Piggie
Mar 25, 08:11 AM
Just realised I was being stupid yesterday.
I forgot about the Mac Pro's
when it said ATI 6970 I thought, Yay, finally an iMac that normal people will buy will be fitted into an iMac and make it a worthy competitor to a good spec PC.
Then it dawned on me, I'm stupid and probably none of the upper end models will find their way into iMac's will they? :(
I forgot about the Mac Pro's
when it said ATI 6970 I thought, Yay, finally an iMac that normal people will buy will be fitted into an iMac and make it a worthy competitor to a good spec PC.
Then it dawned on me, I'm stupid and probably none of the upper end models will find their way into iMac's will they? :(
Cagle
Apr 3, 01:15 AM
Wow that's a little extreme
that's not extreme, that's pure nuts :eek:
great ad, very restrained, no bashing, focusing on great software, something apple really needs to do to make the ipad more than an oversized ipod.
hard to believe the same company signed off on the recent iphone ads. good grief....
that's not extreme, that's pure nuts :eek:
great ad, very restrained, no bashing, focusing on great software, something apple really needs to do to make the ipad more than an oversized ipod.
hard to believe the same company signed off on the recent iphone ads. good grief....
macEfan
Nov 29, 10:30 PM
Its the Pippin 2!! this time its intel instead of Bandai!
lets hope so!
I want a pippin, but they are all so rare and expensive... would be grate if the itv let you play games on your tv!
lets hope so!
I want a pippin, but they are all so rare and expensive... would be grate if the itv let you play games on your tv!
vartanarsen
Apr 26, 01:22 PM
how hilarious would it be if we saw those Martin Glick lawyers in the courtroom all using iPhones LOL!
richardsim7
Mar 22, 04:40 PM
Yeah but are they going to improve the quality? The DAC on the iPod Classic is bloody terrible! It makes me sad :(
Tmelon
Mar 30, 08:55 PM
Is there a DMG or is the App Store / Redemption Code the only way to update? What about offline computers?
Redemption code seems to be the only way. For some reason I can't get mine to work.
Redemption code seems to be the only way. For some reason I can't get mine to work.
Peterkro
Mar 22, 06:13 AM
U.S. F-15 crashes in Libya revolutionaries rescue aircrew.
(fuknukles shoot and injure six of the rescuers )
@skunk I finally worked it out "head for the hills".:)
(fuknukles shoot and injure six of the rescuers )
@skunk I finally worked it out "head for the hills".:)
hunkaburningluv
Mar 26, 08:18 PM
You clearly lack any sort of vision. You couldn't be more wrong about the future of gaming.
that's awfully nice of you.
Methinks you need yo get your head out of the clouds when it comes to hardcore gaming.
I'll agree that the future of casual games may be going in this direction, but core gamers will use this to supplement their gaming.
Come back when you can play gears, modern warfare or Uncharted and have the same or better tactile experience and I'll gladly eat my own words. Until then it's all a pipe dream.
You need a real dose of reality.
Whilst tablet gaming will never overtake console gaming, unless a TV dock and controller is introduced, its always fun to see a portable device that is capable of outputting games at 1920x1080, where the xbox 360 and ps3 (retail games only) can not.
They seriously think the 360 can last another 5 years? Considering this is only the iPad's 2nd release, I wouldn't bet on it.
Not exactly true:
PS3 games running in 1080p
Fifa Street 3 = 1920x1080 (no AA)
Full Auto 2 (demo) = 1920x1080 (4x AA)
GT5 Prologue (demo) = 1080p mode is 1280x1080 (2xAA) in-game while the garage/pit/showrooms are 1920x1080 with no AA. 720p mode is 1280x720 (4xAA)
Marvel: Ultimate Alliance = 1280x720 & 1920x1080 (no AA)
MLB09: The Show = 1280x720 (2xAA) or 1920x1080 (no AA)
NBA07 (demo) = 1920x1080 (no AA)
NBA08 (demo) = 1920x1080 (no AA)
NBA Street Home court (screenshot) = 1920x1080 (no AA
Ridge Racer 7 (demo) = 1920x1080 (no AA)
Sacred 2: Fallen Angel = 1280x720 when sub-HD output selected, 1920x1080 for any HD output (no AA)
Virtua Tennis 3 = 1920x1080 (2x AA)
World Series Of Poker 2008 = 1920x1080 (2xAA)
there's probably a few more for the 360 - BUT, IMO resolution isn't the be all and end all of visuals, take the uncharted series, it isn't 1080p, but it's spectacular looking where as Sacred 2 looks like crap.
