or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Mac shipments continue to shrink as Apple loses ground in US PC market
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mac shipments continue to shrink as Apple loses ground in US PC market - Page 6

post #201 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by bananaman View Post
 

1->They are repairable

2->It's 3k???

omgwat 

 

Once you upgrade the  i7 processor from 2.7 to 2.8 for the top model the price does jump to 3,050.00 or even when you change the 256GB drive to 512GB.  I really think the base model at 2100.00 is more then adequate though, for myself anyway, I would probably upgrade the memory to 16GB but that's it, the rest is great.

 

As far as the warranty is concerned there are retailers that offer a 5 year extended warranty. I'm not sure where you live so I'll assume the US. After a little research I found that Fry's Electronics has an extended warranty plan. I don't know anything about this store but their site is fairly large and looks professional.


Edited by Relic - 10/11/13 at 6:58am
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #202 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

And OS X’s marketshare against Windows is growing, by the way.

 

Very True.

 

2011 - iOS 1% / OSX 6.8%

 

2013 - iOS 4.15%  /  OSX 7%

"I invented the rectangle"  - Steve Jobs

"We Bomb you" - USA

Reply

"I invented the rectangle"  - Steve Jobs

"We Bomb you" - USA

Reply
post #203 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek View Post

Mac shipments in the UK certainly aren't helped by Apple continuously jumping up their prices here whilst keeping them stable in the US.

The exchange rate is essentially the same now as when the iMacs were released last year yet we are charged another £100 ($160).

Spot on.

 

We lose the DVD (which Apple charged me £60 external!) and Apple ups the entry price by £100...then another £50!  That's £210 to get the base iMac to little over a year ago!

 

£210.  From a previous £999.  Then a £1095 and then a £1150?  With Integrated crappics to add insult to injury?

 

Known in the UK as, 'Taking the p*ss.'

 

And if that wasn't bad.  After the crazy 2008 crash...Apple dropped the £695 integrated crappics iMac....and bumped up the entry price to £999.

 

'You're taking the p*ss...you're taking the p*ss...repeat.'

 

I may like Apple kit.  ...and according to Steve Jobs, 'Money isn't everything.'  

 

No kidding.  Easy to say when you're millions and corporations are ruling the world.

 

The things they price the best are the entry iPad at £399.  It's the best value they do.  It wasn't the expected £1000 price tag.

 

I await the price of the Mac Pros with interest.

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #204 of 275

So, we're in a triple dip recession with worse to come (believe what you like...but you can only keep printing money out of fresh air for so long...) and Apple hike their prices and wonder why Mac sales begin to suffer.


I think we've just reached the glass ceiling on Apple's desktop/laptop growth.

 

Without winding back some of the price hikes to boost sales I can Mac sales slipping or losing traction.

 

Yeah, yeah.  They haven't updated the Pro in years, the iMac had a late update (again, no design to blame this time...), no Macbook Pro or Mini...there's mitigating circumstances along with the ungoing cannibilisation from the iOS devices.

 

However, you reap what you sow when you're greedy.

 

Just look at iSocks.  Apple could but an Apple logo on 'Jam' or peanut butter and still charge £10-20 for it.

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #205 of 275
Haven't read all the posts so this may have been discussed:

I think there are 2 sleeper Macs:

1) The New Mac Pro -- likely very expensive, but fills a high-end need where price is secondary. I think that it will be supply constrained for ay least 6 months along with 4K displays.

2) The new Mac Mini (assuming bumped specs at same price) -- especially the server version.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #206 of 275

They even hiked the price of the iPhone 5S.

 

So the '5' wasn't really £100 less at all.  With the plastic casing they're using, they've padded margins on both the 's' and 'c' models.

 

Transparent?

 

Yes.

 

Greedy B*st*rdness?  

 

Yes.

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #207 of 275

I like Tim Cook.  The Apple legacy is in safe hands as much as it could be.

 

However, he's capitulated to shareholder demands in a way Steve Jobs never did.

 

Nobody expects Apple to sell junk.

 

But Apple can't sell a laptop for £695?

 

They can't sell an integrated crappics desktop with a monitor, k/b and mouse for £595?

 

B*ll*cks.

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #208 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Haven't read all the posts so this may have been discussed:

I think there are 2 sleeper Macs:

1) The New Mac Pro -- likely very expensive, but fills a high-end need where price is secondary. I think that it will be supply constrained for ay least 6 months along with 4K displays.

2) The new Mac Mini (assuming bumped specs at same price) -- especially the server version.

Well, if they want to sell even less Mac Pros than they did before...

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #209 of 275

Apple could offer a fairer deal to consumers than they do.  In this economy it remains to be seen how long Macs can tread water at their current prices.

 

We used to have an entry iMac for far, far, far less than £1000.

 

We had one as cheap as £545 inc vat once upon a time (certainly £595...or less for an entry model.  Was that junk?)

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #210 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post
 

Spot on.

 

We lose the DVD (which Apple charged me £60 external!) and Apple ups the entry price by £100...then another £50!  That's £210 to get the base iMac to little over a year ago!

 

£210.  From a previous £999.  Then a £1095 and then a £1150?  With Integrated crappics to add insult to injury?

 

Known in the UK as, 'Taking the p*ss.'

 

And if that wasn't bad.  After the crazy 2008 crash...Apple dropped the £695 integrated crappics iMac....and bumped up the entry price to £999.

 

'You're taking the p*ss...you're taking the p*ss...repeat.'

 

I may like Apple kit.  ...and according to Steve Jobs, 'Money isn't everything.'  

 

No kidding.  Easy to say when you're millions and corporations are ruling the world.

 

The things they price the best are the entry iPad at £399.  It's the best value they do.  It wasn't the expected £1000 price tag.

 

I await the price of the Mac Pros with interest.

