or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by hmm

 Those things could be perfectly sufficient for some people. I think memory and storage constraints are likely to be a far greater aggravation for lighter users. What I dislike is how they artificially constrained the top minis. I do agree with you on the iPads, but it's not like this is new. They have cheaped out on weird things as long as I've used them. I recall the older earbuds, charger problems with both the early G4s and certain macbook pros, battery issues (check...
 It's not that atypical of litigation. Parties often reach an agreement that includes the discontinuation of future business together. In the past Apple stocked Bose headphones as accessories for their own products. Apple didn't make a natural accessory to a Bose product, so Bose Stores weren't a natural distribution channel for Apple. This site just likes to spin things in weird ways.
 If they had stuck with tracking the 15" hardware at $900-1000, that could have been a winner. The price increase on processors shouldn't have been as severe as it was with the 13". They accomplished the transition with the (previously) low end model by bumping the price upwards $100 to account for bumps in cpu cost. If they wanted to, they could have done the same thing with the one above it rather than expand what used to be their base offering. The $500 mini is a...
Ghz != performance. It refers to the length of a clock cycle when the cpu is operating at its base clock rate. It does not describe the amount of work accomplished during a cycle, only its duration. If they aren't from the same chip design, the comparison is 100% useless and another silly example of spreading misinformation on the internet. If you want to read about the end of the mhz wars, look up the stories of the old Pentium III architecture. Actually architecture...
It's actually pretty typical of endorsement contracts. Apple has their own stipulations somewhere, which may or may not differ from these types of agreements.
That's a somewhat strong assumption. Your local market factors into that, unless you want to sell on ebay and eat the fees and hassle. Three years is also around the time where I've had chargers break and batteries begin to bulge in the past, so I would say you're looking at closer to $800 on the macbook pro as a reasonable estimate. Where I agree is that at the $1500 level, it's skewed strongly in favor of the macbook pro. In this revision they essentially squeezed out...
 The cpus that Apple uses in the 15" now cost a bit more. The 13" ones cost considerably more, to where I doubted they would stick with $600 on the entry model. They moved what was that one to $700, and then placed another configuration beneath it. As you can see the $700 mini uses internals similar to those in the current 13" macbook pro, just like the old one did at $600. Where they cheaped out was on the one above that. It could have held out at $900 with a quad...
Part of it is that they configured for a different price range. I'm not surprised by how it shook out. As I mentioned before on here, the price increase on cpus was the steepest at the low end with the $600 model. They actually implemented something similar to what was in the $600 model in the $700 model. By that I mean they followed the 13" macbook pro. The recommended customer price as per intel's listing increased around $130 there from one generation to the next, thus...
Anything specific reason?
I've heard their headphones, and what I liked most was the noise cancellation.That statement makes absolutely no sense. Apple sold Bose headphones as accessory items for Apple branded products. They were there to provide an additional sale for Apple retail. This really doesn't require much insight. Think for a second before you post. Apple doesn't make anything that would be a natural accessory to a Bose item, so retail space leased by Bose would not have any reason to...
New Posts  All Forums: