Does anyone really care about that thing anymore? Did Apple mention anything about AppleTV with their latest financial results? Did anyone ask about AppleTV in the conference call afterwards?
I have one and it just sits there keeping things warm.
I didn't say anything about the current incarnation of AppleTV either. Products can and do get better, and Apple is focusing on video now. AppleTV will be a core part of their strategy.
Everything was not shot in cinemascope. Even from the past, most movies were not shot with large frames and wide vistas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud
Only if you talking about current movies released today. You're still not mentioning a vast library of film that has yet and will sell enormously when it gets released. North by NorthWest gets released next month and it should do very well. Even something recent like the 10 year old Nightmare before Christmas sold incredibly last year and the upcoming Mosters Inc will look amazing. There is a huge market for older tittles. And you're still missing PBS, HBO, Discovery, Opera, etc, etc.
(1) the Core i5 model costs way too much compared with the Core 2 Duo model. The actual Core i5 chip costs only half as much as the 3.06GHz mobile Core 2 and the difference in the graphics chips doesn't even make up the difference. The Core i5 model should cost LESS, not $300 more.
(2) Apple still doesn't think the GPU is important despite touting OpenCL as a significant part of Snow Leopard. The 4670 was a low end chip back in June 2008 when it came out and equipping any GPU with only 256MB of VRAM is a joke. The 4850 is an upgrade, but not a $150 one.
Of course serious GPUs draw lots of power and generate lots of heat, two things Apple tries to avoid, and large amounts of VRAM are mostly useful for gaming and 3D work. Apple knows they can't attract gamers with an all-in-one and really doesn't want pros buying iMacs instead of Mac Pros.
There seems to be a real interest here in something between the Mini & the Mac Pro
- the iMac - a great consumer machine, but not that great for more demanding tasks
- the Mac Pro - too expensive for all but the most affluent graphics designer
- the Mini - just not powerful enough for anything other than emails & watching dvds (ok, and doing some light server tasks)
(1) the Core i5 model costs way too much compared with the Core 2 Duo model. The actual Core i5 chip costs only half as much as the 3.06GHz mobile Core 2 and the difference in the graphics chips doesn't even make up the difference. The Core i5 model should cost LESS, not $300 more.
(2) Apple still doesn't think the GPU is important despite touting OpenCL as a significant part of Snow Leopard. The 4670 was a low end chip back in June 2008 when it came out and equipping any GPU with only 256MB of VRAM is a joke. The 4850 is an upgrade, but not a $150 one.
Of course serious GPUs draw lots of power and generate lots of heat, two things Apple tries to avoid, and large amounts of VRAM are mostly useful for gaming and 3D work. Apple knows they can't attract gamers with an all-in-one and really doesn't want pros buying iMacs instead of Mac Pros.
There seems to be a real interest here in something between the Mini & the Mac Pro
- the iMac - a great consumer machine, but not that great for more demanding tasks
- the Mac Pro - too expensive for all but the most affluent graphics designer
- the Mini - just not powerful enough for anything other than emails & watching dvds (ok, and doing some light server tasks)
- hmmm, what could the answer be?
Yes. I wonder what that could be...
Lemon Bon Bon.
Ps. You're right about the GPU in the iMac. The 4850 should be in the entry level models. You can get a £1000 PC with something far more effective than that awful Nvidia 9400 thing. And in the upper models...we should have something at least mainstream and with a gig of Vram. Yeesh.
what? My 13" mbp runs fairly cool. If you want to see a laptop that ran hot look at the late 2006 macbook with a 2ghz processor. The fan always ran at 6k rpm if i did anything that required a little power.
Players are cheap (unless you're looking to buy a BR player at Shop-rite for $29.99) and movie prices are starting to come down. Not accounting for taste, the latest Transformers movie is $19.99 on BR at Amazon.
Better formatted HD download movies?!? What are you smoking? Where can you download 20-35Mbps average bit-rate 1080/24p movies with lossless audio? Give me a break.
I AM SOrRY
yOUR RIGHT its not dead bluray
i can just see the writing on the wall
and discs themselves will be replaced by little movie flash drives
Not so bruce- Any movie relased since 1955 in widescreen 70millimeter benefits enormously. All the widescreen classics that haven't yet been touched to Blu. Even the old 4:3 classics look amazing. not to mention HBO prgramming and the new 16:9 PBS /Discovery titles- absolutely breathtaking. Even Woodstock and now Monterey Pop.
i don't understand what your saying TS
all these old titles have been converted to blu ray ??
where does hbo fit in ??
answer careful because you may talk me into buying a blu ray player for car chase scene in BULLIT or FRENCH CONNECTION
all these old titles have been converted to blu ray ??
where does hbo fit in ??
answer careful because you may talk me into buying a blu ray player for car chase scene in BULLIT or FRENCH CONNECTION
OR I GUESS THE GOD FATHWR WOULD LOOK GOOD TOO
GOOD night you all
peace 9
No, no- I'm saying most have not and Blu-ray discs haven't barely entered into the old classics catalogue.