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

 

£ vs $,

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=GBPUSD%3DX+Interactive#symbol=;range=20080325,20130705;compare=;indicator=volume;charttype=area;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined;

 

This is why iMac went from £782 ( March 2009 ) to £949 ( April 2009 ). Ok, Apple was a bit late but there ain't no such thing as a free lunch with Apple.

"I invented the rectangle"  - Steve Jobs

"We Bomb you" - USA

Reply

"I invented the rectangle"  - Steve Jobs

"We Bomb you" - USA

Reply
post #211 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

I like Tim Cook.  The Apple legacy is in safe hands as much as it could be.

However, he's capitulated to shareholder demands in a way Steve Jobs never did.

Nobody expects Apple to sell junk.

But Apple can't sell a laptop for £695?

They can't sell an integrated crappics desktop with a monitor, k/b and mouse for £595?

B*ll*cks.

Lemon Bon Bon.

How has Cook now down to shareholder pressure? Many clueless shareholders/analysts want market share in spite of margins. Apple has refused to make cheap sh1t. Sure they can release cheap Macs but it'll be plastic, use cheap components, weak-ass processor and be crap. No thanks.
post #212 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

1) The New Mac Pro -- likely very expensive, but fills a high-end need where price is secondary. I think that it will be supply constrained for ay least 6 months along with 4K displays.

Low volume machines hardly ever have supply problems. You're talking about 250,000 units per quarter tops, that's under 3,000 units per day. The design of the machine is so simplified now:

- base, power supply, single heatsink, attach the 3 required boards to the heatsink, fan on top, pop in the SSD, slide on the lid, test it works before shipping (hopefully)

Assembling one by hand surely wouldn't take more than an hour, so 1 assembly worker could build 8 a day. They can employ 500 workers in one factory and they can meet even their peak worldwide orders no problem. There may be a delay of a few days or so at the start while they build up inventory but never 6 months. Even the iMac that sells 5x that many wasn't delayed by 6 months and this time, they've announced the machine months in advance so they can build up a supply at launch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

2) The new Mac Mini (assuming bumped specs at same price) -- especially the server version.

The Mini is likely waiting on the dual-core CPUs. They seem to have benchmarks out:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i5-4300M-Notebook-Processor.93556.0.html

but all the manufacturers are shipping the Ultrabooks with the low power CPUs. Intel might have deliberately delayed the standard CPUs to push Ultrabooks, possibly to help drive up average selling prices - notice the Air came out straight away. This unfortunately means that Apple has to wait for CPUs for the 13" rMBP and Mini as they use the higher power dual-core CPUs and while the quad-i7s might be available for the 15", it's hard to ship those without updating the 13" ones at the same time. Switching to the ULT chips would raise the prices.

Thunderbolt 2 is another thing that could cause a delay but Apple skipped it in the iMac so that already weakens potential support, same with the Air. That's probably 50% of their lineup. If they skip it in the MBP, that's a slight disincentive for peripheral manufacturers but not entirely. A lot of peripherals don't need the extra bandwidth anyway. Given that the remaining products to be updated use external displays, I'm thinking there's a 4K display coming. It actually makes a lot of sense that they'd release it after the iMac because that would have created supply constraints having a 4K iMac. If they'd brought out a 4K Thunderbolt display and not a 4K iMac, it wouldn't make the iMac look very good. The iMac is old news now so it doesn't matter.

Tim said to expect product rollouts into 2014 but it doesn't make sense for them to delay the Macs further and they had a whole raft of updates last October. This next event might see new iPads, new minis, new Mac Pro, cheaper Retina Macbook Pros, 4K Thunderbolt displays, hardware controllers for the iPads. Plenty to talk about.
post #213 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by mocseg View Post

£ vs $

Don't forget that $ doesn't include tax, £ does.
post #214 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


Apple has refused to make cheap sh1t. Sure they can release cheap Macs but it'll be plastic, use cheap components, weak-ass processor and be crap. No thanks.

I don't think you need to go off the deep end on LBB's remarks regarding Macs.  I've said it before and I'll say it again...the majority of people don't care about quality of their PCs as much as they do with mobile devices (tablets and laptops included).  I'm not saying Apple should make cheap sh!t crap Macs...but I am saying that Apple could lower build costs in order to provide the good in the good/better/best line of all-in-ones.  This has nothing to do with catering to shareholders, this has to do with providing a quality product in a classy way.  Most would agree that an all-in-one for $800 (as one example) is not thought of as cheap sh!t in and of itself....it depends on what the product looks like and what it can do.

post #215 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

1) The New Mac Pro -- likely very expensive, but fills a high-end need where price is secondary. I think that it will be supply constrained for ay least 6 months along with 4K displays.

Low volume machines hardly ever have supply problems. You're talking about 250,000 units per quarter tops, that's under 3,000 units per day. The design of the machine is so simplified now:

- base, power supply, single heatsink, attach the 3 required boards to the heatsink, fan on top, pop in the SSD, slide on the lid, test it works before shipping (hopefully)

Assembling one by hand surely wouldn't take more than an hour, so 1 assembly worker could build 8 a day. They can employ 500 workers in one factory and they can meet even their peak worldwide orders no problem. There may be a delay of a few days or so at the start while they build up inventory but never 6 months. Even the iMac that sells 5x that many wasn't delayed by 6 months and this time, they've announced the machine months in advance so they can build up a supply at launch.

My theory is that the new Mac Pro will not be a low volume machine. AFAICT it will be the most powerful off-the-shelf solution available to: researchers, 3D Modelers, scientists, creatives, video editors, sound editors, medical/imaging, gamers, etc. It is the only high-end machine that can run [supported] Windows, Linux, Unix, Mac OS X -- singly, or in any combination.

For example, the movie industry is moving towards all-digital, end-to-end 4K creation, distribution and presentation. TV, the same. All this requires much more compute, graphics, storage capacity and I/O capability.

