~Shard~
Sep 6, 08:48 PM
PS - please stop whinging about your MB & MBP in the iMac thread, I'm sure there's more appropriate venues...
Please stop whinging about iMacs, AIOs, minitowers, etc. in the Mac mini thread. :p :cool:
Please stop whinging about iMacs, AIOs, minitowers, etc. in the Mac mini thread. :p :cool:
Decker
Mar 22, 05:14 PM
Apple is totally a lone player in this market of HDD-based high capacity MP3 player. The only thing prohibiting me from nabbing one of these is the highly scratchable chrome back. If Apple goes with full unibody aluminum enclosure, I'll nab one for sure.
It would be interesting how long would Apple keep this before updating it. The iPod classic already missed one cycle of update. Maybe Apple is waiting for SSD to drop in price? An SSD based Classic would be awesome (in addition to the unibody aluminum casing).
Just put it in a YoTank case like I did. You can drive your car over it without damaging the iPod.
http://www.substrata.ca/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/CJE3140.jpg
More pics here (http://www.substrata.ca/blog/uncategorized/portable-music-rig/).
It would be interesting how long would Apple keep this before updating it. The iPod classic already missed one cycle of update. Maybe Apple is waiting for SSD to drop in price? An SSD based Classic would be awesome (in addition to the unibody aluminum casing).
Just put it in a YoTank case like I did. You can drive your car over it without damaging the iPod.
http://www.substrata.ca/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/CJE3140.jpg
More pics here (http://www.substrata.ca/blog/uncategorized/portable-music-rig/).
Speczorz
Sep 27, 05:25 PM
My dermashot case came in on Friday.. been using it since.
My initial thoughts - this case looks cheap and has a loose feel.
My thoughts now - the case has a nice style and even though it is not as snug as it should be, it fits fine. It has not fallen off at all and has a real nice feel too. However, the included screen protector was junk. Had way too many bubbles. Even after applying many times, that didn't help. I now like the grip of the case. I also like how the case comes up around the menu button.
Overall, I'm very satisfied with it. For $20 with free shipping, it was a decent deal. The case also comes with a little stand that holds the iPod horizontally (not vertically at all), so you can watch movies and not have to hold it. It's a nice little added feature.
Hope this helps others who are on the fence.. ;)
Bill
My initial thoughts - this case looks cheap and has a loose feel.
My thoughts now - the case has a nice style and even though it is not as snug as it should be, it fits fine. It has not fallen off at all and has a real nice feel too. However, the included screen protector was junk. Had way too many bubbles. Even after applying many times, that didn't help. I now like the grip of the case. I also like how the case comes up around the menu button.
Overall, I'm very satisfied with it. For $20 with free shipping, it was a decent deal. The case also comes with a little stand that holds the iPod horizontally (not vertically at all), so you can watch movies and not have to hold it. It's a nice little added feature.
Hope this helps others who are on the fence.. ;)
Bill
ro2nie
Jul 18, 10:55 AM
Apple don't want to be left out of this online movie thing. They tried to convince the studios, but they couldnt, so I think they have no choice but to make it a rental service before it's too late
Doctor Q
Mar 22, 04:58 PM
I guess I'm glad about this news.
However, I don't know anybody who has bought an iPod in the past couple of years.
However, I don't know anybody who has bought an iPod in the past couple of years.
(marc)
Mar 20, 08:24 AM
I actually think having troops is better. "Firing missles and bombing" from great distances has a "disconnect" between people. When you have actual people fighting and even dying alongside you, both the citizens and the warriors appreciated it more and form more of a bond between people and cultures. It builds a "comraderee" of sorts and helps secure a pschological future between peoples....whereas, in this case, perhaps the only interaction we really have with Lybians is that the generals and politicians might go to meetings. Something the masses never experience for themselves.
After something like this is over without them actually "enduring victory and suffering" with Westerners hugging them, many Lybians will still think...oh yeah, those are the infidels that helped us get Quadafi with their big guns. :p
And even in the eyes of the opposition, it can have a negative effect in that you don't see them face to face when you kill them. It can be seen as a sign of "weakness" and "chickeness". This is what happened with Clinton shooting tomahawks at Bin Laden and then walking away brushing his hands. When you look in their eyes and shoot them, they know you mean business and respect and fear you as a warrior. Then they might think twice before they try to blow up your buildings when you're not looking. ;)
The jets and rockets are there to prevent Gaddafi from killing civilians, not to prevent Gaddafi from winning.
