steve_hill4
Jul 27, 02:07 PM
How about a new Mac at WWDC?
Lower Model:
CConroe E6300 - 1.86 GHz � FSB1066 � 2 MB cache - ($185)
1GB RAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
Double-layer SuperDrive (DVD+R DL/DVD�RW/CD-RW)
One open PCI-Express expansion slot
One open Optical drive slot [maybe] (i.e. for 2nd DVD drive)
Graphics Card with 128MB SDRAM
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0, USB/FW800
Remote [(?] I think this box will still be small enough to fit into home entertainment setups.]
Keyboard, Mighty Mouse...................................................... $999
Some Options:
Conroe E6600 - 2.40 GHz � FSB1066 � 4 MB cache � (+$100)
Wireless Keyboard/Mouse +$60
Add DVD/CD ROM drive (in 2nd slot) + $50
250GB SATA hard drive +$75
+1GB RAM (2GB total) +$100
+3GB RAM (4GB total) +$300
Slightly Better Graphics Card with 256MB SDRAM + $50
Much Better Graphics Card +$200+
While I like your thinking, your mock-up is wrong. If Apple are going to release a mid-Tower it has to appeal to both gamers and those looking for a headless iMac. They would really have to bring out about three main models, one which was basically an upgradable iMac spec for a couple to few hundred bucks less than the real deal and two higher spec conroes, (short of Mac Pro though). From what I can see, yours looks too small to easily customise, which would appeal to gamers.
Single optical, single HD (2nd slot free), assume better specs will mainly lie with graphics and ram.
Lower Model:
CConroe E6300 - 1.86 GHz � FSB1066 � 2 MB cache - ($185)
1GB RAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
Double-layer SuperDrive (DVD+R DL/DVD�RW/CD-RW)
One open PCI-Express expansion slot
One open Optical drive slot [maybe] (i.e. for 2nd DVD drive)
Graphics Card with 128MB SDRAM
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0, USB/FW800
Remote [(?] I think this box will still be small enough to fit into home entertainment setups.]
Keyboard, Mighty Mouse...................................................... $999
Some Options:
Conroe E6600 - 2.40 GHz � FSB1066 � 4 MB cache � (+$100)
Wireless Keyboard/Mouse +$60
Add DVD/CD ROM drive (in 2nd slot) + $50
250GB SATA hard drive +$75
+1GB RAM (2GB total) +$100
+3GB RAM (4GB total) +$300
Slightly Better Graphics Card with 256MB SDRAM + $50
Much Better Graphics Card +$200+
While I like your thinking, your mock-up is wrong. If Apple are going to release a mid-Tower it has to appeal to both gamers and those looking for a headless iMac. They would really have to bring out about three main models, one which was basically an upgradable iMac spec for a couple to few hundred bucks less than the real deal and two higher spec conroes, (short of Mac Pro though). From what I can see, yours looks too small to easily customise, which would appeal to gamers.
Single optical, single HD (2nd slot free), assume better specs will mainly lie with graphics and ram.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 1, 05:10 AM
It's life Captain but not as we know it.:confused:
I don't understand.
I don't understand.
FF_productions
Aug 15, 11:34 AM
Check it out!
http://barefeats.com/quad06.html
The 3 ghz Mac Pro is neck and neck with the G5 Quad in the Adobe benchmarks, sick considering the fact it's running under rosetta!!
http://barefeats.com/quad06.html
The 3 ghz Mac Pro is neck and neck with the G5 Quad in the Adobe benchmarks, sick considering the fact it's running under rosetta!!
drlunanerd
Aug 25, 05:08 PM
I've just come out the other side of a protracted saga with AppleCare.
Bought my first personal Apple laptop, a MacBook, in May (having supported and bought a lot of their hardware over the years in my job).
It had a couple of faults so I decided to send it in to get repaired.
It took them 2 months to get a working laptop back to me.
After 1 month I had the original MacBook returned, which they hadn't repaired at all, apparently due to spare parts availabilty problems.
After another 2 weeks they sent a replacement MacBook. Which was DOA. At this point I asked for a refund as I had no confidence in the quality control of the product.
Customer Relations then offered me an upgrade to a new Macbook Pro, which I have now and am happy with.
So a happy ending, but a disgracefully long wait to get to it. Unfortunately this has been my experience with AppleCare over the years - it takes far too long to get hardware repaired - whether you take it to an Authorised Repair Centre or send it to AppleCare. It's useless in a business environment. At the least Apple need to add a next business day service, just like all the other 'tier one' PC manufacturers do. I'm baffled why Apple don't offer this.