Michael Cioni, digital cinema pioneer, in a 2012 preso "Prepping For A 4K World" -- discussed the processing and "data" requirements of 5K & 4K Video processing on the movie "The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo". At about 7:58 in Michael discusses the data processing and storage fanout of end-to-end 4K video:




Significant, is that each frame is 45 MBytes, and at 25 frames per second thats 1.1 GBytes per second. 12 TBytes of source video is processed to produce an hour video of 4T Bytes of output. Special effects often are done at 60 or 120 fps -- greatly increasing processing/storage requirements.

Circa 2000, when Final Cut 1 came on the scene, a typical video editing seat cost $125,000-$250,000 for hardware and software.

Today you can greatly exceed that capability for around $12,000.

For example I have:

     $500 Final Cut Pro X, Motion, Compressor
     $500 Plugins and training
     $500 Cables and Misc.
  $1,500 Silhouette SFX Roto/Paint
  $3,700 Loaded 2011 iMac 27" (I use an old 23" Cinema display as a second monitor)
  $4,800 2 Promise Pegasus 12 (10 TB) Thunderbolt Raid
$11,500 Total

So, for 1/10 of the cost of a video editing seat in 2000, I have much, much more capability.

Now here's an unexpected incident: My granddaughter was fooling around with my iPhone 5S - taking SloMo videos: 1280x720 at 120 fps. I imported one of these videos into FCPX -- it was 14 seconds long (60 fps) and 29 seconds long when conformed to 120 fps. What surprised me was that my very capable iMac really struggled to import, optimize and render this relatively minor clip. It wasn't red-lined, but there was obviously some problem processing 720P at 120 fps???

Back on point. I have put off replacing the 2011 iMac 27" with a newer model pending the announcement and pricing of the new Mac Pro.

To my mind, $5,000 - $6,000 for a Mac Pro would greatly increase my processing capability at an acceptable cost -- and provide better future-proofing (upgrade capability) to boot.

I am not a 'pro" editor (just an old guy with 3 teenage grandkids), but I don't think that I am alone… The price is quite affordable -- especially when you consider that I paid $2,700 (not including disks monitor, etc.) for my 48 KB (yes KiloByte) RAM in 1978. $2,700 in 1978 dollars is about $12,000 in 2013 dollars.

One final point: Apple, brilliantly (IMO), has reduced the entry cost for video, effects and sound editing software to the point where anyone with a decent camera/sound equipment and access to a Mac can do these types editing. And once you get the creative juices running -- what's a few thousand dollars to realize your creative potential -- software, hardware, camera/sound equipment alike?

Whew!

Another final point: I used the cinema industry as an example, but there are a lot of other industries that use high-end personal computers and workstations. I think that this market segment is open to disruption… Who better than Apple with a $5,000-$10,000 new Mac Pro (with all the latest tech) to provide this high-end disruption?

The full video is below -- an excellent and fun watch!


Edited by Dick Applebaum - 10/11/13 at 1:59pm
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #216 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewys808 View Post

I don't think you need to go off the deep end on LBB's remarks regarding Macs.  I've said it before and I'll say it again...the majority of people don't care about quality of their PCs as much as they do with mobile devices (tablets and laptops included).  I'm not saying Apple should make cheap sh!t crap Macs...but I am saying that Apple could lower build costs in order to provide the good in the good/better/best line of all-in-ones.  This has nothing to do with catering to shareholders, this has to do with providing a quality product in a classy way.  Most would agree that an all-in-one for $800 (as one example) is not thought of as cheap sh!t in and of itself....it depends on what the product looks like and what it can do.

The majority of people may not care, but Apple does. Why should Apple cater to them? They make 45% of the PC profits and own 90% of the $1000+ market.
post #217 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


The majority of people may not care, but Apple does. Why should Apple cater to them? They make 45% of the PC profits and own 90% of the $1000+ market.


Because they want 80% of PC profits and because these products would be of value to consumers.

 

It's what many consumers want and need.  Apple cares about that.

post #218 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

My theory is that the new Mac Pro will not be a low volume machine. AFAICT it will be the most powerful off-the-shelf solution available to: researchers, 3D Modelers, scientists, creatives, video editors, sound editors, medical/imaging, gamers, etc. It is the only high-end machine that can run [supported] Windows, Linux, Unix, Mac OS X -- singly, or in any combination.

That entire market is small at this price range though and those people don't all need to use a Mac Pro. Workstation sales worldwide across every manufacturer are around 1 million units per quarter and Apple can't take all of it because a lot of the others start their workstation prices at $1000. The best case would be to reach HP at about 40% marketshare but that would require HP to lose their share and even then it's still only 1/3 of the iMac sales.

It doesn't have to be a high volume market. The higher-end models in any lineup from any manufacturer typically aren't the highest volume sellers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Significant, is that each frame is 45 MBytes, and at 25 frames per second thats 1.1 GBytes per second. 12 TBytes of source video is processed to produce an hour video of 4T Bytes of output. Special effects often are done at 60 or 120 fps -- greatly increasing processing/storage requirements.

1GB/s means you get 16 minutes of footage on a $1000 1TB SSD or over 5.5TB ($5500) for a 90 minute movie so prices would really need to come down but uncompressed wouldn't be necessary for long sequences so the 1.25GB/s speed of Apple's PCIe SSD will be useful for shorter media. It only goes up to 1TB so far but I wonder if the Mac Pro will get a larger option. Either way, bulk storage has to go outside and that's for the best as it means it's far easier to buy new machines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Now here's an unexpected incident: My granddaughter was fooling around with my iPhone 5S - taking SloMo videos: 1280x720 at 120 fps. I imported one of these videos into FCPX -- it was 14 seconds long (60 fps) and 29 seconds long when conformed to 120 fps. What surprised me was that my very capable iMac really struggled to import, optimize and render this relatively minor clip. It wasn't red-lined, but there was obviously some problem processing 720P at 120 fps???

