chrono1081
May 5, 11:35 PM
The microsoft usability tax costs even more, in wasted time and low productivity.
+1 I work fixing windows desktops and servers for a living and companies pay me pretty good to do it.
Not to mention Microsoft doesn't make the hardware, they simply sell the software. There is no such thing as "Apple Tax". If you get a Windows machine that is on par with the quality of a Mac machine then you will pay roughly the same, if not more for your computer.
Mentioning many OS X users use antivirus is useless, as anyone is in the conversation is able to decide not to run antivirus on OS X.
As for greater performance on OS X vs Windows 7 you'd need to compare software on both platforms, but since the best things on OS X don't run on Windows 7, I can't see many comparisons worth wild. (although this is personal, if you want Windows 7 software, go for it!)
I use Maya extensively on both platforms as well as Photoshop and Mac OSX runs them both faster. Photoshops difference isn't very big obviously but Maya is a pretty good difference during render times. Same exact hardware too.
+1 I work fixing windows desktops and servers for a living and companies pay me pretty good to do it.
Not to mention Microsoft doesn't make the hardware, they simply sell the software. There is no such thing as "Apple Tax". If you get a Windows machine that is on par with the quality of a Mac machine then you will pay roughly the same, if not more for your computer.
Mentioning many OS X users use antivirus is useless, as anyone is in the conversation is able to decide not to run antivirus on OS X.
As for greater performance on OS X vs Windows 7 you'd need to compare software on both platforms, but since the best things on OS X don't run on Windows 7, I can't see many comparisons worth wild. (although this is personal, if you want Windows 7 software, go for it!)
I use Maya extensively on both platforms as well as Photoshop and Mac OSX runs them both faster. Photoshops difference isn't very big obviously but Maya is a pretty good difference during render times. Same exact hardware too.
Yvan256
Jul 15, 06:23 PM
So, apart from all the discussions about exFAT and all... am I the only one who wish the SD reader was in the front?
They could have made a black plastic strip the same thickness and width as the optical drive, meaning two long black strips in the front of the Mac mini instead of one, and put the reader on the far right of the second strip, just like the infrared receptor is at the right of the CD/DVD slot.
Or even better, design some kind of CD/DVD slot with an SD reader built-in.
I also wish Apple would be able to get the same slot-loading mini-CD/DVD capability as the Nintendo Wii.
They could have made a black plastic strip the same thickness and width as the optical drive, meaning two long black strips in the front of the Mac mini instead of one, and put the reader on the far right of the second strip, just like the infrared receptor is at the right of the CD/DVD slot.
Or even better, design some kind of CD/DVD slot with an SD reader built-in.
I also wish Apple would be able to get the same slot-loading mini-CD/DVD capability as the Nintendo Wii.
Aldaris
May 4, 07:40 PM
:D couldn't hurt now could it!
My MacBook pro does great, but I was getting the new Mac pro anyway, just added incentive to play star craft with a kick butt card!
My MacBook pro does great, but I was getting the new Mac pro anyway, just added incentive to play star craft with a kick butt card!
robbieduncan
Mar 29, 07:34 AM
YOU WILL GET DIFFERENT IMAGES IF YOU USE A 200mm EF Lens on a 7D (APS-C) and a 200mm EF-S lens on that same camera due to the FOVCF
Go and try it and come back...
Edit to add:
Here is a great little one page explanation of EF vs EF-s (http://jefflynchdev.wordpress.com/2009/01/10/understanding-canons-ef-s-lenses/). I quote from it:
Canon EF-S lenses are designed specifically for the 1.6x FOVCF DSLR bodies but still require the same 1.6x crop factor to be applied as the standard Canon EF Lenses to get the equivalent field of view comparison. Again, this is because the physical focal length of the lens is the same, regardless of which camera it’s mounted on.
Which, once again, agrees with me.
Go and try it and come back...
Edit to add:
Here is a great little one page explanation of EF vs EF-s (http://jefflynchdev.wordpress.com/2009/01/10/understanding-canons-ef-s-lenses/). I quote from it:
Canon EF-S lenses are designed specifically for the 1.6x FOVCF DSLR bodies but still require the same 1.6x crop factor to be applied as the standard Canon EF Lenses to get the equivalent field of view comparison. Again, this is because the physical focal length of the lens is the same, regardless of which camera it’s mounted on.
Which, once again, agrees with me.
more...
MisterMe
Sep 14, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by bullrat
I'm a potential "switcher" that wants to buy an iMac now but I keep reading all the posts on the various Mac boards about how even the latest 17 inch iMac looks "choppy" or "jerky" when resizing or moving windows and how much slower browsing the Web is than bad old MS on Wintel.
I have not seen those posts, but then I have seen a lot of other bitching and moaning about one thing or another. Point No. 1: Although I don't have access to a 17" iMac, I do have Jaguar installed on my 2000 Firewire PowerBook G3. I don't see any of that choppiness and jerkiness that you mentioned. I would be astonished to find it on a faster machine like the 17" iMac. Point No. 2: Don't take anybody's word for it. Drive down to your nearest Apple retailer. Look at the machines yourself. That should end all arguments.
I'm so bored reading all the MHz doesn't matter blather. It does matter. When a brand new $2000 computer looks choppy using a brand new OS, then something is not right. It should be blazing on all basic functions. Flame away if you like, I see a lot of that on the Mac boards whenever someone happens to disagree with the party line but I'd wager I speak for a lot of potential switchers.
Again, have your actually seen this "choppiness" on that $2000 machine with the brand new OS? Now for the issue of MHz, browse the web sites of the expensive UNIX workstations and servers. Look at the clock speeds of the offerings from IBM, HP, SGI, and Sun. For the most part, you will see that their machines have clock speeds in the sub-GHz range. Yet these are the machines of choice when price is no object and the job must get done. Just think about this: these boards are filled with laments that effectively tell you that you need substaintially higher clock speeds to run a computer game than you need to simulate the gas flow in a jet engine. Don't you think that something is just a bit warped here?
I guess what really blows me away is that Apple appears to be *purposely* cripppling their systems. From what I understand it's possible for Apple to upgrade the processor, bus, memory and other components without any technical difficulties.
Think. Think. Think. Apple does not "appear" to be purposesly crippling its systems. The entirity of the corporation orbits about the Macintosh. No company would purposely cripple its central product. The fact that Apple is only one of two profitable personal computer manufacturers serve as loud testimony to the contrary. Just because a bunch of idle college students post things on the Internet does not make them so.
Okay, you can flame away now -- but all I'm saying is there are a lot of potential switchers waiting to plunk down their hard earned cash if Apple would get it together. I see more and more Apple folks waking up, no longer satisfied to let Apple off the hook for getting further and further behind the rest of the computer world.
If you are serious, then nobody wants to see you flamed. But again, think. Exactly how is Apple behind? If you are talking about the race toward bankruptcy, then I would agree with you. Apple is second to last in that race among personal computer makers.
The best OS deserves the best hardware or at least a lot better hardware than being currently used. You want premium prices? Then give us premium hardware. Geez, drop Motorola if they can't deliver the goods and go with IBM (don't go with Intel or AMD to keep that Apple distinction). But pul-leeze do it soon. I want to buy!
-bullrat
I cannot agree more that the best OS deserves the best currently available hardware. However, the machine has to be affordable. For many years, Apple has ranked among the highest quality hardware manufactures. I am not just talking about microprocessors. I've endured conditions that put Dells out to pasture while my Mac chugged along like a champ.
As for all this business about Motorola this, IBM that, and AMD the other thing, I will leave it to Apple to make the best decision. It knows the players and its own business better than any nitwit posting on an Internet bulletin board.
I'm a potential "switcher" that wants to buy an iMac now but I keep reading all the posts on the various Mac boards about how even the latest 17 inch iMac looks "choppy" or "jerky" when resizing or moving windows and how much slower browsing the Web is than bad old MS on Wintel.
I have not seen those posts, but then I have seen a lot of other bitching and moaning about one thing or another. Point No. 1: Although I don't have access to a 17" iMac, I do have Jaguar installed on my 2000 Firewire PowerBook G3. I don't see any of that choppiness and jerkiness that you mentioned. I would be astonished to find it on a faster machine like the 17" iMac. Point No. 2: Don't take anybody's word for it. Drive down to your nearest Apple retailer. Look at the machines yourself. That should end all arguments.