After something like this is over without them actually "enduring victory and suffering" with Westerners hugging them, many Lybians will still think...oh yeah, those are the infidels that helped us get Quadafi with their big guns. :p
And even in the eyes of the opposition, it can have a negative effect in that you don't see them face to face when you kill them. It can be seen as a sign of "weakness" and "chickeness". This is what happened with Clinton shooting tomahawks at Bin Laden and then walking away brushing his hands. When you look in their eyes and shoot them, they know you mean business and respect and fear you as a warrior. Then they might think twice before they try to blow up your buildings when you're not looking. ;)
The jets and rockets are there to prevent Gaddafi from killing civilians, not to prevent Gaddafi from winning.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 16, 10:52 AM
Compete with Zune? Seriously? Zune is even on Apple's radar?
Let me get this straight, maybe I'm mistaken. Is this the same Zune that was announced that it will "play music! videos! games! ... wait... no, we changed our minds... no games. And videos? Yeah we can't quite get that to work, it won't do that either. But it plays music! And looks like an iPod... except its a tad on the fugly side...."
Please. Apple already has something to compete with this, its called the iPod. Who needs wireless??
Apple releases Leopard and a new iPod
Microsoft releases Vista and Zune
Apple 2 Microsoft 0
Let me get this straight, maybe I'm mistaken. Is this the same Zune that was announced that it will "play music! videos! games! ... wait... no, we changed our minds... no games. And videos? Yeah we can't quite get that to work, it won't do that either. But it plays music! And looks like an iPod... except its a tad on the fugly side...."
Please. Apple already has something to compete with this, its called the iPod. Who needs wireless??
Apple releases Leopard and a new iPod
Microsoft releases Vista and Zune
Apple 2 Microsoft 0
KeriJane
Apr 9, 04:56 PM
Yes, I can drive manual.
My father was too cheap to buy an automatic car and the cars I could afford when I was younger were all manual.
I didn't actually start with a car. My first motor vehicle was a Yamaha 60, which was a full-sized motorcycle with a 60cc engine and a... manual transmission!
1st car= 1968 SAAB 96 with 3 cylinders and a manual transmission! It was loads of fun and sounded like nothing else except maybe a very angry snowmobile.
Nowdays, 2 of my last 3 Toyota Tercels were automatics. I wish for manual a lot as the autos are a bit sluggish and not as economical.
Have Fun,
Keri
PS. I may have a really fun manual car pretty soon.
My father was too cheap to buy an automatic car and the cars I could afford when I was younger were all manual.
I didn't actually start with a car. My first motor vehicle was a Yamaha 60, which was a full-sized motorcycle with a 60cc engine and a... manual transmission!
1st car= 1968 SAAB 96 with 3 cylinders and a manual transmission! It was loads of fun and sounded like nothing else except maybe a very angry snowmobile.
Nowdays, 2 of my last 3 Toyota Tercels were automatics. I wish for manual a lot as the autos are a bit sluggish and not as economical.
Have Fun,
Keri
PS. I may have a really fun manual car pretty soon.
thesdx
Jan 12, 05:39 AM
I think "MacBook Air" sounds kinda cool, but not like something Apple would name a notebook. Who knows? It could be actually called this. Everyone was doubting the images of the fat Nano, thinking it couldn't possibly be true, and it came true. It could happen again.
Dale Campbell
Apr 19, 10:55 AM
Octo-core please + 16GB ram for �999 : ) *joke*... or is it?
Peterkro
Mar 21, 06:09 PM
Run! Run for the collines!
Grim but accurate.
Grim but accurate.
yellow
Oct 23, 03:16 PM
eGads I hope so!
I have a "new" MBP supposedly being ordered for me by work.. let's hope the bureaucracy works IN my favor for once! :)
I have a "new" MBP supposedly being ordered for me by work.. let's hope the bureaucracy works IN my favor for once! :)
iTeen
Jan 13, 02:25 AM
Why does the banner have to reference only one product or service? Perhaps it refers to a theme shared by all introductions at MacWorld.
i don't see how this would relate to something like itunes, but it is referring to the major release...the macbook ________
i don't see how this would relate to something like itunes, but it is referring to the major release...the macbook ________
t0mat0
Sep 6, 09:42 AM
Silent upgrades anyone? :)
Makes the MBP upgrades more likely. Can only say to nay sayers, that MBP will be C2D before (12th) or *just* after the student offer ends (US) - Sept 16th. I'd bet someone an icecream over it...