If Kinect wasn't the run away success it was, then yeah, I would have expected some announcement this or next e3 for the 360, but it looks like the Wii 2 will probably be announced first.
The PS3 will probably have some legs actually, as people get more and more used to the developer tools (as they are now) then we'll see more and more impressive titles graphically.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Yeah, and you can unplug it, put it in your bag, play it on the train, surf the web, check your email, edit your movie ...bit more than a $400 controller
you make a good point, but to really excel at gaming, you can't have a jack of all trades device - look at the PSP for instance- great wee machine, but it was far too spread, functionality wise to be a great success. For this device to appeal to the core gamer it needs to be designed specifically for core gaming, as it is the now (and there's nothing wrong with it this way) it's for casual gamers or 'pick up for 5 mins' kinda games
that's awfully nice of you.
Methinks you need yo get your head out of the clouds when it comes to hardcore gaming.
I'll agree that the future of casual games may be going in this direction, but core gamers will use this to supplement their gaming.
Come back when you can play gears, modern warfare or Uncharted and have the same or better tactile experience and I'll gladly eat my own words. Until then it's all a pipe dream.
You need a real dose of reality.
Whilst tablet gaming will never overtake console gaming, unless a TV dock and controller is introduced, its always fun to see a portable device that is capable of outputting games at 1920x1080, where the xbox 360 and ps3 (retail games only) can not.
They seriously think the 360 can last another 5 years? Considering this is only the iPad's 2nd release, I wouldn't bet on it.
Not exactly true:
PS3 games running in 1080p
Fifa Street 3 = 1920x1080 (no AA)
Full Auto 2 (demo) = 1920x1080 (4x AA)
GT5 Prologue (demo) = 1080p mode is 1280x1080 (2xAA) in-game while the garage/pit/showrooms are 1920x1080 with no AA. 720p mode is 1280x720 (4xAA)
Marvel: Ultimate Alliance = 1280x720 & 1920x1080 (no AA)
MLB09: The Show = 1280x720 (2xAA) or 1920x1080 (no AA)
NBA07 (demo) = 1920x1080 (no AA)
NBA08 (demo) = 1920x1080 (no AA)
NBA Street Home court (screenshot) = 1920x1080 (no AA
Ridge Racer 7 (demo) = 1920x1080 (no AA)
Sacred 2: Fallen Angel = 1280x720 when sub-HD output selected, 1920x1080 for any HD output (no AA)
Virtua Tennis 3 = 1920x1080 (2x AA)
World Series Of Poker 2008 = 1920x1080 (2xAA)
there's probably a few more for the 360 - BUT, IMO resolution isn't the be all and end all of visuals, take the uncharted series, it isn't 1080p, but it's spectacular looking where as Sacred 2 looks like crap.
If Kinect wasn't the run away success it was, then yeah, I would have expected some announcement this or next e3 for the 360, but it looks like the Wii 2 will probably be announced first.
The PS3 will probably have some legs actually, as people get more and more used to the developer tools (as they are now) then we'll see more and more impressive titles graphically.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Yeah, and you can unplug it, put it in your bag, play it on the train, surf the web, check your email, edit your movie ...bit more than a $400 controller
you make a good point, but to really excel at gaming, you can't have a jack of all trades device - look at the PSP for instance- great wee machine, but it was far too spread, functionality wise to be a great success. For this device to appeal to the core gamer it needs to be designed specifically for core gaming, as it is the now (and there's nothing wrong with it this way) it's for casual gamers or 'pick up for 5 mins' kinda games
petpirepete
Jun 22, 01:24 PM
I doubt 10.7 will be such an overhaul. Probably more like Mac OS X 11.0 or a totally new naming scheme.
I gess you mean OS XI or OS 11.0 :rolleyes:
I gess you mean OS XI or OS 11.0 :rolleyes:
Multimedia
Sep 6, 11:55 AM
I just bought a Core Duo on the 21st, needless to say I'm pissed. Anyone know apple's price match policy?If you call and complain, they might give you a refund for the difference.You're just over 2 weeks. Be persistent and ask to speak to a supervisor.