Maybe try converting to 120fps ProRes in Quicktime Pro and then import that to FCPX. The video quality looks nice on the 5S as well as the photos. Here's a video shot on a 5S:

http://vimeo.com/75353123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Back on point. I have put off replacing the 2011 iMac 27" with a newer model pending the announcement and pricing of the new Mac Pro.

To my mind, $5,000 - $6,000 for a Mac Pro would greatly increase my processing capability at an acceptable cost -- and provide better future-proofing (upgrade capability) to boot.

It might not use all the cores fully on the top-end model:

http://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2011/20110624_1_FinalCutProX--howto.html

but an 8-core will give you a boost over the quad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

what's a few thousand dollars to realize your creative potential

It can be quite a lot if you realize you don't have any creative potential. 1wink.gif But even then, it's not an expense as it retains its resale value. You aren't really losing a few thousand, same as you don't really lose what you spend on a house. Rather than it sitting in the bank, it is taking the form of a product you can do something with.
post #219 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

That entire market is small at this price range though and those people don't all need to use a Mac Pro.

Plus not everyone is going to rush out to get the latest Mac Pro. Many will just use their current one and check online what they can buy after their current one dies.
Quote:
Maybe try converting to 120fps ProRes in Quicktime Pro and then import that to FCPX. The video quality looks nice on the 5S as well as the photos. Here's a video shot on a 5S:

http://vimeo.com/75353123

Really cool these slow-mo videos popping up on the net. I like this one as well:
http://vimeo.com/75285430

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Back on point. I have put off replacing the 2011 iMac 27" with a newer model pending the announcement and pricing of the new Mac Pro.

To my mind, $5,000 - $6,000 for a Mac Pro would greatly increase my processing capability at an acceptable cost -- and provide better future-proofing (upgrade capability) to boot.

Future proofing as in storage and screen is external I take it. Well, that certainly is a good way to look at it. I presume one is able to use their iMac screen for their new MP?
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

what's a few thousand dollars to realize your creative potential

It can be quite a lot if you realize you don't have any creative potential. 1wink.gif

LOL!
post #220 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewys808 View Post


Because they want 80% of PC profits and because these products would be of value to consumers.

It's what many consumers want and need.  Apple cares about that.

You release a cheap Mac, margins would be lower. Not only that, people willing to buy the $1200 iMac will then buy the cheap Mac instead thus you lose a sale at the higher end. Soon more people will buy the cheap Mac and you eat your sales at the higher end and possibly eat the iPad sales. Thus lower margins and lower profit.
post #221 of 275
Those stats are actually quite surprising. Where I work we just replaced all the laptops with macbook airs.

Within a week everyone had given up with osx and had win 8 installed instead. Seems iOS lovers don't necessarily translate to mac lovers. Everyone does seem to love the hardware though.

Maybe Apple should consider abandoning OSX and work out a way to put iOS on a desktop.
post #222 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


Now here's an unexpected incident: My granddaughter was fooling around with my iPhone 5S - taking SloMo videos: 1280x720 at 120 fps. I imported one of these videos into FCPX -- it was 14 seconds long (60 fps) and 29 seconds long when conformed to 120 fps. What surprised me was that my very capable iMac really struggled to import, optimize and render this relatively minor clip. It wasn't red-lined, but there was obviously some problem processing 720P at 120 fps???

Just to follow up on the above... It seems the problem causing FCPX import to struggle was unrelated to the iPhone 5S, the 120 fps SloMo footage, the Mac OS or the iMac. The problem is caused when the [event target] Promise Pegasus RAID's space gets low during import.

When available space gets around 1.5 GB, the Pegasus slows down significantly -- even though there is enough space to complete the import.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #223 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

That entire market is small at this price range though and those people don't all need to use a Mac Pro.

Plus not everyone is going to rush out to get the latest Mac Pro. Many will just use their current one and check online what they can buy after their current one dies.

AFAICT, there is a lot of pent up demand for a new, faster Mac Pro from the current Mac Pro users. I suspect some will be dissatisfied that they can't use their existing hardware components in the new model.

In answer to @Marvin, I suggested that the new Mac Pro may attract new [to the Mac or to the Mac Pro] users that are topping out on their iMacs or Windows or Linux machines.
Quote:
Quote:
Maybe try converting to 120fps ProRes in Quicktime Pro and then import that to FCPX. The video quality looks nice on the 5S as well as the photos. Here's a video shot on a 5S:

http://vimeo.com/75353123

Really cool these slow-mo videos popping up on the net. I like this one as well:
http://vimeo.com/75285430

I posted an update to my conversion problems -- my RAID was running out of space and that slowed everything down. Turns out, when space is available, FCPX handles the import with ease -- much faster than transferring the SloMo file to the mac then exporting in QT:

1) Connect the iPhone to the Mac

2) With FCPX, import 120 fps to a FCPX Event (Trans code optional) -- the 120 fps clips are rendered/played in the event as 60 fps (realtime)

3) When you include the clip in a timeline you can play at realtime 60 fps, or 1-click conform to SloMo at 120 fps -- or manually retime from anything 1,000 times slower or faster

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Back on point. I have put off replacing the 2011 iMac 27" with a newer model pending the announcement and pricing of the new Mac Pro.

To my mind, $5,000 - $6,000 for a Mac Pro would greatly increase my processing capability at an acceptable cost -- and provide better future-proofing (upgrade capability) to boot.

Future proofing as in storage and screen is external I take it. Well, that certainly is a good way to look at it. I presume one is able to use their iMac screen for their new MP?



The only expandable Macs I ever owned were a Mac II (circa 1987) and the Developer Intal Mac which had the current Mac Pro form factor. The latter was a real beast -- a floor top rather than a desktop computer. But, even with all the room inside, "expansion" was rather limited -- few PCI cards and a few additional disks. At the time I was using PPC iMacs and had about 1.5 TB of external FireWire LaCie HDDs. Couldn't match that with internal drives on a Mac Pro.

So yes, I applaud Apple for designing the new Mac Pro for relatively unlimited external expansion as opposed to limited internal expansion.