I'm so bored reading all the MHz doesn't matter blather. It does matter. When a brand new $2000 computer looks choppy using a brand new OS, then something is not right. It should be blazing on all basic functions. Flame away if you like, I see a lot of that on the Mac boards whenever someone happens to disagree with the party line but I'd wager I speak for a lot of potential switchers.
Again, have your actually seen this "choppiness" on that $2000 machine with the brand new OS? Now for the issue of MHz, browse the web sites of the expensive UNIX workstations and servers. Look at the clock speeds of the offerings from IBM, HP, SGI, and Sun. For the most part, you will see that their machines have clock speeds in the sub-GHz range. Yet these are the machines of choice when price is no object and the job must get done. Just think about this: these boards are filled with laments that effectively tell you that you need substaintially higher clock speeds to run a computer game than you need to simulate the gas flow in a jet engine. Don't you think that something is just a bit warped here?
I guess what really blows me away is that Apple appears to be *purposely* cripppling their systems. From what I understand it's possible for Apple to upgrade the processor, bus, memory and other components without any technical difficulties.
Think. Think. Think. Apple does not "appear" to be purposesly crippling its systems. The entirity of the corporation orbits about the Macintosh. No company would purposely cripple its central product. The fact that Apple is only one of two profitable personal computer manufacturers serve as loud testimony to the contrary. Just because a bunch of idle college students post things on the Internet does not make them so.
Okay, you can flame away now -- but all I'm saying is there are a lot of potential switchers waiting to plunk down their hard earned cash if Apple would get it together. I see more and more Apple folks waking up, no longer satisfied to let Apple off the hook for getting further and further behind the rest of the computer world.
If you are serious, then nobody wants to see you flamed. But again, think. Exactly how is Apple behind? If you are talking about the race toward bankruptcy, then I would agree with you. Apple is second to last in that race among personal computer makers.
The best OS deserves the best hardware or at least a lot better hardware than being currently used. You want premium prices? Then give us premium hardware. Geez, drop Motorola if they can't deliver the goods and go with IBM (don't go with Intel or AMD to keep that Apple distinction). But pul-leeze do it soon. I want to buy!
-bullrat
I cannot agree more that the best OS deserves the best currently available hardware. However, the machine has to be affordable. For many years, Apple has ranked among the highest quality hardware manufactures. I am not just talking about microprocessors. I've endured conditions that put Dells out to pasture while my Mac chugged along like a champ.
As for all this business about Motorola this, IBM that, and AMD the other thing, I will leave it to Apple to make the best decision. It knows the players and its own business better than any nitwit posting on an Internet bulletin board.
ProstheticHead
May 10, 04:56 PM
So i got the Beta Copy of Star Craft but I don't seem to have any playable maps... :S What gives?
Did you actually get the beta from Blizzard? Or did you just download some random beta from a pirate site?
If you're not a part of the authorized Beta, you're not going to be able to play maps (as far as I know) on a Mac. The beta is based on online multiplayer only.
Did you actually get the beta from Blizzard? Or did you just download some random beta from a pirate site?
If you're not a part of the authorized Beta, you're not going to be able to play maps (as far as I know) on a Mac. The beta is based on online multiplayer only.
more...
desigarms
Apr 20, 02:20 PM
Wait....there are rules...but then apple can bend them as they see fit?
The rules should apply to all or to none.
Just another reason I really hate apple and cant wait for jobs to leave.
Exactly!!! I'm sick of Apple's crap. I went to Android and not looking back.
The rules should apply to all or to none.
Just another reason I really hate apple and cant wait for jobs to leave.
Exactly!!! I'm sick of Apple's crap. I went to Android and not looking back.
gatearray
Oct 6, 01:29 PM
Two new models, a "high end" and a smaller "low end" model???
Already exists. They are called the 8gb iPhone 3GS for $99, and the 32gb iPhone 4 for $299.