BTW- I have Bullit and it looks amazing.
HBO has been filming in HD for about 3 years now with the exception of Larry David. HBO has their own HD channel However HD channels again do not compare to a Blu-Ray where you see the full 1080P HD.
Everything was not shot in cinemascope. Even from the past, most movies were not shot with large frames and wide vistas.
Correct- but they were shot with 35millimeter which is HD also. Casablanca, Wizard of Oz , etc all appear with levels of detail as if we've never seen them before.
My kids broke my 24" iMac last week, they snagged the power cord and it went flying off of my desk and smashed the screen. My insurance company picked up the iMac this week with the view to repair or replace it. Kinda hoping they replace it with the 27" one now, seeing as it is cheaper too.
Also, beware, Apple didn't use safety glass so. If your iMac glass screen breaks it shatters and is razor sharp.
I never thought about getting my kids to break the computer one week or so before the new ones are introduced. I shall try your technique next round
No, no- I'm saying most have not and Blu-ray discs haven't barely entered into the old classics catalogue.
BTW- I have Bullit and it looks amazing.
HBO has been filming in HD for about 3 years now with the exception of Larry David. HBO has their own HD channel However HD channels again do not compare to a Blu-Ray where you see the full 1080P HD.
I suspect the next refresh of the Mac Pros will see Bluray intro and matte displays (hope I am right about this one). If you are going to introduce 'a bag of hurt', why not place them in the professional line ups. I find the bag of hurt lies more in the glossy glass displays. I, for one, am skipping this round of announcement (yet again) and wait for gloss to hit matte. I am sure the Apple Tablet will be gloss.
I am not really into Bluray. The disc cost $150 each in my part of the world. Seriously, how many times over am I going to watch a movie for that amount of money. Enuf said. Wait for 2010.
There seems to be a real interest here in something between the Mini & the Mac Pro
- the iMac - a great consumer machine, but not that great for more demanding tasks
- the Mac Pro - too expensive for all but the most affluent graphics designer
- the Mini - just not powerful enough for anything other than emails & watching dvds (ok, and doing some light server tasks)
- hmmm, what could the answer be?
Checked with the local service centres here. iMacs and MacBooks are the most problematic Apple machines. I have owned a mirrored door G4 for over 5 years. It's never seen a doctor. Same goes with my Cinema Display... [touch wood] ... Machines were designed to last ... in those days.
Who is "many"? Many on Apple fansites? Which means a minority of a minority of Apple's market.
If there was actually enough demand for it, we might have seen one already. Desktop sales are horrible in the entire industry. Apple isn't going to spend time developing a hole into which they can throw money.
Except back a few years ago when they designed those P.O.S. "Pizza Box" Quadra models...
I suspect the next refresh of the Mac Pros will see Bluray intro and matte displays (hope I am right about this one). If you are going to introduce 'a bag of hurt', why not place them in the professional line ups. I find the bag of hurt lies more in the glossy glass displays. I, for one, am skipping this round of announcement (yet again) and wait for gloss to hit matte. I am sure the Apple Tablet will be gloss.
I am not really into Bluray. The disc cost $150 each in my part of the world. Seriously, how many times over am I going to watch a movie for that amount of money. Enuf said. Wait for 2010.
Blu Ray is a bag of hurt for more than just licensing reasons. Apple has absolutely no desire to give their customers a NEW reason to go out and plunk down $50 US on one movie, when that same customer knows that $50 can go a lot further in the iTunes store. Including High Definition content that you can watch on your Mac.
There really is no reason for a Mac user to need Blu Ray, and there never will be.
Comments
Who is "many"?
Me and him for starters. That's more than the niche market for the Macbook Air.
Lemon Bon Bon.
No worries- Casablance is already available on Blu-ray. I have seen it and it is amazing.'i'm hoping Citiizen Kane gets there soon.
Two of my favourite movies. Hmm...
Lemon Bon Bon.
Good! How is the quality? Does it retain the original aspect ratio, or has it been reengineered?
*
No- no totally 4:3. Amazing quality . Here is the link. And it's now available without the big box extras.
http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/35634...lanca/?___rd=1
Does anyone really care about that thing anymore? Did Apple mention anything about AppleTV with their latest financial results? Did anyone ask about AppleTV in the conference call afterwards?
I have one and it just sits there keeping things warm.