Sigh, as you know, I can't use the iMac screen as an external monitor. I have a 24" iMac with a bad internal drive -- that I boot from a 2TB LaCie FireWire 800 drive. But I've always wanted the option to use an iMac as an additional display. They have FW Target Disk Mode -- why not Target Display Mode.

Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

what's a few thousand dollars to realize your creative potential

It can be quite a lot if you realize you don't have any creative potential. 1wink.gif

LOL!


The point I was attempting to make is that Apple has dramatically lowered the entry fee for video editing to on tenth of what was 13 years ago. It is now affordable to millions who couldn't even think about it last decade.

In 2000, a pro-quality video editing seat was as inaccessible as a maimframe computer in its heyday.

Today, if you have access to a Mac, and $400-$500 you can experiment with pro-quality video editing -- and see if it works for you... With the proliferation of videos on the web I think it works for many.
Edited by Dick Applebaum - 10/12/13 at 11:13am
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #224 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jexus View Post
 

If being the most powerful company in the world is being held back...then what the hell does that make every other company?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad View Post
 

Intel does decrease prices from time to time as yields improve, but you're right that all OEMs have access to those price adjustments.

 

Apple issued speed bumps earlier this year to the MacBook Pro from 2.3GHz to 2.4GHz and 2.6GHz to 2.7GHz when Intel made the faster chips available at the same price that the slower ones had previously been. It's safe to assume that Apple did this because MacBook Pro customers are important to them.

 

Today the 2.6GHz i7-3720QM and 2.7GHz i7-3740QM both cost exactly the same amount and that price is identical to what customers previously paid for the 2.3GHz 3610QM yet the Mac mini continues to carry the older, slower CPU. It's safe to assume that Apple doesn't worry about giving Mac mini customers the best possible bang for their buck.

 

The 3610QM no longer appears on the Intel price list so it's not known whether customers with long term supply agreements for the older chip are getting a discount or not.

 

FYI the Core i7 4800MQ is priced identically to the 3740QM so it's pretty safe to assume that it will be the CPU in the late 2013 Retina MacBook Pro.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by xZu View Post
 Funny observation, if you use a hackintosh you can really observe just how powerful, elegant and joy to use OSX is on the same hardware as Windows, it is amazing, if only Apple would make some decent hardware for it to run on. 

Ouote:

Originally Posted by runbuh

"Don't forget the business side of the equation: What business wants to support an OS X device when the device can't access the systems that the business uses?  Cisco support for VoIP clients on OS X?  No feature parity with Windows.  Cisco/Juniper VPN support (especially client inspection)?  Sucks.  802.1X/NAC for OS X?  Always an also ran to Windows (try doing machine and user auth with certificates in OS X).  The ability to remotely manage the system, control software deployments, apply policies, etc.?  Always an also ran to Windows, especially with 3rd party support.  Has DISA even issued a STIG for Lion, much less Mountain Lion?  No.  

 

"Windows has the marketshare, which means the vendors provide better/faster support for Windows, which sells more Windows machines, which keeps their marketshare up, etc." End quote.

 

Apple holds back tech updates for a long time. Look at the Mini. It is the bastard step child in the Mac line. They keep old chips around longer than their competition.

 

Apple does innovate There is no doubt about it. They just don't spread the love to all of their line.

 

Their obsession with design is stupid. It shouldn't overshadow the purpose of their devices. This is probably a reason they won't build a small tower with more power than a Mini. The iMacs are like anorexic fashion models. They look good on the outside, cost a lot, but you wouldn't get one to help you build a house (Enterprise). What's up with the 5400 rpm drives?

 

Optical drives are still useful for consumers. Since Apple obviously isn't going for enterprise sales by not making their software compatible with important enterprise applications, why the hell drop optical drives?

 

Blu-Ray is a market that will be around for a while. If you want proof go to Walmart. They only sell things that people buy. They have a Blu-Ray section. I'm not saying they should be added to iMacs. It is just an observation that they are still a wanted product.

 

Years ago I believed Apple products were not priced too high. I am typing this on my Mac Book. Now I do believe they are because of their slow adoption of the best chips and the dropping of features. Now that I actually prefer GNU/Linux I'm comparing hardware. OSX is better than Windows but it isn't better than several Linux distributions.

 

My next machine will probably be a Chromebook. I will dual boot it. It has what I want without the gigantic price of a Mac Book Air. The video performance of low end chips is now good enough to do what I need. I realized I don't need an i7. The DDR3 speeds and 4 GB of RAM will do what I need, which is streaming videos and listening to music in a portable device capable of being connected to an external monitor with HDMI.

 

Far more people want a low end functional machine than a $1000 buy in price for a laptop. If Apple wants to ignore such a gigantic market it is fine with me. I don't own Apple stock. 

 

The writing is on the wall. Apple will  kill the Mac line. They just haven't realized it yet, or they have and won't admit it publicly. If they refuse to update their high quality/over priced/under spec'd products at a pace equal to or faster than their lower priced competition, and refuse to enter the lower end market, their computer division will eventually shrink and die.

 

Low price doesn't always mean low quality.  Apple could build a mid-range computer for the masses and win if they would lower their margin. The Mac Mini for $349 with its current base model would be a great start. Just make the case out of pressed steel instead of blocks of aluminum. Add a CD ROM drive to boot. It would be a winner.

 

The iPod Touch is a device I want to own. I just think it is overpriced by $200 for the 64 GB model. I can get a great Android phone with that much storage and a bigger screen for much less on a phone contract that I use anyway. Where is the compelling reason to buy one? It certainly isn't price or features. IOS is their new bread and butter. They just need to remember that some innovation from somewhere else might quickly kill them just like the iPhone killed RIM and their Blackberry.

post #225 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

Those stats are actually quite surprising. Where I work we just replaced all the laptops with macbook airs.

