lordonuthin
Apr 4, 07:25 PM
congrats to whiterabbit for 12 million points!
Thanks.
Thanks.
skiltrip
Oct 10, 03:50 PM
I disagree. After all, its in the USA and shipping times are slashed. I bought a couple iPhone cases and whenever I've had issues with the case, they always solved it. I can't say the same about sellers from Hong Kong that just don't care.
For the record, I've had a couple Hong Kong cases I wasn't happy with and I was issued pretty prompt refunds for them with no need to return it.
For the record, I've had a couple Hong Kong cases I wasn't happy with and I was issued pretty prompt refunds for them with no need to return it.
franswa za
May 3, 04:45 AM
i bought my first ever ipad last week............
today while working on my macbook i touched its screen to flick through pictures...... amazing how easily we transform?
today while working on my macbook i touched its screen to flick through pictures...... amazing how easily we transform?
mattwolfmatt
Sep 14, 10:17 AM
...my iPhone 4 still gets the best reception of any phone I've ever owned, regardless of how I hold it or whether or not it has a case on it...
Ditto for me. I can't believe I waffled between 3GS, HTC Incredible, and iPhone 4. With 3GS 30% of my calls were dropped, with iPhone 4, 0%. Had it since July 5.
Ditto for me. I can't believe I waffled between 3GS, HTC Incredible, and iPhone 4. With 3GS 30% of my calls were dropped, with iPhone 4, 0%. Had it since July 5.
Rodimus Prime
Feb 26, 11:14 PM
I currently have a 4.7L V8 Dodge Dakota. I'd buy a diesel version of it in a heartbeat. I could still get the power/hauling ability needed but have the mileage to justify having the pickup.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
Had the truck for over 5 years, but it may get too cost prohibitive to keep.
I take it you need to haul, tow stuff often enough that not having the truck would be painful.
My dad refuses to get rid of there 1995 Ram that gets like 15 MPG HWY on a good day because it is nice to have a truck for when stuff needs to be hauled or we need the bed.
Mind you the truck has been pretty much reduced to just that type of duty or if one of our other cars are out of action for one reason or another it is a spare vehicle.
SUV and trucks have their places. Problem I see is to many people only want trucks when really in a family with 2 vehicles you really only need a max of 1 SUV/truck between them and a car for the rest. That is how my parents did it for a while. SUV for my mom/family car and a gas and my dad drove a car.
Dad car mainly went 2 and from work and my mom SUV was for when the family went somewhere together and my mom drove it to and from work but my mom drove like 6 miles each way compared to my dads near 30 miles each way.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
Had the truck for over 5 years, but it may get too cost prohibitive to keep.
I take it you need to haul, tow stuff often enough that not having the truck would be painful.
My dad refuses to get rid of there 1995 Ram that gets like 15 MPG HWY on a good day because it is nice to have a truck for when stuff needs to be hauled or we need the bed.
Mind you the truck has been pretty much reduced to just that type of duty or if one of our other cars are out of action for one reason or another it is a spare vehicle.
SUV and trucks have their places. Problem I see is to many people only want trucks when really in a family with 2 vehicles you really only need a max of 1 SUV/truck between them and a car for the rest. That is how my parents did it for a while. SUV for my mom/family car and a gas and my dad drove a car.
Dad car mainly went 2 and from work and my mom SUV was for when the family went somewhere together and my mom drove it to and from work but my mom drove like 6 miles each way compared to my dads near 30 miles each way.
LethalWolfe
Apr 12, 10:38 PM
You mean made easier to use?
No, I'll take easier to use in a heartbeat unless the way they made it easier to use was to dumb it down. Making something better and making something easier to use aren't necessarily the same thing. An automatic transmission is easier to use than a manual transmission but there are a host of reasons why manual transmission are the better choice.
Lots of the changes to FCP X look very promising. The 'enhanced' labeling/tagging feature for clips sounds great. As does their new stab at having an 'open timeline' (hopefully it works out much better than their current attempt at it). The easy color matching between shots could save me a ton of tedious work that I hate doing assuming it works properly.
I'm not against change itself I'm just against change for the worse or change for the sake of change.
Lethal
No, I'll take easier to use in a heartbeat unless the way they made it easier to use was to dumb it down. Making something better and making something easier to use aren't necessarily the same thing. An automatic transmission is easier to use than a manual transmission but there are a host of reasons why manual transmission are the better choice.