Bought my first personal Apple laptop, a MacBook, in May (having supported and bought a lot of their hardware over the years in my job).
It had a couple of faults so I decided to send it in to get repaired.
It took them 2 months to get a working laptop back to me.
After 1 month I had the original MacBook returned, which they hadn't repaired at all, apparently due to spare parts availabilty problems.
After another 2 weeks they sent a replacement MacBook. Which was DOA. At this point I asked for a refund as I had no confidence in the quality control of the product.
Customer Relations then offered me an upgrade to a new Macbook Pro, which I have now and am happy with.
So a happy ending, but a disgracefully long wait to get to it. Unfortunately this has been my experience with AppleCare over the years - it takes far too long to get hardware repaired - whether you take it to an Authorised Repair Centre or send it to AppleCare. It's useless in a business environment. At the least Apple need to add a next business day service, just like all the other 'tier one' PC manufacturers do. I'm baffled why Apple don't offer this.
REDolution
Apr 10, 04:20 AM
All the rumours appear to be about FCP8, does anyone else think that DVDSP, STP, Motion, Compressor and Color have all been left as is?
Ivabign
Apr 6, 03:58 PM
Nice...I'm glad to have a more rare piece of hardware. I love mine and have no issues, it'll only get better over time.Reminds me of the days of the RAZR, that's what the iPhone and iPad have become.
Honda sells a TON more cars than BMW by a huge factor...I'd rather drive a BMW, I guess you're all happy with the Hondas :)
I think if you were told you could only use unpaved roads in your BMW - you'd beat a path to your Honda dealer.
Honda sells a TON more cars than BMW by a huge factor...I'd rather drive a BMW, I guess you're all happy with the Hondas :)
I think if you were told you could only use unpaved roads in your BMW - you'd beat a path to your Honda dealer.
rdowns
Apr 27, 02:46 PM
Really guys? We're going to argue it may be a forgery now. :rolleyes:
Reach
Apr 12, 03:01 PM
Would not excluding capture from tape be quite dumb?
Maybe I'm the stone age man using XH A1...
Maybe I'm the stone age man using XH A1...
LethalWolfe
Apr 10, 12:45 AM
I'm a little confused...why was Avid presenting at a Final Cut Pro User Group's meeting anyway? Do they just come in and are like "Hey, you've all made a mistake!" or something?
Long story short, because the people that make up the groups want it and the other companies (Adobe, Avid, Canon, AJA, Blackmagic, etc.,) don't want to pass up a chance to talk to their demographic directly. Although still FCP-centric there are many other tools that editors are interested in learning about and the user groups accommodate that. Apple hasn't really been on the ball the last few years and companies like Adobe and Avid have been stepping up their game which, in my comings and goings, has kicked up the most interest in non-Apple software by FCP users I've seen since I first bought FCP 9 years ago.
Sure, there are die-hard fanboys but most editors realize these are just tools and want the best ones for the job and right now there is more competition in the prosumer price range than ever. For example, Apple Color used the best deal in town by far for coloring grading apps but last year Blackmagic purcahsed DaVinci (the gold standard in color correction) and dropped the price to $1000 for the software-only version. Perviously the lowest point of entry to get a DaVinci was over $200,000, AFAIK. Baselight, another high-end color grading system, just announced a Baselight plug-in for FCP that'll be available this fall for "less than $1000".
Lethal
Long story short, because the people that make up the groups want it and the other companies (Adobe, Avid, Canon, AJA, Blackmagic, etc.,) don't want to pass up a chance to talk to their demographic directly. Although still FCP-centric there are many other tools that editors are interested in learning about and the user groups accommodate that. Apple hasn't really been on the ball the last few years and companies like Adobe and Avid have been stepping up their game which, in my comings and goings, has kicked up the most interest in non-Apple software by FCP users I've seen since I first bought FCP 9 years ago.
Sure, there are die-hard fanboys but most editors realize these are just tools and want the best ones for the job and right now there is more competition in the prosumer price range than ever. For example, Apple Color used the best deal in town by far for coloring grading apps but last year Blackmagic purcahsed DaVinci (the gold standard in color correction) and dropped the price to $1000 for the software-only version. Perviously the lowest point of entry to get a DaVinci was over $200,000, AFAIK. Baselight, another high-end color grading system, just announced a Baselight plug-in for FCP that'll be available this fall for "less than $1000".