Within a week everyone had given up with osx and had win 8 installed instead. Seems iOS lovers don't necessarily translate to mac lovers. Everyone does seem to love the hardware though.

Maybe Apple should consider abandoning OSX and work out a way to put iOS on a desktop.

People hate change. There are some windows only programs so there probably was a need for win8. Apple already sold the hardware.

Your last statement is ludicrous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post





My next machine will probably be a Chromebook. I will dual boot it. It has what I want without the gigantic price of a Mac Book Air. The video performance of low end chips is now good enough to do what I need. I realized I don't need an i7. The DDR3 speeds and 4 GB of RAM will do what I need, which is streaming videos and listening to music in a portable device capable of being connected to an external monitor with HDMI.

Far more people want a low end functional machine than a $1000 buy in price for a laptop. If Apple wants to ignore such a gigantic market it is fine with me. I don't own Apple stock. 

Good luck with the chrome book. I hope you're always connected to the internet

Apple doesn't need the low end market. It does fine with the highend market (45% profit share).
post #226 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

Good luck with the chrome book. I hope you're always connected to the internet

Apple doesn't need the low end market. It does fine with the highend market (45% profit share).

Chrome OS now has features that work offline. Even so, the dual boot with a GNU/Linux OS will make it just fine for offline work. If I get the new Acer I'll be up and running for $249 plus the additional price of an SD card to increase the storage capacity to a total of 80 GB. With multiple SD cards I won't have any storage problems ever. I intend to divide the original 16 GB SSD equally between Chrome and GNU/Linux. Windows is totally out of the picture for me. YAY!

 

What if Apple could capture a much larger percentage of the home PC market by making one low cost desktop and one low cost laptop? Do you think their high end customers would stop buying the expensive Macs? I don't think so. Already people are buying the expensive Macs even though the overpriced Mini has been around for many years.

 

Apple now has the iPhone 5c yet the 5s is selling so well it is back-ordered for 2-3 weeks. Apple is learning a lesson because of this. Perhaps they will extend this to the computer market if they really intend to continue in it long term. Maybe they will create low cost A7 computers that run iOS a la Google's new Android powered laptops. In theory it sounds good but they already charge a fortune for the 64 GB iPod Touch. Until they rethink their profit structure for entry level devices it won't happen.

post #227 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post

Apple holds back tech updates for a long time.

No, they wait till there is something worthwhile to put in their hardware
Quote:
Look at the Mini. It is the bastard step child in the Mac line. They keep old chips around longer than their competition.

And people love it, gets bought by the batch. Enterprise stuff, this Mini.
Quote:
Apple does innovate There is no doubt about it. They just don't spread the love to all of their line.

I think Apple is the only company spreading their love across all their products. Heck, even the inside of their computers used to get a signature because they were so proud of what they created.
Quote:
Their obsession with design is stupid. It shouldn't overshadow the purpose of their devices.

It doesn't. As a matter of fact, it complements its purpose.
Quote:
This is probably a reason they won't build a small tower with more power than a Mini.

They actually do.
Quote:
The iMacs are like anorexic fashion models. They look good on the outside, cost a lot, but you wouldn't get one to help you build a house (Enterprise). What's up with the 5400 rpm drives?

Wow.

1) never seen a person suffering from anorexia who looked good to me

2) iMacs cost a lot?

3) 'build a house' ??

4) 5400 drives? Choice; isn't that what 'people like you' want?
Quote:
Optical drives are still useful for consumers. Since Apple obviously isn't going for enterprise sales by not making their software compatible with important enterprise applications, why the hell drop optical drives?

They'r not in the enterprise software business. And ODD are a no-no in enterprises. Many disable the USB ports as well.
Quote:
Blu-Ray is a market that will be around for a while. If you want proof go to Walmart. They only sell things that people buy. They have a Blu-Ray section. I'm not saying they should be added to iMacs. It is just an observation that they are still a wanted product.

So buy external, or get a MP and pop one in, while you still can.
Quote:
Years ago I believed Apple products were not priced too high.

They never changed this. We now simply get more bang for the same buck, but that's just the evolution in IT.
Quote:
I am typing this on my Mac Book. Now I do believe they are because of their slow adoption of the best chips and the dropping of features. Now that I actually prefer GNU/Linux I'm comparing hardware. OSX is better than Windows but it isn't better than several Linux distributions.

Preferring Linux makes it possible for you to get a cheaper HW solution. Build it yourself, or get a Dell or whatever.
Quote:
My next machine will probably be a Chromebook.

That's quite an investment! $1299 with 4GB RAM and 32GB SSD. Sounds more expensive than something mobile from Apple.
Quote:
I will dual boot it. It has what I want without the gigantic price of a Mac Book Air. The video performance of low end chips is now good enough to do what I need. I realized I don't need an i7. The DDR3 speeds and 4 GB of RAM will do what I need, which is streaming videos and listening to music in a portable device capable of being connected to an external monitor with HDMI.

I'm starting to give up on you...
Quote:
Far more people want a low end functional machine than a $1000 buy in price for a laptop. If Apple wants to ignore such a gigantic market it is fine with me. I don't own Apple stock. 

Sales figures say otherwise. You should look stuff up before posting.
Quote:
The writing is on the wall. Apple will  kill the Mac line. They just haven't realized it yet, or they have and won't admit it publicly.

There are vacancies for people like you at Apple Inc.
Quote:
If they refuse to update their high quality/over priced/under spec'd products at a pace equal to or faster than their lower priced competition, and

You call that competition? I call them incompetent!
Quote:
... refuse to enter the lower end market...

By giving us the Mini for 500 bucks, some 8 years ago.
Quote:
their computer division will eventually shrink and die.

Not as fast as their 'competition'
Quote:
Low price doesn't always mean low quality.

Good point, although you do get what you pay for.
Quote:
Apple could build a mid-range computer for the masses and win if they would lower their margin. The Mac Mini for $349 with its current base model would be a great start. Just make the case out of pressed steel instead of blocks of aluminum. Add a CD ROM drive to boot. It would be a winner.