Next year, there will be an iPhone 4 with 8gb for $99, and the iPhone 5 will take over the $199/$299 spots with new, fantastic features. :)
How much cheaper does Apple need to make the phone to entice buyers? What can they do to make a more expensive phone for "high end" customers? Make it gold-plated, or possibly an iPhone with 24" spinner rims?
I agree with everyone else here, Shaw Wu should stop being a fake analyst and get to work at his new, more appropriate job� asking me if I want fries with that.
Already exists. They are called the 8gb iPhone 3GS for $99, and the 32gb iPhone 4 for $299.
Next year, there will be an iPhone 4 with 8gb for $99, and the iPhone 5 will take over the $199/$299 spots with new, fantastic features. :)
How much cheaper does Apple need to make the phone to entice buyers? What can they do to make a more expensive phone for "high end" customers? Make it gold-plated, or possibly an iPhone with 24" spinner rims?
I agree with everyone else here, Shaw Wu should stop being a fake analyst and get to work at his new, more appropriate job� asking me if I want fries with that.
more...
iMeowbot
Oct 16, 10:06 PM
The trademark was posted with a "Far Eastern" patent office...hmmmm... That is Japan I believe.
There is no application for iPhone in the Japanese trademark database.
There are, however, applications for iPhone dating from late September in several countries' systems: Hong Kong, Singapore, UK/EU, US. These applications have all been taken out by a mysterious US entity known as Ocean Telecom Services LLC, which gives only Corporation Trust Center of Wilmington, Delaware as its contact address. This corporation was only formed a few days before the trademark applications appeared.
(This doesn't appear to be Ocean Telecom of the UK, who don't make hardware; the trademark applications are definitely for hardware and software.)
More oddly, these applications list priority as an application filed in Trinidad and Tobago back in March 2006 - not bad for a company that came into being several months later. Annoyingly, the T&T IP Office servers haven't been responding today, so there isn't a quick way to check if this Ocean Telecom Services entity is an Apple shell.
Apple have, in the past, used the T&T trademark office (along with other countries not in primary Apple markets) to "hide" applications before, so it's certainly possible that this is from them.
There is no application for iPhone in the Japanese trademark database.
There are, however, applications for iPhone dating from late September in several countries' systems: Hong Kong, Singapore, UK/EU, US. These applications have all been taken out by a mysterious US entity known as Ocean Telecom Services LLC, which gives only Corporation Trust Center of Wilmington, Delaware as its contact address. This corporation was only formed a few days before the trademark applications appeared.
(This doesn't appear to be Ocean Telecom of the UK, who don't make hardware; the trademark applications are definitely for hardware and software.)
More oddly, these applications list priority as an application filed in Trinidad and Tobago back in March 2006 - not bad for a company that came into being several months later. Annoyingly, the T&T IP Office servers haven't been responding today, so there isn't a quick way to check if this Ocean Telecom Services entity is an Apple shell.
Apple have, in the past, used the T&T trademark office (along with other countries not in primary Apple markets) to "hide" applications before, so it's certainly possible that this is from them.
mmmcheese
Sep 27, 04:09 PM
hah! you are ridiculous, trying to play quake on an integrated graphics chip.
shoulda bought a macbook pro.
that said, for the money apple is charging, they could have definitely picked a low end dedicated graphics chip from ati or nvidia. shame on apple
Wasn't Quake 1 a software rendered game? In that case, the graphics processor has nothing to do with it. Even if it is OpenGL accelerated, the integrated graphics should have no problem on such an old game.
shoulda bought a macbook pro.
that said, for the money apple is charging, they could have definitely picked a low end dedicated graphics chip from ati or nvidia. shame on apple
Wasn't Quake 1 a software rendered game? In that case, the graphics processor has nothing to do with it. Even if it is OpenGL accelerated, the integrated graphics should have no problem on such an old game.
more...
drinu89
Mar 28, 08:24 AM
how does it confirm that ??? apple has previewed things in April, but showcased the whole thing in June in the past.. and this is an announcement for the Showcase.
"Join us for a preview of the future of iOS and Mac OSX"
That's what I think mate
"Join us for a preview of the future of iOS and Mac OSX"
That's what I think mate
lostngone
Apr 14, 06:31 PM
There goes the neighborhood...