Lethal
jaxstate
Aug 11, 02:40 PM
It will not be carrier free. They'll be able to see more phone buy letting them go for a cheaper price w/2-year agreement. Buying a celly without a plan can be quite expensive.
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 14, 10:46 PM
The gameplay vids show a ton of changes. Damage (to both the cars and tracks it looks like. I think i saw tire tracks in the grass like Motorstorm has), prettier gfx, a whole new physics engine (i read that prologue used an updated gt4 engine and gt5's is completely rebuilt), etc...
I'm really looking forward to it. I enjoyed 4 quite a bit until it got into the super fast races. I have more fun racing a slightly tuned 350z instead of a completely modified GT that is putting 800+hp on the road.
I'm really looking forward to it. I enjoyed 4 quite a bit until it got into the super fast races. I have more fun racing a slightly tuned 350z instead of a completely modified GT that is putting 800+hp on the road.
yoak
Apr 6, 03:08 AM
4GB? Do you realize how many DVDs FCS is? Unless Apple is going to severely cut up the package and de-studio it, no way is 4GB nearly enough space. Aperture is fine as a download b/c it's a relatively small program. FCS is a monster. It needs to be on media. I can't hog up my bandwidth to d/l a 16+GB suite.
4GB is roughly the size of the apps in FCS, the other 40GB are loops, templates et.
4GB is roughly the size of the apps in FCS, the other 40GB are loops, templates et.
tartufo
Apr 12, 08:27 AM
I am Sorry but I have to say something here. your ignorance amuses me.
si alex neh dlm cite neh,
alex pettyfer vanessa hudgens
alex pettyfer and vanessa
alex pettyfer in an unkown
Alex Pettyfer and Vanessa
Vanessa Hudgens and Alex
Cameront9
Aug 7, 05:02 PM
Like the whole 3ghz thing?
Ahh, but that was a different situation. In that case, Steve said that, but was dependent on IBM to make it come true.
In this Case, steve is only dependent on his own company to make it come true.
And did anyone else laugh today when they showed the top of the line Mac Pro--at 3Ghz?
Ahh, but that was a different situation. In that case, Steve said that, but was dependent on IBM to make it come true.
In this Case, steve is only dependent on his own company to make it come true.
And did anyone else laugh today when they showed the top of the line Mac Pro--at 3Ghz?
ergle2
Sep 15, 12:50 PM
More pedantic details for those who are interested... :)
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
scott523
Sep 19, 07:52 AM
All I have to say is:
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
I agree what you said, but at least it's what I've been waiting to hear. :D
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
I agree what you said, but at least it's what I've been waiting to hear. :D
Shasterball
Apr 19, 01:58 PM
Parties do not understate potential damages in a lawsuit. No way. No how.
Cougarcat
Mar 26, 12:56 PM
Do you use stacks for accessing applications? If yes, then why wouldn't you want to use launchpad?
I use Spotlight, but Launchpad is terribly inefficient compared to stacks. You have to click on its icon to invoke it, hunt through potentially a bunch of different screens, click on a folder if you've organized your apps, and then click on your app. With stacks, I move my cursor down to the dock, click on the appropriate stack, and then click on my app. 2 clicks vs a button press, a bunch of swipes, hunting, and 2 more clicks.
I use Spotlight, but Launchpad is terribly inefficient compared to stacks. You have to click on its icon to invoke it, hunt through potentially a bunch of different screens, click on a folder if you've organized your apps, and then click on your app. With stacks, I move my cursor down to the dock, click on the appropriate stack, and then click on my app. 2 clicks vs a button press, a bunch of swipes, hunting, and 2 more clicks.
Multimedia
Jul 27, 01:55 PM
Well it's back to the future for all of us. Remember when the Mac was going 64-bit with the introduction of the G5 PowerMac on June 23, 2003? :rolleyes: Only more than three years later and we're doing it all over again thanks to Yonah's 7 month retrograde.
aloshka
Apr 25, 03:08 PM
My Garmin saves way points too!
SUE THEM!!!! I don't understand how my personal information can be on my phone. I'm suing everyone! I'm suing mac rumors too, because I just posted a private message, and it's visible on this forum.
SUE THEM!!!! I don't understand how my personal information can be on my phone. I'm suing everyone! I'm suing mac rumors too, because I just posted a private message, and it's visible on this forum.