SeaFox
Dec 28, 02:23 AM
Here is your quote SeaFox.
You are an condescending individual and take my post out of context.
You can't please all of the people all of the time.
"I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly."
I stand by the statement. WebTV failed because at the time everyone had CRT TVs, which are much blurrier than a computer monitor. Even if you are using a new plasma screen set you have to account for how you use your device. One sits in front of their monitor by a couple feet. This makes 12 point text readable. Now, step back from this thread about six feet or so, however far you usually sit from your TV, and you'll see why. Even if you're viewing the screen at the real resolution of the HD set (1920x1080 for the real nice sets) you're still not going to be wanting to read long passages to text from your TV. Kinda like people don't like reading books in their entirety one screen at a time in Acrobat.
When you ask a home entertainment device to perform the functions of a regular computer you're adding all sorts of complexity and starting down a slippery slope. Let's say Apple added the ability to view Word files to the iTV. Someone would complain that they couldn't edit them. Same with iMovie files. Now you have to add that functionality. Then someone would say "well, what about image files? I can already watch my iPhoto library, why can't I do color and brightness/contrast correction?"
This is exactly the same thing that comes up about the iPod and the Apple Phone. Yeah, the iPod has no built-in FM tuner, no voice memo ability, no built in recording ability, built in FM transmitter for the car, ect. And adding these features would make the interface more complicated, when one of the things that makes the iPod such a hit is it's simplicity. Why do current music playing phones suck? Because the player functionality is hidden under a bunch of unintuitive menus, just like most of the other bells and whistles that may have influenced you to buy the phone to begin with. It's the current state of overly complicated interface design that gets people excited about Apple entering the cell phone market.
Edit: Also, one last point. If you put too much functionality into the iTV that is normally relegated to a regular Mac, then charge less for the iTV, you're going to eat into sales of the Mac Mini. Apple wouldn't do this, and this is the main reason I don't think you'll see the ability to open Word files or surf the Net with the iTV, that and it just sounds like a weird feature to have in a set top box.
If you've got your Mini hooked up to your TV and its working good for you I applaud you. The iTV is clearly not aiming for your type of consumer. I've read articles about setting up Minis as PVR's with HD sets, and invariably the indivdulal has some difficulty finding a monitor resolution and refresh rate the HD set will play along with at first, and actual use of the device is hobbled by needing a wireless keyboard or similar. Apple is aiming for the average TV watching consumer with the iTV, who I can tell you from personal experience are not nearly as smart.
You are an condescending individual and take my post out of context.
You can't please all of the people all of the time.
"I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly."
I stand by the statement. WebTV failed because at the time everyone had CRT TVs, which are much blurrier than a computer monitor. Even if you are using a new plasma screen set you have to account for how you use your device. One sits in front of their monitor by a couple feet. This makes 12 point text readable. Now, step back from this thread about six feet or so, however far you usually sit from your TV, and you'll see why. Even if you're viewing the screen at the real resolution of the HD set (1920x1080 for the real nice sets) you're still not going to be wanting to read long passages to text from your TV. Kinda like people don't like reading books in their entirety one screen at a time in Acrobat.
When you ask a home entertainment device to perform the functions of a regular computer you're adding all sorts of complexity and starting down a slippery slope. Let's say Apple added the ability to view Word files to the iTV. Someone would complain that they couldn't edit them. Same with iMovie files. Now you have to add that functionality. Then someone would say "well, what about image files? I can already watch my iPhoto library, why can't I do color and brightness/contrast correction?"
This is exactly the same thing that comes up about the iPod and the Apple Phone. Yeah, the iPod has no built-in FM tuner, no voice memo ability, no built in recording ability, built in FM transmitter for the car, ect. And adding these features would make the interface more complicated, when one of the things that makes the iPod such a hit is it's simplicity. Why do current music playing phones suck? Because the player functionality is hidden under a bunch of unintuitive menus, just like most of the other bells and whistles that may have influenced you to buy the phone to begin with. It's the current state of overly complicated interface design that gets people excited about Apple entering the cell phone market.