Lots of the changes to FCP X look very promising. The 'enhanced' labeling/tagging feature for clips sounds great. As does their new stab at having an 'open timeline' (hopefully it works out much better than their current attempt at it). The easy color matching between shots could save me a ton of tedious work that I hate doing assuming it works properly.
I'm not against change itself I'm just against change for the worse or change for the sake of change.
Lethal
Earendil
Nov 28, 10:32 AM
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs?
*snip*
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20".
*snip*
But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
And that percentage shoots up when you take into account only the Pro style Towers. And it's a shame your Cinema display is showing age sooner than I would think it should. Still, in my own experience with color reproduction and accuracy in Photography, the cinema displays I have used have exceeded my Dell 2005. In regular computer use I wouldn't be able to tell them apart (aside from the back light bleed on the Dell).
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Do you see any fan boys making posts here? I see some people here that are ignorant of the way monitors work and yet are trying to pass opinions on Apple/Dell/LCD market as gold though.
That's the issue though, currently Apple doesn't sell a consumer computer that either doesn't already come with a monitor, or where you aren't supposed to already have a monitor.
the MacBook and iMac both have screens built in, the MacMini, if you saw any of it's advertisements or presentation, is meant as a direct replacement for a PC box. i.e. bring your own mouse, keyboard and monitor. I as well as another guy have already said this though.
It's a problem, still, I want too want Apple to sell a consumer level monitor. But Apple certainly doesn't have to enter that market if they don't want to. Besides, the market for a cheap 17" monitor is TINY. You're talking Mini owners (who don't already have a monitor) maybe a few laptop owners, and...? G5 owners? If you're plugin a $150 LCD up to a G5 you should be shot :P Unless you are running three at once or something.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
Many professionals run Duel 20" screens. In fact I see this setup far more often that a 30" screen.
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one.
wow wow wow. You just me on that logic jump. Apple sells some high end systems to Professions in industry that demand at least a certain standard. Apple also sells other computers. Apple Sells monitors that are aiming at (hitting is another matter) those professionals that demand a certain standard. Apple doesn't currently sell any other monitors. How is that proof that Apple is trying to personally screw you out of your cash?
Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
Yeah, there is a gap, and I do see it as a problem. No one in the entire thread is disagreeing with that. You ideas on why there is a gap is viewed a little bit more negative than I would, but whatever.
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper.
Another huge jump in logic based on no facts and stretched assumptions. Do you know what Apple takes home at the end of the day from each monitor sale, each iMac sale, and each Mini sale? Can you provide that data to back up any of your conclusions? It sure would go a long way in getting anyone to side with you on that point. However, until you do, I'm going to say this one more time:
Cinema Display = Pro quality Display (I don't give a hoot if your eyes can't see it, the components alone show it, and that is what cost money to make not your eye sight)
Pro Quality = not cheap, don't go looking for a $200 monitor for pro work.
And for the last time, I'm still waiting for someone to show me a display that matches the Cinemas tech specs and qualifications and also cost downwards in the $400 range that people keep speaking about. Because until someone does, I'm inclined to believe, based on my own looking, that Apple is right with the industry on this one (or close) and all our whining on cost means jack.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it.
In light of that little sarcastc jab, the irony is that you are one of, if not the only user, to have admitted to owning a 20" Cinema display in this thread so far :rolleyes:
[quote]I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right?
I'll just quote myself on this one...
[QUOTE=Earendil]You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in back lighting and change in color based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benefits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level monitor for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
But if you had been following the thread you'd know that about me already...
But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
No, you are asking for two very different things here.
1. You are asking Apple to produce a consumer level monitor that you can afford and falls in line with the market. I think everyone agrees with this idea, whether there is a large enough market for Apple to justify it (only Aple costumers would consider them) is up for debate.
and...
2. You are asking Apple to drop the price on their Pro displays without giving a reason (all your reasons apply to a consumer LCD), nor have you provided a similarly speced display to show that Apple is out of line with it's pricing.
There are large difference between a Mini and a G5. Just because most people wouldn't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. Just relax and trust me that in two properly functioning displays, Apple's monitors are very good, and imho should never be compared to Apple's displays unless you are trying to convince a consumer (who can't tell the difference) not to buy it and buy an alternative display. I have done this before. Just like you'd never compare a Mini and a G5 unless grandma was thinking about buying a G5 to surf the web with...