Ok, so now we need a Fail-Whale equivalent because I see the Apple cloud going down a lot.
Ok, so now we need a Fail-Whale equivalent because I see the Apple cloud going down a lot.
more...
nighthawk
Oct 11, 12:02 AM
I'm sure Apple will progress the Mini to C2D when they Macbook is updated. The Mini only received a minor speed bump the last time around and I bet it had more to do with keeping consistant pricing than it did with updating a product.
If I remember right, the only change was the bottom end went from a Core Solo to Core Duo. And since the Core 2 Duos cost the same as Core 1 Duos, there is no financial reason for Apple to continue to use the older chips... so I agree the Mac Mini could be upgraded at any time.
However, from the roadmap I don't think that the lower end Core 2 Duos are shipping yet. I always thought it was odd that Intel would release the top-of-the-line chips first since there would be fewer production units which fit the standards (whereas running a CPU at a lower clockspeed or smaller cache would be OK).
If I remember right, the only change was the bottom end went from a Core Solo to Core Duo. And since the Core 2 Duos cost the same as Core 1 Duos, there is no financial reason for Apple to continue to use the older chips... so I agree the Mac Mini could be upgraded at any time.
However, from the roadmap I don't think that the lower end Core 2 Duos are shipping yet. I always thought it was odd that Intel would release the top-of-the-line chips first since there would be fewer production units which fit the standards (whereas running a CPU at a lower clockspeed or smaller cache would be OK).
alent1234
Mar 25, 08:32 AM
so silly, everyone knows apple invented everything ever made
more...
bankshot
Aug 14, 04:21 PM
I feel embarrassed watching them.
Exactly. I find the Mac character to be very smug and condescending. I don't like being associated with that just because I choose to use Macs. I've talked to several people about the ads, and most find them to be offensive because of the elitist attitude. It's not just "Look at how great I am," but it's "Look at how crappy you are, too." Nobody likes being told they're crappy.
Some people I know just dismiss it as an ad for a product they'll never buy. A few told me they ultimately dismissed it before really considering the Mac argument because it seemed like all fluff and no substance (that seems to be a common perception among people who avoid Macs: that they are all about style and not substance). Other people said it actively made them want to do anything to hurt Apple - not only by not buying the products, but advising everyone they know to stay away as well.
I can't think of one person I've talked to who found the ads to be completely positive. The people I know who like Macs were all a bit uncomfortable like me, being stereotyped as smug and elitist.
The big problem with these "hello, I'm a Mac" commercials is that they're an easy target for parodies.
Yeah, they're easy to parody because they're made so simply. Same as the "switch" ads. Speaking of parodies, this one's my favorite:
http://joyoftech.com/joyoftech/joyimages/817.jpg
:D
Exactly. I find the Mac character to be very smug and condescending. I don't like being associated with that just because I choose to use Macs. I've talked to several people about the ads, and most find them to be offensive because of the elitist attitude. It's not just "Look at how great I am," but it's "Look at how crappy you are, too." Nobody likes being told they're crappy.
Some people I know just dismiss it as an ad for a product they'll never buy. A few told me they ultimately dismissed it before really considering the Mac argument because it seemed like all fluff and no substance (that seems to be a common perception among people who avoid Macs: that they are all about style and not substance). Other people said it actively made them want to do anything to hurt Apple - not only by not buying the products, but advising everyone they know to stay away as well.
I can't think of one person I've talked to who found the ads to be completely positive. The people I know who like Macs were all a bit uncomfortable like me, being stereotyped as smug and elitist.
The big problem with these "hello, I'm a Mac" commercials is that they're an easy target for parodies.
Yeah, they're easy to parody because they're made so simply. Same as the "switch" ads. Speaking of parodies, this one's my favorite:
http://joyoftech.com/joyoftech/joyimages/817.jpg
:D
MattSepeta
Apr 12, 01:45 PM
Again, those are majorities singling out a minority. You don't expect a group of hispanic men to jump a korean man if there's more korean's than hispanic's on the street corner. Likewise, blacks are the majority in a black ghetto. It's just that, when you look at the country as a whole, they are the minority.