Please, no. They'd get 'people like you' as their new customers, and we wouldn't want to have to deal with, well, posts like this one. Or people agreeing to it.
Quote:
The iPod Touch is a device I want to own. I just think it is overpriced by $200 for the 64 GB model. I can get a great Android phone with that much storage and a bigger screen for much less on a phone contract that I use anyway. Where is the compelling reason to buy one? It certainly isn't price or features. IOS is their new bread and butter. They just need to remember that some innovation from somewhere else might quickly kill them just like the iPhone killed RIM and their Blackberry.

Thanks for showing me being incapable of responding to this; I simply couldn't ever explain to you why you are so wrong, and on so many levels.
post #228 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Today, if you have access to a Mac, and $400-$500 you can experiment with pro-quality video editing -- and see if it works for you... With the proliferation of videos on the web I think it works for many.

 

One might argue that the development you describe has had the same affect on video that the previous decade had on independent music production. Prior to the Great Democratization, those who could not attract the attention of financiers had no hope of realizing their vision. Now, anybody can produce and distribute their garbage no matter how bad it is!

 

At least "cost of entry" provided some degree of shit filtering.

post #229 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

And people love it, gets bought by the batch. Enterprise stuff, this Mini.

 

Not arguing for or against the post to which you reply, but for the record, I have need for a mini at the moment and am delaying the purchase until it is updated with current internals. To me it DOES seem like Haswell/Iris is the kind of thing that should have been included by now. The only possible explanations for delaying it are being able to make a fuss by claiming that using something other than a two-year-old CPU qualifies it to claim to be a "new model," or Crazy Jony has a new look he wants to try out and everyone has to make do with dated equipment until he has a chance to get around to it.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

4) 5400 drives? Choice; isn't that what 'people like you' want?

 

I don't understand. Are you saying that 5400 rpm drives are anything less than ridiculous in any computer than costs more than $399?

 

To those of us who feel Jony Ive may be losing the plot, those drives are what we call "evidence." The lust for an unnecessarily thin iMac resulted in a computer that dissipates heat poorly, precluding the use of higher-performance drives because they get too hot. He sacrificed the very tangible benefit of higher speed in order to achieve a look. That's the very definition of "form over function" and is the kind of thinking that drives fashion, not technology.

 

post #230 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

At least "cost of entry" provided some degree of shit filtering.

Shit will always Surface.
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post


I have need for a mini

Then buy one. It really is that simple. There is nothing 'wrong' with the current model, and if you need one, well, get it.
Quote:
at the moment and am delaying the purchase until it is updated with current internals.

Ok, so you need one, but not now. Then wait. But make no mistake on how long this might take, for whatever reason, and do not even think it has anything to do with something new Apple is waiting on to hit the market. Because that is by no means any reason for them to wait.

Quote:
Are you saying that 5400 rpm drives are anything less than ridiculous in any computer than costs more than $399?

I'm saying I wouldn't buy a PC with a HDD in it, but that's my preference. Other are perfectly fine with old tech, be it mechanically spinning discs, rotating at lower speeds of 5400rpm.
Quote:
The lust for an unnecessarily thin iMac resulted in a computer that dissipates heat poorly, precluding the use of higher-performance drives because they get too hot. He sacrificed the very tangible benefit of higher speed in order to achieve a look. That's the very definition of "form over function" and is the kind of thinking that drives fashion, not technology.

I haven't been reading up on tech, only Apple rumors. Are the new iMacs having problems? Or are they mostly being sold with SSD anyways therefore making this possible point moot? I don't know, but I wouldn't expect Apple to release a product that is having problems, HW-wise.
post #231 of 275
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post

This is probably a reason they won't build a small tower with more power than a Mini.

 


No, they won’t do that because Apple isn’t in the business of making worthless junk.

 

Optical drives are still useful for consumers.

 

Not Apple’s consumers. Get over it.

 

Blu-Ray is a market that will be around for a while. If you want proof go to Walmart. They only sell things that people buy. They have a Blu-Ray section. I'm not saying they should be added to iMacs. It is just an observation that they are still a wanted product.

 

Not by Apple’s customers.

 
Apple will kill the Mac line.
 

 

Duh. This wasn’t obvious? Eventually we won’t be using mice and physical keyboards. When that happens, it won’t be a Mac that you buy, just as we aren’t currently buying Apple XCVIIIs.

 
They just haven’t realized it yet…

 

Please. It’s Apple.

 
If they refuse to update their high quality/over priced/under spec'd products at a pace equal to or faster than their lower priced competition, and refuse to enter the lower end market, their computer division will eventually shrink and die.

 

Not really, no, since sales of the aforementioned (horribly defined, by you) products have only increased compared to the “properly priced”, “over spec’d” trash from everyone else.

 
Low price doesn't always mean low quality.

 

But in the case of every PC, it does.

 
Apple could build a mid-range computer for the masses and win if they would lower their margin.

 

You know nothing about Apple.

 
The Mac Mini for $349 with its current base model would be a great start.

 

It’d be great if they could get the Mini back down to $499 like the G4 model was. Other than that, no, they don’t need to compromise to create crap.

 
Just make the case out of pressed steel instead of blocks of aluminum. Add a CD ROM drive to boot. It would be a winner.

 

Funny, I didn’t know “utter failure” was spelled with six letters.

 
The iPod Touch is a device I want to own. I just think it is overpriced by $200 for the 64 GB model. I can get a great Android phone with that much storage and a bigger screen for much less on a phone contract that I use anyway.

 

Yep, a $2,400 phone costs less than an iPod touch. Oh, and is meant for the same market, by the way.

 
Where is the compelling reason to buy one? It certainly isn't price or features.

 

It certainly isn’t possible that you just can’t think of one because you have no use for a PMP and can’t comprehend anyone’s wishes but your own¡

 
They just need to remember that some innovation from somewhere else might quickly kill them just like the iPhone killed RIM and their Blackberry.  