~Tyler
*snip*
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20".
*snip*
But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
And that percentage shoots up when you take into account only the Pro style Towers. And it's a shame your Cinema display is showing age sooner than I would think it should. Still, in my own experience with color reproduction and accuracy in Photography, the cinema displays I have used have exceeded my Dell 2005. In regular computer use I wouldn't be able to tell them apart (aside from the back light bleed on the Dell).
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Do you see any fan boys making posts here? I see some people here that are ignorant of the way monitors work and yet are trying to pass opinions on Apple/Dell/LCD market as gold though.
That's the issue though, currently Apple doesn't sell a consumer computer that either doesn't already come with a monitor, or where you aren't supposed to already have a monitor.
the MacBook and iMac both have screens built in, the MacMini, if you saw any of it's advertisements or presentation, is meant as a direct replacement for a PC box. i.e. bring your own mouse, keyboard and monitor. I as well as another guy have already said this though.
It's a problem, still, I want too want Apple to sell a consumer level monitor. But Apple certainly doesn't have to enter that market if they don't want to. Besides, the market for a cheap 17" monitor is TINY. You're talking Mini owners (who don't already have a monitor) maybe a few laptop owners, and...? G5 owners? If you're plugin a $150 LCD up to a G5 you should be shot :P Unless you are running three at once or something.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
Many professionals run Duel 20" screens. In fact I see this setup far more often that a 30" screen.
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one.
wow wow wow. You just me on that logic jump. Apple sells some high end systems to Professions in industry that demand at least a certain standard. Apple also sells other computers. Apple Sells monitors that are aiming at (hitting is another matter) those professionals that demand a certain standard. Apple doesn't currently sell any other monitors. How is that proof that Apple is trying to personally screw you out of your cash?
Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
Yeah, there is a gap, and I do see it as a problem. No one in the entire thread is disagreeing with that. You ideas on why there is a gap is viewed a little bit more negative than I would, but whatever.
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper.
Another huge jump in logic based on no facts and stretched assumptions. Do you know what Apple takes home at the end of the day from each monitor sale, each iMac sale, and each Mini sale? Can you provide that data to back up any of your conclusions? It sure would go a long way in getting anyone to side with you on that point. However, until you do, I'm going to say this one more time:
Cinema Display = Pro quality Display (I don't give a hoot if your eyes can't see it, the components alone show it, and that is what cost money to make not your eye sight)
Pro Quality = not cheap, don't go looking for a $200 monitor for pro work.
And for the last time, I'm still waiting for someone to show me a display that matches the Cinemas tech specs and qualifications and also cost downwards in the $400 range that people keep speaking about. Because until someone does, I'm inclined to believe, based on my own looking, that Apple is right with the industry on this one (or close) and all our whining on cost means jack.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it.
In light of that little sarcastc jab, the irony is that you are one of, if not the only user, to have admitted to owning a 20" Cinema display in this thread so far :rolleyes:
[quote]I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right?
I'll just quote myself on this one...
[QUOTE=Earendil]You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in back lighting and change in color based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benefits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level monitor for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
But if you had been following the thread you'd know that about me already...
But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
No, you are asking for two very different things here.
1. You are asking Apple to produce a consumer level monitor that you can afford and falls in line with the market. I think everyone agrees with this idea, whether there is a large enough market for Apple to justify it (only Aple costumers would consider them) is up for debate.
and...
2. You are asking Apple to drop the price on their Pro displays without giving a reason (all your reasons apply to a consumer LCD), nor have you provided a similarly speced display to show that Apple is out of line with it's pricing.
There are large difference between a Mini and a G5. Just because most people wouldn't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. Just relax and trust me that in two properly functioning displays, Apple's monitors are very good, and imho should never be compared to Apple's displays unless you are trying to convince a consumer (who can't tell the difference) not to buy it and buy an alternative display. I have done this before. Just like you'd never compare a Mini and a G5 unless grandma was thinking about buying a G5 to surf the web with...
~Tyler
lordonuthin
Dec 28, 06:53 PM
nice. glad it worked for you!
and congrats to mc68k for 9 million points!
and congrats to whiterabbit for 5 million points!
Sorry you couldn't have stayed in 4th place for longer lyzardking... but at least you can claim you were there! :D And you are getting more points for the team!