Chupa Chupa
Apr 10, 12:03 PM
DVD Studio Pro will get a full overhaul and fully support The Bag of Hurt Blu-ray -- on an external burner for the new iMacs which will also be announced. Again, physical media gets an external treatment and the application will be the sperate step child of the newly integrated Final Studio.
Based on the video I'd be betting the other way; that DVD SP will not get updated. It will be supported, but on the way out.
Physical media's relevancy is waning by the day. And if Apple has a "be where the puck will be" attitude then it's not going to put energy in propping up a dying war horse.
If you need a one-off Blu-Ray disc you can already out put to Blu-Ray via Compressor then burn via Toast. I can see Apple declaring hard media dead before I see it enhancing support BD-R.
Based on the video I'd be betting the other way; that DVD SP will not get updated. It will be supported, but on the way out.
Physical media's relevancy is waning by the day. And if Apple has a "be where the puck will be" attitude then it's not going to put energy in propping up a dying war horse.
If you need a one-off Blu-Ray disc you can already out put to Blu-Ray via Compressor then burn via Toast. I can see Apple declaring hard media dead before I see it enhancing support BD-R.
Dan==
Jul 31, 09:35 AM
I think that the bigger issue with Dan=='s design (full credit and kudos for the idea!) is that the Mac Mini is so small that it only uses laptop components. If you want to have a full-size optical drive or a full-size hard drive, you need to use a larger form factor. This is part of the reason for the size of my design.
Here's a comparison in sizes (I've also changed the floor because my wife thought that the reflection was confusing...)
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsFrontSm.png
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsBackSm.png
Cheers!
Now you've got some skills. I especially like the shadowing, reflections and detail on the back side. Very nice.
I agree with your size assessment.
Actually, our designs are quite close, differing primarily in cosmetics. What I'm refering to is my earlier design, (which I suspect you missed) not boncellis'. boncellis wished to see a wider, flatter version for use in home entertainment, so I conjured that 2nd one up for visualization. While that form factor has grown on me somewhat, I still like the taller version, as I had done earlier, and you've shown here, as well.
Here's my initial design, from earlier in this thread.
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9648/macandmacminipx9.jpg
The size of mine is a little smaller (narrower) - I wanted the whole thing less than 8" wide, though it could go back a little deeper, i.e. not necessarily square.
Also, see possible/hoped for product specs earlier in the thread.
Personally, I think I still prefer the smoother Mini-like skin than the perforated look of the Pro, but I'm just quibbling.
Thanks for the imagery.
-Dan
Here's a comparison in sizes (I've also changed the floor because my wife thought that the reflection was confusing...)
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsFrontSm.png
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsBackSm.png
Cheers!
Now you've got some skills. I especially like the shadowing, reflections and detail on the back side. Very nice.
I agree with your size assessment.
Actually, our designs are quite close, differing primarily in cosmetics. What I'm refering to is my earlier design, (which I suspect you missed) not boncellis'. boncellis wished to see a wider, flatter version for use in home entertainment, so I conjured that 2nd one up for visualization. While that form factor has grown on me somewhat, I still like the taller version, as I had done earlier, and you've shown here, as well.
Here's my initial design, from earlier in this thread.
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9648/macandmacminipx9.jpg
The size of mine is a little smaller (narrower) - I wanted the whole thing less than 8" wide, though it could go back a little deeper, i.e. not necessarily square.
Also, see possible/hoped for product specs earlier in the thread.
Personally, I think I still prefer the smoother Mini-like skin than the perforated look of the Pro, but I'm just quibbling.
Thanks for the imagery.
-Dan
EagerDragon
Nov 29, 05:12 AM
Just tell them that they are getting the same deal they had before, or they can sell their music elsewhere. Apple is not a new comer to the industry like Microsoft.
Standard response from the music industry, "Our customers are thieves, and have iPods full of illigal music". Tell them to Stick it where .......
Standard response from the music industry, "Our customers are thieves, and have iPods full of illigal music". Tell them to Stick it where .......
70355
Aug 7, 03:53 PM
What I like to say to PC fans that rip on Macs is this: Buy a Mac, use it for a year, and come back to me. Then if you still don't like Macs then at least you have supporting evidence, however I doubt that will be the case!
That's quite an offer. I'm sure you get a lot of takers.:rolleyes:
That's quite an offer. I'm sure you get a lot of takers.:rolleyes:
No comments:
Post a Comment