 

When was the last time anyone in the industry but Apple did ANY innovation?

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #232 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post

What if Apple could capture a much larger percentage of the home PC market by making one low cost desktop and one low cost laptop? Do you think their high end customers would stop buying the expensive Macs? I don't think so. Already people are buying the expensive Macs even though the overpriced Mini has been around for many years.

Apple is happy with the $1000+ market. They also have something like 45% profit share. They don't do cheap.
post #233 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

Ok, so you need one, but not now. Then wait. But make no mistake on how long this might take, for whatever reason, and do not even think it has anything to do with something new Apple is waiting on to hit the market. Because that is by no means any reason for them to wait.

 

So, your point is that Apple really doesn't give Shit One what their customers want or expect, they will just do whatever the hell they want whenever they want and if we don't like it we can just suck it? High praise. Gee, why would I ever consider another vendor?

 

;)

post #234 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

I haven't been reading up on tech, only Apple rumors. Are the new iMacs having problems? Or are they mostly being sold with SSD anyways therefore making this possible point moot?

 

Seriously? C'mon Phil, now you're being disingenuous. If Ford built a car with a choice of engines, the least expensive of which would overheat, would you defend Ford by arguing that most people buy the more expensive engine so it doesn't really matter? Of course not.

 

I don't know how many HHDs vs. Fusion they sold BEFORE THE SSD WAS EVEN AVAILABLE, but it doesn't affect MY POINT which was that the design puts form before function.

post #235 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post

This is probably a reason they won't build a small tower with more power than a Mini.

 

No, they won’t do that because Apple isn’t in the business of making worthless junk. 

 

What would make a small tower "worthless junk?" I can think of all kinds of ways that a "Mac Medium" could open up a whole new market. It may not be a market Apple wants, like large-screen notebooks, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post

Optical drives are still useful for consumers.

 

Not Apple’s consumers. Get over it. 

 

That's a ridiculous remark. The only reason Apple's consumers don't consume optical drives is because they CAN'T.

 

YOU may not see a need, but lots of people still prefer to consume media via physical disc, and there are still really good reasons for them to do so. Get over it. Why do you get your panties bunched up over that?

post #236 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

Gee, why would I ever consider another vendor?

1wink.gif

"Because it's all in the software"

- Steve Jobs at AllThingsD, 2000something
post #237 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

I haven't been reading up on tech, only Apple rumors. Are the new iMacs having problems? Or are they mostly being sold with SSD anyways therefore making this possible point moot?

Seriously? C'mon Phil, now you're being disingenuous. If Ford built a car with a choice of engines, the least expensive of which would overheat, would you defend Ford by arguing that most people buy the more expensive engine so it doesn't really matter? Of course not.

No, no, I'm not saying that, only that I don't know if that could be the problem. Not defending them here.
Quote:

I don't know how many HHDs vs. Fusion they sold BEFORE THE SSD WAS EVEN AVAILABLE, but it doesn't affect MY POINT which was that the design puts form before function.

Ok.

I think they wanted to get rid of the ODD and then started to design the new iMac without it. One could say they but form over function, I'd say they got rid of the ODD and designed the new iMac without one.

Look at it this way: the old iMac had a CRT. Along come flatpanels, and they designed the new iMac with one. Now this flat panel was quite thick, and Apple likes to create thin products. Still, they release it as they can see the innovation in the future will have thinner flat panels.

Or look at the first iPhone. It came with a 2Mpx camera. Pretty shitty, for a smartphone, but that wasn't where the focus lied, it was in multi touch and the software.

I think they did a fantastic job with the ODD-less iMac. I wouldn't buy one because I don't like the screens, because they're glossy and therefore use a MP + ACD. But I certainly don't need all these CPUs and memory banks. Putting the horizon back where it belongs in Aperture is the most intensive thing my Mac has to work on, because I don't always hold my DSLR straight. But I digress.
post #238 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

People hate change. There are some windows only programs so there probably was a need for win8. Apple already sold the hardware.

Your last statement is ludicrous.
 

I wouldn't put it down to people hating change. The guys that got them are typical gadget lovers that embrace new stuff, hence wanting MBA's in the first place. One guy simply hated OSX because there no "cut" shortcut and basically hated OSX. Didn't even got onto the point of programs not being available for OSX. Knowing there job's as well, they probably wouldn't have had much of an issue. We use a lot of web based apps to, which generally run better on OSX.

 

Second point was ludicrous, but why arnt Apple selling more. Years ago I always made the argument that it was down to the Windows monopoly and IT departments. But now? IT departments seem to have fully embraced iPads, the IT guys seem more likely to have Apple hardware than anyone else. When you look round IT agencies there hardware is almost mostly Apple, particularly digital agencies seem to be 100% Apple including the developers. Home users should be wanting Apple as they love their iPhones. And the figures we're looking at are sales! Id expect actual usage to remain with Windows for a long time but sales actually means people buying machines still arn't choosing Apple. Why?

 

So my thought is maybe people just don't like OSX. I love it and have had it for the last 11 years, but then I love Win Phone too and most people hate that.

post #239 of 275
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

The only reason Apple's consumers don't consume optical drives is because they CAN'T.

 

You were saying something about ridiculous remarks, I think? Come off it.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #240 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

I wouldn't put it down to people hating change. The guys that got them are typical gadget lovers that embrace new stuff, hence wanting MBA's in the first place. One guy simply hated OSX because there no "cut" shortcut and basically hated OSX. Didn't even got onto the point of programs not being available for OSX. Knowing there job's as well, they probably wouldn't have had much of an issue. We use a lot of web based apps to, which generally run better on OSX.

This guy must be stupid. The "cut " shortcut is command+X. Maybe they don't hate change, maybe they are just too lazy to learn something new.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Mac shipments continue to shrink as Apple loses ground in US PC market