And it looks like mc68k is definitly going to be our first to the big 10 mil!! You are cooking right now with over 600k ppw - as Jim Carey would say (in Mask) "smokin"!
I have now organized my machines with five (linux) in the cold basement, and the 2 win/gpu machines in 4u boxes I got on ebay in the rack with the mac. I spent christmas day, snowbound, rerouting the wiring (and cleaning the "computer room" so everything at least looks much better. I actually got 4 4u cases so I have room to grow, they were $28 each plus $17? each for shipping. 4u is about the same size as a normal tower case so everything fits in nicely. I will post some pics soon.
and congrats to mc68k for 9 million points!
and congrats to whiterabbit for 5 million points!
Sorry you couldn't have stayed in 4th place for longer lyzardking... but at least you can claim you were there! :D And you are getting more points for the team!
And it looks like mc68k is definitly going to be our first to the big 10 mil!! You are cooking right now with over 600k ppw - as Jim Carey would say (in Mask) "smokin"!
I have now organized my machines with five (linux) in the cold basement, and the 2 win/gpu machines in 4u boxes I got on ebay in the rack with the mac. I spent christmas day, snowbound, rerouting the wiring (and cleaning the "computer room" so everything at least looks much better. I actually got 4 4u cases so I have room to grow, they were $28 each plus $17? each for shipping. 4u is about the same size as a normal tower case so everything fits in nicely. I will post some pics soon.
Baseline
Nov 15, 12:16 PM
This is true, but there are still many many ways to optimize the multi-core processor that's not currently being use.
For example, I am waiting for a program to compile right now. Although I have a dual core on my computer, the compiler only compile one file at a time and usually takes about 10 min to do a full compile . If I have an 8 core computer with a multi-threaded compiler then I can cut the total time to jsut over a min + couple of seconds for linking time.
You know that if you have multiple processors, you can tell the build process to use them all, ie. compile multiple files at the same time!
I have a dual-core iMac, and if I do 'make -j3', it will use both processors. If you have a quad processor, do 'make -j5'.
Really though, this is just an example of what I was already talking about, namely doing tasks A,B,C and D, where A,B,C and D have no dependence on each other.
For example, I am waiting for a program to compile right now. Although I have a dual core on my computer, the compiler only compile one file at a time and usually takes about 10 min to do a full compile . If I have an 8 core computer with a multi-threaded compiler then I can cut the total time to jsut over a min + couple of seconds for linking time.
You know that if you have multiple processors, you can tell the build process to use them all, ie. compile multiple files at the same time!
I have a dual-core iMac, and if I do 'make -j3', it will use both processors. If you have a quad processor, do 'make -j5'.
Really though, this is just an example of what I was already talking about, namely doing tasks A,B,C and D, where A,B,C and D have no dependence on each other.
CEAbiscuit
Nov 27, 01:43 PM
After using a 23, the 20 seems small. If someone is looking for an allin one solution, instead of a mini and a monitor, they should just get an iMac. The move makes no sense.
apb3
Aug 18, 01:08 AM
Especially since they have ads on their music stations now. Sirius had 600,00 subscribers before Stern and now has over 4 million. Sirius WILL surpass XM sometime in the next year. The reasons are simple:
1. Howard Stern
2. Exclusive NFL, NBA, NHL (all now) and Nascar (as of 2007) programming.
3. Commercial-free music stations
XM has ads on the MUSIC stations?? ugh. Do you have both XM and Sirius or did you see that somewhere? I'd like to read that press release to see what they have to say and how they spin it. "We're not terrestrial radio, we're better. Oh wait, we are pretty much the same now... buy Crest! Sirius who?"
I understand the commercials/ads on talk-type radio on Sirius - and XM too I assume - especially the live ones as it takes time to change guests, pee, put the seat back down, set up segments, etc... and even recorded ones need separators/change of pace markers or whatever of sorts. If it brings in more revenue so my subscription is a bit lower, OK, I can deal. But not on the music channels. I can tell you, being able to hear and have personalities use the F-word and talk about pooh graphically (while sometimes funny) was not the main reason for my decison to go from terrestrial radio to Sirius (before Stern even made the leap). One of the big motivations was not having to sit through those lame local commercials touting some local PC repair man or dental office (sorry if that's you...) or the stations next "big" promotion just to hear a few songs I may or may not like. I want Punk or rap or old standards or comedy or Korean or way-out-there commentary? I tune to that specific station and know I will hear what I am in the mood for without idiotic offers for 0% financing until 2008 for those who qualify - I have the yellow pages and google, thanks.