Edit: Also, one last point. If you put too much functionality into the iTV that is normally relegated to a regular Mac, then charge less for the iTV, you're going to eat into sales of the Mac Mini. Apple wouldn't do this, and this is the main reason I don't think you'll see the ability to open Word files or surf the Net with the iTV, that and it just sounds like a weird feature to have in a set top box.
If you've got your Mini hooked up to your TV and its working good for you I applaud you. The iTV is clearly not aiming for your type of consumer. I've read articles about setting up Minis as PVR's with HD sets, and invariably the indivdulal has some difficulty finding a monitor resolution and refresh rate the HD set will play along with at first, and actual use of the device is hobbled by needing a wireless keyboard or similar. Apple is aiming for the average TV watching consumer with the iTV, who I can tell you from personal experience are not nearly as smart.
iJohnHenry
Apr 10, 07:10 PM
Miata's are actually very good driving cars.
Yes, and excellent value for your dollar.
If I could afford a second car, just for sport, I would try to wedge myself into one.
But I really want an S-2000. :(
Yes, and excellent value for your dollar.
If I could afford a second car, just for sport, I would try to wedge myself into one.
But I really want an S-2000. :(
walleyealx
Oct 23, 05:18 PM
any chance you think they are gonna put the update the MB the same time they do the MBP's?
kresh
Jul 19, 07:27 PM
Such short memories...
2001-Q1 would be when the "Dot.com Bubble" burst. The whole PC industry tanked, not just Apple. Motorola was also struggling to bring faster G4 processors to market, if I remember correctly.
Ah, those were the days.
A one page web-site, drooling capital venurists, a silly name like "BoxOfRox.com", and the day of your IPO your stock was $100 a share. Set for life I tell ya.
2001-Q1 would be when the "Dot.com Bubble" burst. The whole PC industry tanked, not just Apple. Motorola was also struggling to bring faster G4 processors to market, if I remember correctly.
Ah, those were the days.
A one page web-site, drooling capital venurists, a silly name like "BoxOfRox.com", and the day of your IPO your stock was $100 a share. Set for life I tell ya.
Ugg
Mar 31, 02:44 PM
The American obsession with WWII simply isn't healthy.
Admittedly, the Brits aren't very good at letting it go either.
Admittedly, the Brits aren't very good at letting it go either.
tokevino
Aug 7, 12:24 AM
I am buying an iMac very soon, and I just want a 64-bit intel core in it. Cmon merom!
IMHO, only Mac Pro and MacBook Pro will get the chance for Core 2s. Intel simply doesn't have the production, yet.
Do you have a particular need for 64 bit computing?
IMHO, only Mac Pro and MacBook Pro will get the chance for Core 2s. Intel simply doesn't have the production, yet.
Do you have a particular need for 64 bit computing?
yukyuklee
Feb 24, 07:54 PM
here's another...
know-it-all5
Jan 1, 07:07 PM
that pic, means a great macworld. it means jobs is going all out for the 30th anniversary things.
vincenz
Apr 3, 01:10 AM
Great ad, love the new direction
daneoni
Sep 1, 02:26 PM
I think it'll be a crime for Apple not to use Conroes in the iMac, they withstood the G5 processors so i dont see any reason as to why they cant do the same for Conroe. Using only merom or xeon processors is just to big a gap and is not ideal. Worse it may plumet the iMac sales unless there is a must have feature in the new revision.
Why would i want to upgrade from a current core duo imac to a merom imac when the performance difference is only 10-15% at best...for a desktop it makes no sense whatsoever and that means the iMac would purely be form over function. The again Apple fans tend to buy anything no matter how illogical
Why would i want to upgrade from a current core duo imac to a merom imac when the performance difference is only 10-15% at best...for a desktop it makes no sense whatsoever and that means the iMac would purely be form over function. The again Apple fans tend to buy anything no matter how illogical
JRM PowerPod
Aug 7, 05:03 AM
I think us Aussies make up a fair portion of this forum
aswitcher
Jan 12, 05:23 PM
AirMac
AirMacExtreme AirMacPro
Maybe
AirMacExtreme AirMacPro
Maybe
lordonuthin
Oct 16, 02:20 PM
congrats to whiterabbit for hitting 1 million!
Thanks, and sorry I just moved past you:D for now anyway...
Thanks, and sorry I just moved past you:D for now anyway...
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.
0 comments:
Post a Comment