The important thing as someone said is that it "is one less thing for next thing". They'd only do a media event with something substantial, otherwise they'd be overwhelming us with lots of small presentations. Just see it as 2 things to tick off the wishlist for Sept 12th/16th!
Makes the MBP upgrades more likely. Can only say to nay sayers, that MBP will be C2D before (12th) or *just* after the student offer ends (US) - Sept 16th. I'd bet someone an icecream over it...
The important thing as someone said is that it "is one less thing for next thing". They'd only do a media event with something substantial, otherwise they'd be overwhelming us with lots of small presentations. Just see it as 2 things to tick off the wishlist for Sept 12th/16th!
Raska
Mar 31, 07:26 PM
Is Safari still buggy as feck? Can you drag images out and not have them be .weblocs? Is google maps working properly without tile distortions/not loading?
Google Maps looks fine, so do dragging images. There is something strange I noticed trying to refresh a page. The best is to just post the pictures to show the bug.
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/5367/safaribug1.png
The first is the popover that slide into view when I tried to refresh the page.
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/1071/safaribug2.png
The second is the address bar glitching once the popover is dismissed.
Google Maps looks fine, so do dragging images. There is something strange I noticed trying to refresh a page. The best is to just post the pictures to show the bug.
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/5367/safaribug1.png
The first is the popover that slide into view when I tried to refresh the page.
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/1071/safaribug2.png
The second is the address bar glitching once the popover is dismissed.
jholzner
Sep 6, 05:57 PM
Does anyone else think that Apple really really needs a rental model for the movie store? I'm against it with music but it's not the same a movies. I don't want my harddrive full of these things. I would be nice to rent one for much less, watch it and delete it. I don't see it being very successful if it is for purchase only.
bjoplin21
Feb 17, 09:08 PM
Just got my 2009 Mac Pro Quad 2.66 today. It has a 120GB SSD drive and 640GB secondary drive, blu ray player, and 16GB of DDR3 Ram. Sitting next to it is my 2009 17 inch 2.66ghz Core2Duo Macbook Pro which has a 240GB SSD drive and 8GB of RAM.
http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/bjoplin21/DSC00964.jpg
http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/bjoplin21/DSC00972.jpg
http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/bjoplin21/DSC00964.jpg
http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/bjoplin21/DSC00972.jpg
AlphaDogg
Feb 23, 04:12 PM
nothing special but heres my setups bedroom and office
A little bit cluttered. Do the iMacs get used regularly?
A little bit cluttered. Do the iMacs get used regularly?
gkarris
Nov 27, 09:04 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.
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.
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, 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.
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. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
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.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
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.
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.
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, 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.
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. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
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.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
Goldfinger
Aug 31, 03:35 PM
Any chance of a new chip set with a newer GMA ?
xionxiox
Apr 2, 08:39 PM
Hmmm... not really. I hate marketing. Nothing they say will change that. They also need to stop calling the iPad "magical". It really isn't. It's very nice, but not magical.
Um, I would just like to point out that the word "Magical" is not meant to be taken literally. It is, in fact: beautiful or delightful in such a way as to seem removed from everyday life.
Um, I would just like to point out that the word "Magical" is not meant to be taken literally. It is, in fact: beautiful or delightful in such a way as to seem removed from everyday life.
ten-oak-druid
Mar 22, 04:32 PM
The classic is great. I got my iphone and was excited about having the ipod and phone combined. But I've gotten to the point where I miss the larger hard drive with more songs. I don't like having to decide which music I can squeeze onto the device. So I've started carrying the ipod around and using the phone for video and calls.
I don't think the classic will die, nor will conventional hard drives in laptops, until you can buy 500GB flash drives for $100. If the functionality of the hard drive suits your needs then you are simply paying more for less. If you are doing tasks that benefit from the access speed of a flash drive compared to a hard drive then of course that will outweigh the capacity issue.
Viva la roue de clic!
I don't think the classic will die, nor will conventional hard drives in laptops, until you can buy 500GB flash drives for $100. If the functionality of the hard drive suits your needs then you are simply paying more for less. If you are doing tasks that benefit from the access speed of a flash drive compared to a hard drive then of course that will outweigh the capacity issue.
Viva la roue de clic!
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
PowerGamerX
Mar 24, 01:28 PM
I wonder if we'll ever see AMD cpu's?
No comments:
Post a Comment