1. Howard Stern
2. Exclusive NFL, NBA, NHL (all now) and Nascar (as of 2007) programming.
3. Commercial-free music stations
XM has ads on the MUSIC stations?? ugh. Do you have both XM and Sirius or did you see that somewhere? I'd like to read that press release to see what they have to say and how they spin it. "We're not terrestrial radio, we're better. Oh wait, we are pretty much the same now... buy Crest! Sirius who?"
I understand the commercials/ads on talk-type radio on Sirius - and XM too I assume - especially the live ones as it takes time to change guests, pee, put the seat back down, set up segments, etc... and even recorded ones need separators/change of pace markers or whatever of sorts. If it brings in more revenue so my subscription is a bit lower, OK, I can deal. But not on the music channels. I can tell you, being able to hear and have personalities use the F-word and talk about pooh graphically (while sometimes funny) was not the main reason for my decison to go from terrestrial radio to Sirius (before Stern even made the leap). One of the big motivations was not having to sit through those lame local commercials touting some local PC repair man or dental office (sorry if that's you...) or the stations next "big" promotion just to hear a few songs I may or may not like. I want Punk or rap or old standards or comedy or Korean or way-out-there commentary? I tune to that specific station and know I will hear what I am in the mood for without idiotic offers for 0% financing until 2008 for those who qualify - I have the yellow pages and google, thanks.
Biscuit411
Apr 21, 11:56 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
Good thing Al Franken is on the case...
Good thing Al Franken is on the case...
WRIGHTRACING
Nov 15, 11:39 PM
Toyota fixes all vehicles because they all have the potential to have dangerous problems.
Most iPhone owners have no problem whatsoever, and there's no danger at all to anyone.
So Toyota HAS to fix them all. It would be pointless for Apple to fix all iPhones in the field when most of them never have an issue needing a fix. But if you do have a problem, let them know and they will fix it for you for free. That's hardly a burden for such a non-dangerous situation.
We live in this ridiculous era of expectations. Apple comes out with a reasonable solution to a problem that affects a tiny percentage of users, and they get slammed for it. Hypocrisy.
This isn't necessarily directed at you, but to all of you comparing Apple/Phone manufacturer to Toyota/Car manufacturer.
So the deal with the "SAFETY" recall of the sticking accelerator, the way it works in the auto industry, generally they catch these things in testing "ON TRACK", but this was one that slipped thru the tracks, just the same as software issues Apple had with iOS4.0 and 4.1 on the older iPhones. So the customers experienced the problem, and it was reported. Toyota(the same as all other greedy, self righteous companies out there, deny everything), then had to create a software fix for the problem in the computer of the car. They then mail out letter's to everyone, because this is a safety issue. You can bring your vehicle in, if you feel safe, and if not, they will tow it at cost to warranty.
Now there are also other things that are problems with cars, and are reported by many consumers, but it isn't classified as a recall, because it is not a safety recall. Take the Chrysler 2.7 engine. It was unfortunate, because it was a good engine, but they had a flaw. The cylinder heads over time got oil buildup from the scorched oil around the overhead valvetrain. It was caused by the heads having a flaw in design that caused them to get hot spots and scorching the oil. So it was noted to Chrysler, and they decided if the engine had this problem and the owner kept sufficient evidence of oil changes, and it was within a certain mileage. They never sent this information out to anyone, and most don't know of this replacement, but the dealers know about it, and the company knows about it as well, and they will pay to replace it under certain circumstances, so long as you do your studying, and find what you can on this engine. As I said this is not safety related, and doesn't apply to everyone, so they don't let everyone know, or don't replace everyone's engine.
Most iPhone owners have no problem whatsoever, and there's no danger at all to anyone.
So Toyota HAS to fix them all. It would be pointless for Apple to fix all iPhones in the field when most of them never have an issue needing a fix. But if you do have a problem, let them know and they will fix it for you for free. That's hardly a burden for such a non-dangerous situation.
We live in this ridiculous era of expectations. Apple comes out with a reasonable solution to a problem that affects a tiny percentage of users, and they get slammed for it. Hypocrisy.