Ok. What about a white woman walking through a white neighbor hood. Passes a hispanic man who beats her because she is white.
Not racist?
:confused:
Ok. What about a white woman walking through a white neighbor hood. Passes a hispanic man who beats her because she is white.
Not racist?
:confused:
more...
goobot
Feb 23, 04:11 PM
Who cares, if you can't use google or call apple to ask how to disable it even tho it is right there, I have no sympathy.
Mac-Addict
Oct 26, 08:22 PM
There was one security guy with a shaved head who was excellent although I think he spent most of his time down the other end of the queue. One of the security guys at the front was really nice too but was a bit overwhelmed due to the number of people. There was an Apple guy at the front who was a bit rubbish though and let people in. The queuing was *really* bad at the front. People were pushing in and got away with it at five to six. One guy even barged in at exactly six o'clock.
Apple apparently couldn't get permission to use barriers from the council - probably because they left it so late to announce when Leopard would be in stores. We (everyone at the front) were *extremely* disappointed with the shocking organisation of the queues. The first 20m or so of the queue was about 4 people wide. The inner two had been there since about 4 while the outer two had queue jumped in at great annoyance to everyone else at about ten to six and the staff did nothing. This is the reason why some of you didn't get t-shirts. We tried complaining and arguing but to no avail. :(
Shame people had to spoil it but xD It was fun while it lasted :P Did Gareth fully install Leopard on his MBP?
Apple apparently couldn't get permission to use barriers from the council - probably because they left it so late to announce when Leopard would be in stores. We (everyone at the front) were *extremely* disappointed with the shocking organisation of the queues. The first 20m or so of the queue was about 4 people wide. The inner two had been there since about 4 while the outer two had queue jumped in at great annoyance to everyone else at about ten to six and the staff did nothing. This is the reason why some of you didn't get t-shirts. We tried complaining and arguing but to no avail. :(
Shame people had to spoil it but xD It was fun while it lasted :P Did Gareth fully install Leopard on his MBP?
misdy
May 1, 04:33 PM
Maybe Puzzle Quest? Although, that doesn't use hearts or potions. It's the type of game you're talking about though.
rph105
Oct 25, 01:25 AM
Yezzir Im Going To Be There For 6pm Sharp With My Gorgeous Gurl, Hoping To Scoop Leopard For Both Of Us
simsaladimbamba
Apr 7, 07:33 AM
No.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10644330/MR_Image_Hotlinks/MR_screenshots/MR_screenshots_04_2011/Screen%20shot%202011-04-07%20at%202.31.52%20PM.png
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10644330/MR_Image_Hotlinks/MR_screenshots/MR_screenshots_04_2011/Screen%20shot%202011-04-07%20at%202.31.52%20PM.png
Di9it8
Oct 26, 06:18 PM
Shows how busy it was
We bought a macbook and printer, and as we were leaving I asked the guy serving us if Vista was in the box and he said yes:D:D:D
We bought a macbook and printer, and as we were leaving I asked the guy serving us if Vista was in the box and he said yes:D:D:D
Eye4Desyn
Apr 1, 11:37 AM
I was so angry last night to find out there was no longer any Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, or NatGeo :mad:
Quite frankly, I just don't see the difference between what is being offered in my home from the box or from my iPad other than screen size. If the big networks feel as though by pulling their channels from this app is another way for them to figure out how to create revenue, than that sucks. Seems as though they may see some sort of HuluPlus opportunity here. As it was, there were already ads/commercials in the TWC iPad app to begin because it's live TV programming streamed to the iPad.
Quite frankly, I just don't see the difference between what is being offered in my home from the box or from my iPad other than screen size. If the big networks feel as though by pulling their channels from this app is another way for them to figure out how to create revenue, than that sucks. Seems as though they may see some sort of HuluPlus opportunity here. As it was, there were already ads/commercials in the TWC iPad app to begin because it's live TV programming streamed to the iPad.
iBlue
Dec 21, 01:57 AM
I sure hope this hasn't ruined davidjearly's christmas (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8423340.stm).
No comments:
Post a Comment