I know... 28mins to rip a 2hr movie on OS X, over 1hr on Windows... Linux however rips in about the same time as OS X on similar hardware. AMD cpu's seem to do things a little quicker in Ubuntu than Intels.
MacMini 2.0 2009... 1.83 2007 was a tad slower but not much.
Does HandBrake work on SL? It needs Rosetta installed- right?
But a mid-tower/w monitor would fall somewhere between an iMac and MacPro price-wise. Would that make it to pricey for hackintosh buyers? Or, where do you think a theoretical mid-tower should be priced?
Considering it doesn't have an expensive display built in, and it uses cheaper desktop-grade components as opposed to expensive mobile-grade components, I think they should mirror the iMac price range of $1200 to $2000.
Quote:
Originally Posted by msantti
Do people STILL hold out for a mini tower?
Lets put that baby to rest.
Its the last thing Apple would ever come out with.
No, they don't hold out... they build hackintoshes or buy from Psystar.
Obviously there's demand for it since these solutions exist, they just don't offer the kind of profit margins Apple would like to see.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
I doubt that very much. There will always be something (else, different, etc.) that people will insist they must have, or something cheaper, or something... People who are hackintoshing either don't want to (or can't) pay for an Apple or won't buy anything that isn't exactly what they want. The hackintosh stuff will never go away while Apple is using the same CPUs as the rest of the PC world. And it probably costs them less to tolerate a certain amount of piracy than to try to cater to 100% of possible customers, so...
It's not an issue of price, as much as it is of value. If I can get more powerful components for cheaper if I buy desktop-grade components, why wouldn't I? It's a more fiscally responsible solution than spending $2k on a non-upgradeable computer that will be as useful to me as a paper-weight in three years.
And my hackintosh? It cost $500, benchmarks higher than an iMac, and I can upgrade it for chump change. It's fiscal common sense, really.
I know... 28mins to rip a 2hr movie on OS X, over 1hr on Windows... Linux however rips in about the same time as OS X on similar hardware. AMD cpu's seem to do things a little quicker in Ubuntu than Intels.
MacMini 2.0 2009... 1.83 2007 was a tad slower but not much.
You don't use handbrake to rip in windows. Use eac3to. You may find it faster. And it can rip anything, audio, video, subs, to just about any format.
i doubt an Apple tower is coming. Other than Mac Pro's Apple sells laptop parts in every computer and i bet Time Machine and Apple TV are the same thing as a Mini except larger HD and slightly different version of OS X
For the Mac Pro they have to sell a tower since there is no laptop components that will do the job and if they lose the Mac Pro target market then they will lose market share in their home computer markets
And technically, the Mac Pro uses server-grade components.
Apple literally sells no desktops... just laptops, headless laptops, immobile laptops, and servers.
CUPERTINO, Calif. ? Apple Inc. is updating its iMac desktop computer line and introducing a mouse that responds to the touch of fingers instead of using buttons or scroll wheels.
The updated iMacs have bigger screens ? 21.5 inches and 27 inches, compared with existing models' 20 inches and 24 inches. They also have speedier processors and better graphics. The least expensive model costs $1,199, the same as the past generation, but the top-of-the-line iMac is now $200 cheaper, at $1,999.
The wireless Magic Mouse, as Apple calls it, will come included. It lets people manipulate what they see on the screen by pinching, swiping and using other gestures. It's similar to the control mechanism made popular on the screen of the iPhone.
It's not an issue of price, as much as it is of value. If I can get more powerful components for cheaper if I buy desktop-grade components, why wouldn't I? It's a more fiscally responsible solution than spending $2k on a non-upgradeable computer that will be as useful to me as a paper-weight in three years.
And my hackintosh? It cost $500, benchmarks higher than an iMac, and I can upgrade it for chump change. It's fiscal common sense, really.
Comments
I know... 28mins to rip a 2hr movie on OS X, over 1hr on Windows... Linux however rips in about the same time as OS X on similar hardware. AMD cpu's seem to do things a little quicker in Ubuntu than Intels.
MacMini 2.0 2009... 1.83 2007 was a tad slower but not much.
Does HandBrake work on SL? It needs Rosetta installed- right?
http://www.mcetech.com/blu-ray/
But a mid-tower/w monitor would fall somewhere between an iMac and MacPro price-wise. Would that make it to pricey for hackintosh buyers? Or, where do you think a theoretical mid-tower should be priced?
Considering it doesn't have an expensive display built in, and it uses cheaper desktop-grade components as opposed to expensive mobile-grade components, I think they should mirror the iMac price range of $1200 to $2000.