This isn't necessarily directed at you, but to all of you comparing Apple/Phone manufacturer to Toyota/Car manufacturer.
So the deal with the "SAFETY" recall of the sticking accelerator, the way it works in the auto industry, generally they catch these things in testing "ON TRACK", but this was one that slipped thru the tracks, just the same as software issues Apple had with iOS4.0 and 4.1 on the older iPhones. So the customers experienced the problem, and it was reported. Toyota(the same as all other greedy, self righteous companies out there, deny everything), then had to create a software fix for the problem in the computer of the car. They then mail out letter's to everyone, because this is a safety issue. You can bring your vehicle in, if you feel safe, and if not, they will tow it at cost to warranty.
Now there are also other things that are problems with cars, and are reported by many consumers, but it isn't classified as a recall, because it is not a safety recall. Take the Chrysler 2.7 engine. It was unfortunate, because it was a good engine, but they had a flaw. The cylinder heads over time got oil buildup from the scorched oil around the overhead valvetrain. It was caused by the heads having a flaw in design that caused them to get hot spots and scorching the oil. So it was noted to Chrysler, and they decided if the engine had this problem and the owner kept sufficient evidence of oil changes, and it was within a certain mileage. They never sent this information out to anyone, and most don't know of this replacement, but the dealers know about it, and the company knows about it as well, and they will pay to replace it under certain circumstances, so long as you do your studying, and find what you can on this engine. As I said this is not safety related, and doesn't apply to everyone, so they don't let everyone know, or don't replace everyone's engine.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 4, 02:58 PM
If you buy a truck or SUV because you want to tow or haul, drive offroad or use it for work, fine. If you bought it because you're being "protective", then, yes, that is a selfish motivation.
Larger SUV's and trucks often do suffer fewer driver fatalities, so in some ways they are safer (in the US), but that is because they force smaller vehicles to absorb most of the impact during a crash. Also, the rollover risk remains high, so that the "protection" you are buying is pretty conditional and may come at the expense of other people's lives.
In addition, I should point out that minivans are safer than SUVs, so if you want your family safe, buy a minivan. Finally, it's a proven fact that pickups are less safe than cars, period.
If you want to debate it further I suggest we start another thread though, so we can keep this one on-topic.
Larger SUV's and trucks often do suffer fewer driver fatalities, so in some ways they are safer (in the US), but that is because they force smaller vehicles to absorb most of the impact during a crash. Also, the rollover risk remains high, so that the "protection" you are buying is pretty conditional and may come at the expense of other people's lives.
In addition, I should point out that minivans are safer than SUVs, so if you want your family safe, buy a minivan. Finally, it's a proven fact that pickups are less safe than cars, period.
If you want to debate it further I suggest we start another thread though, so we can keep this one on-topic.
islanders
Dec 28, 01:08 AM
anything is possible minus 1 thing: the option to dock and iPod simply is so out of place that I do not know why it keeps getting brought up. iTV is focused on streaming content from your computer, not your iPod.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
Sorry, I�m still on a G3, but I still don�t get it. A 42�� LCD/Plasma is just a monitor so it would display a word document, and I assumed the new Macs would play a movie also.
Also, most people don�t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that�s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don�t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
I don�t care if an iPod dock in included or not, but the iTV will be connected to a home theater system, so it would be convenient addition.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
Also I thought preserving digital media was the process of saving it to disk? I haven�t done a lot of this but assumed it was matter of disk space.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
Sorry, I�m still on a G3, but I still don�t get it. A 42�� LCD/Plasma is just a monitor so it would display a word document, and I assumed the new Macs would play a movie also.
Also, most people don�t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that�s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don�t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
I don�t care if an iPod dock in included or not, but the iTV will be connected to a home theater system, so it would be convenient addition.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
Also I thought preserving digital media was the process of saving it to disk? I haven�t done a lot of this but assumed it was matter of disk space.
jettredmont
Mar 25, 05:31 PM
If someone had come out with a console allowing for full-color 1024x768 touchscreen controllers the other consoles would be scrambling to catch up. Even if that controller cost $499.
While there are some nits here (30fps isn't exactly ideal performance, the dongle connection seems too flimsy for real gameplay, etc) I think this is a huge step forward in gaming.
Nintendo and Microsoft should be shaking in their boots right now.
