or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by kim kap sol

Looks like it's official released now. http://www.parallels.com/
It's even better on Frank's 2000" TV.
Trust me...you will know.
Ok, teckstud, show us on the doll...where did Apple touch you?
Perhaps this day will come in the distant future. Desktops still remain the most comfortable way for someone to work on text documents, spreadsheets, app development, graphics design, certain games, and if the computer is set up in a room fit for watching a movie...then watching a movie. Doing some of this stuff on a tiny notebook screen or an iPhone/iPod touch simply doesn't make sense. There is no trend per se...just that the people that don't particularly care for...
Everything about the new 27" iMac seems to be high quality. Mossberg says the new iMacs are evolutionary not revolutionary...I suppose I *could* agree except that the 27" iMac is one pretty frickin' big evolution -- it's a real desktop computer.Desktop CPUDesktop GPUDesktop speakersDesktop HDDLike I said in my previous post though, I'm thinking heat is going to be an issue with these beasts.
Much more for sure. This is the first time I'm even considering an iMac. Three days ago, the iMac was simply a mobile computer in a sexy desktop package. Today, the 27" iMac is a desktop computer in a sexy desktop package...complete with desktop CPU, desktop HDD, and a screen big enough to act as a nice media center (a TV). I'm somewhat worried this iMac will be plagued by heat issues. But if it turns out that the heat dissipates well, I'm for sure going to buy this...
Perhaps to some people they are. The trade-off is really the speed that one can achieve with a mouse. You'll find that someone with a mouse will usually be much faster at moving the pointer cursor than someone with a trackball. I hate trackpads and trackballs because they're slow and inefficient compared to the mouse (which may be less ergonomic that a trackball) which feels like a natural extension of the arm.
Nonsense. You're just using the 30" Cinema HD Display as somekind of basis. But anyone can play that game and say that the 30" Cinema HD Display is small compared to Product XYZ and that they are against smaller displays. The 160x2560 "missing" pixels would be fun to have but definitely not if you consider that you're going to pay 100 dollars more for them but you're foregoing an entire computer that goes with it.
For anyone still thinking the 27" iMac is expensive. 1. If a 27" LED-backlit IPS display with 2560x1440 resolution did exist as a standalone product, you could probably never find one that would cost less than 1000 dollars. 2. If 1 is true, then rest of the top-of-the-line 27" iMac costs 1000 dollars. 3. I don't think it's possible to build your own box for 1000 dollars. I think sargeantjackass (his name escapes me and I can't be bothered to go back a few pages to find...
New Posts  All Forums: