don't want to buy something with a screen. nor do we want some tiny puny non-upgradeable thing like the mac mini.
give us better options.
Deathlok2001
Mar 25, 07:40 PM
Jesus! :eek: As Mac Addict use to say, freaking awesome! (does that mag still exist?) This just SOLD me on an iPad 2! :D
EJR
Sep 14, 09:04 PM
I caved and decided to just go ahead and order the Incipio dermaSHOT case today. I'm really waiting for Otterbox to release their new case, but apparently they haven't even made a final decision on it yet and I'm going to need something to hold me over till they do, so this seemed to be the best choice for me right now. I'm pretty sure a screen protector would have cost me about 5 bucks after shipping, so 19.99 for both the case/screen protector/stand looked like a pretty good deal to me. I'll put pics up whenever I do receive it.
Thanks guys.
Thanks guys.