As a rather casual gamer, I'd love to see the bastard love-child of this and kinect.
While there are some nits here (30fps isn't exactly ideal performance, the dongle connection seems too flimsy for real gameplay, etc) I think this is a huge step forward in gaming.
Nintendo and Microsoft should be shaking in their boots right now.
As a rather casual gamer, I'd love to see the bastard love-child of this and kinect.
TuffLuffJimmy
Jun 24, 01:54 AM
read the original post? NO! DO I Think that is the only benefit? NO!
The post only mentions porn. There are several other drawbacks to the Apple way.
The post only mentions porn. There are several other drawbacks to the Apple way.
AvSRoCkCO1067
Nov 28, 01:16 PM
Microsoft lost billions on the Xbox and likely to lose hundreds of millions on their Zune attempt. iPod sales have been profitable for Apple since their introduction. How one measures success in this industry can't always be marketshare.
One of the best points I've read so far - and one that I wish more people would apply to Apple's share in the computer market...:)
One of the best points I've read so far - and one that I wish more people would apply to Apple's share in the computer market...:)
Mattsasa
Mar 22, 03:49 PM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
retroneo
Aug 29, 10:17 AM
UPDATE:
It looks like the GMA X3000 is ready to go now
GMA X3000 is ready in the soon to ship G965 for Conroe desktops, but the mobile GM965 "Santa Rosa" for Merom isn't due until March 2007. GM965 also features "Robson" flash technology. New Meroms also arrive in March with the same clock speed but 800MHz system bus.
It looks like the GMA X3000 is ready to go now
GMA X3000 is ready in the soon to ship G965 for Conroe desktops, but the mobile GM965 "Santa Rosa" for Merom isn't due until March 2007. GM965 also features "Robson" flash technology. New Meroms also arrive in March with the same clock speed but 800MHz system bus.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 29, 10:59 AM
Maybe FrontRow 2 (I believe/assume comes with Leopard) is where this will play in. Maybe instead of making a single device and labeling it a media center Apple will allow for any Mac (any new Mac...) to be used as a media center via FrontRow 2.
I really hope you are correct about FR2 in Leopard. However...
I do think you need a TV-card in the computer too. Given Apples philosophy about simplicity, I doubt they will have a stand alone TV-reciever. Furthermore, I just can't see Apple selling MP with a TV-card. So my guess is that they will make a dedicated computer. Still I am most likely wrong... as always...:p
I really hope you are correct about FR2 in Leopard. However...
I do think you need a TV-card in the computer too. Given Apples philosophy about simplicity, I doubt they will have a stand alone TV-reciever. Furthermore, I just can't see Apple selling MP with a TV-card. So my guess is that they will make a dedicated computer. Still I am most likely wrong... as always...:p
Irishman
May 3, 06:17 PM
The i7. I actually have an i7 920 in my PC but the sandy bridge is still a good upgrade.
I'm not jealous :)
I'm not jealous :)
Erwin-Br
Mar 24, 03:07 PM
Can anyone explain the nVidia hate?
I, for one, miss my old GeForce 8800.
I have a Radeon HD 5770 now, and there are these little annoyances. For instance, when I run my bootcamp partition inside VMWare, the AMD driver software starts complaining. The GeForce didn't give a damn. Speaking of which, I had to install the .Net framework to install the AMD drivers. Kinda cheap. And every now and then I get a slight flicker in the screen. To be honest, I'm not sure if that's the Radeon, but I've never had it before.
Don't get me wrong, the card is performing superbly overall. But the driver side still needs some polish. (And that's a complaint I've been hearing for ages!)
I, for one, miss my old GeForce 8800.
I have a Radeon HD 5770 now, and there are these little annoyances. For instance, when I run my bootcamp partition inside VMWare, the AMD driver software starts complaining. The GeForce didn't give a damn. Speaking of which, I had to install the .Net framework to install the AMD drivers. Kinda cheap. And every now and then I get a slight flicker in the screen. To be honest, I'm not sure if that's the Radeon, but I've never had it before.
Don't get me wrong, the card is performing superbly overall. But the driver side still needs some polish. (And that's a complaint I've been hearing for ages!)
ucfgrad93
Apr 9, 04:41 PM
I learned how to drive on a stick shift. It has been awhile since I have driven one, but I'm sure I still could.
No comments:
Post a Comment