Do people STILL hold out for a mini tower?
Lets put that baby to rest.
Its the last thing Apple would ever come out with.
No, they don't hold out... they build hackintoshes or buy from Psystar.
Obviously there's demand for it since these solutions exist, they just don't offer the kind of profit margins Apple would like to see.
I doubt that very much. There will always be something (else, different, etc.) that people will insist they must have, or something cheaper, or something... People who are hackintoshing either don't want to (or can't) pay for an Apple or won't buy anything that isn't exactly what they want. The hackintosh stuff will never go away while Apple is using the same CPUs as the rest of the PC world. And it probably costs them less to tolerate a certain amount of piracy than to try to cater to 100% of possible customers, so...
It's not an issue of price, as much as it is of value. If I can get more powerful components for cheaper if I buy desktop-grade components, why wouldn't I? It's a more fiscally responsible solution than spending $2k on a non-upgradeable computer that will be as useful to me as a paper-weight in three years.
And my hackintosh? It cost $500, benchmarks higher than an iMac, and I can upgrade it for chump change. It's fiscal common sense, really.
-Clive
I know... 28mins to rip a 2hr movie on OS X, over 1hr on Windows... Linux however rips in about the same time as OS X on similar hardware. AMD cpu's seem to do things a little quicker in Ubuntu than Intels.
MacMini 2.0 2009... 1.83 2007 was a tad slower but not much.
You don't use handbrake to rip in windows. Use eac3to. You may find it faster. And it can rip anything, audio, video, subs, to just about any format.
Does HandBrake work on SL? It needs Rosetta installed- right?
When I updated the HT mini, I checked Rosetta just to be sure. It's working perfectly in SL on my end.
Does HandBrake work on SL? It needs Rosetta installed- right?
Works for me, but I don't know if it's because of Rosetta.
i doubt an Apple tower is coming. Other than Mac Pro's Apple sells laptop parts in every computer and i bet Time Machine and Apple TV are the same thing as a Mini except larger HD and slightly different version of OS X
For the Mac Pro they have to sell a tower since there is no laptop components that will do the job and if they lose the Mac Pro target market then they will lose market share in their home computer markets
And technically, the Mac Pro uses server-grade components.
Apple literally sells no desktops... just laptops, headless laptops, immobile laptops, and servers.
-Clive
And technically, the Mac Pro uses server-grade components.
Apple literally sells no desktops... just laptops, headless laptops, immobile laptops, and servers.
-Clive
Technically the mac pro is a workstation ( an expensive one at that ).
New iMacs. New mouse to the side. Magic Mouse with multitouch.
Go enjoy.
http://blog.taragana.com/index.php/a...nsitive-mouse/
Apple updates iMac line, adds 'multitouch' mouse
CUPERTINO, Calif. ? Apple Inc. is updating its iMac desktop computer line and introducing a mouse that responds to the touch of fingers instead of using buttons or scroll wheels.
The updated iMacs have bigger screens ? 21.5 inches and 27 inches, compared with existing models' 20 inches and 24 inches. They also have speedier processors and better graphics. The least expensive model costs $1,199, the same as the past generation, but the top-of-the-line iMac is now $200 cheaper, at $1,999.
The wireless Magic Mouse, as Apple calls it, will come included. It lets people manipulate what they see on the screen by pinching, swiping and using other gestures. It's similar to the control mechanism made popular on the screen of the iPhone.
...i bet Time Machine and Apple TV are the same thing as a Mini except larger HD and slightly different version of OS X...
The Time Capsule uses a Marvell 88F5BF01 C500 500Mhz processor.
The AppleTV uses an Ultra Low Voltage Pentium M based on the Dothan core, running at 1 GHz (max frequency), 400 MHz FSB and a 2 MB L2 cache
The AppleTV also has a NVIDIA GeForce Go 7300 with 64 MB of dedicated graphics memory.
The AppleTV also still uses PATA drives not SATA.
The AppleTV is nothing like the Mac mini except in terms of looks.
Updates live on Engadget
Quad-core, too.
Polished aluminum to go with the glass screens... Yum...
ditto
It's not an issue of price, as much as it is of value. If I can get more powerful components for cheaper if I buy desktop-grade components, why wouldn't I? It's a more fiscally responsible solution than spending $2k on a non-upgradeable computer that will be as useful to me as a paper-weight in three years.
And my hackintosh? It cost $500, benchmarks higher than an iMac, and I can upgrade it for chump change. It's fiscal common sense, really.
I think I covered that with, "something..."
details now online/announced in Business Week!
Edit - nevermind, I see you can get a i7 as an option.