I didn't say anything about the current incarnation of AppleTV either. Products can and do get better, and Apple is focusing on video now. AppleTV will be a core part of their strategy.
Only if you talking about current movies released today. You're still not mentioning a vast library of film that has yet and will sell enormously when it gets released. North by NorthWest gets released next month and it should do very well. Even something recent like the 10 year old Nightmare before Christmas sold incredibly last year and the upcoming Mosters Inc will look amazing. There is a huge market for older tittles. And you're still missing PBS, HBO, Discovery, Opera, etc, etc.
I have two additional issues with the new models:
(1) the Core i5 model costs way too much compared with the Core 2 Duo model. The actual Core i5 chip costs only half as much as the 3.06GHz mobile Core 2 and the difference in the graphics chips doesn't even make up the difference. The Core i5 model should cost LESS, not $300 more.
(2) Apple still doesn't think the GPU is important despite touting OpenCL as a significant part of Snow Leopard. The 4670 was a low end chip back in June 2008 when it came out and equipping any GPU with only 256MB of VRAM is a joke. The 4850 is an upgrade, but not a $150 one.
Of course serious GPUs draw lots of power and generate lots of heat, two things Apple tries to avoid, and large amounts of VRAM are mostly useful for gaming and 3D work. Apple knows they can't attract gamers with an all-in-one and really doesn't want pros buying iMacs instead of Mac Pros.
There seems to be a real interest here in something between the Mini & the Mac Pro
- the iMac - a great consumer machine, but not that great for more demanding tasks
- the Mac Pro - too expensive for all but the most affluent graphics designer
- the Mini - just not powerful enough for anything other than emails & watching dvds (ok, and doing some light server tasks)
- hmmm, what could the answer be?
Different strokes for different folks, I guess. I prefer everything in HD. TV sitcoms in HD is great. If it is not in HD, why bother?
Originally Posted by Bregalad
I have two additional issues with the new models:
(1) the Core i5 model costs way too much compared with the Core 2 Duo model. The actual Core i5 chip costs only half as much as the 3.06GHz mobile Core 2 and the difference in the graphics chips doesn't even make up the difference. The Core i5 model should cost LESS, not $300 more.
(2) Apple still doesn't think the GPU is important despite touting OpenCL as a significant part of Snow Leopard. The 4670 was a low end chip back in June 2008 when it came out and equipping any GPU with only 256MB of VRAM is a joke. The 4850 is an upgrade, but not a $150 one.
Of course serious GPUs draw lots of power and generate lots of heat, two things Apple tries to avoid, and large amounts of VRAM are mostly useful for gaming and 3D work. Apple knows they can't attract gamers with an all-in-one and really doesn't want pros buying iMacs instead of Mac Pros.
There seems to be a real interest here in something between the Mini & the Mac Pro
- the iMac - a great consumer machine, but not that great for more demanding tasks
- the Mac Pro - too expensive for all but the most affluent graphics designer
- the Mini - just not powerful enough for anything other than emails & watching dvds (ok, and doing some light server tasks)
- hmmm, what could the answer be?
Yes. I wonder what that could be...
Lemon Bon Bon.
Ps. You're right about the GPU in the iMac. The 4850 should be in the entry level models. You can get a £1000 PC with something far more effective than that awful Nvidia 9400 thing. And in the upper models...we should have something at least mainstream and with a gig of Vram. Yeesh.
what? My 13" mbp runs fairly cool. If you want to see a laptop that ran hot look at the late 2006 macbook with a 2ghz processor. The fan always ran at 6k rpm if i did anything that required a little power.
my 15 in 3.02 ghz burns hot in call of duty mode
Blu-ray is far from dead.
Players are cheap (unless you're looking to buy a BR player at Shop-rite for $29.99) and movie prices are starting to come down. Not accounting for taste, the latest Transformers movie is $19.99 on BR at Amazon.
Better formatted HD download movies?!? What are you smoking? Where can you download 20-35Mbps average bit-rate 1080/24p movies with lossless audio? Give me a break.
I AM SOrRY
yOUR RIGHT its not dead bluray
i can just see the writing on the wall
and discs themselves will be replaced by little movie flash drives
Not so bruce- Any movie relased since 1955 in widescreen 70millimeter benefits enormously. All the widescreen classics that haven't yet been touched to Blu. Even the old 4:3 classics look amazing. not to mention HBO prgramming and the new 16:9 PBS /Discovery titles- absolutely breathtaking. Even Woodstock and now Monterey Pop.
i don't understand what your saying TS
all these old titles have been converted to blu ray ??
where does hbo fit in ??
answer careful because you may talk me into buying a blu ray player for car chase scene in BULLIT or FRENCH CONNECTION
OR I GUESS THE GOD FATHWR WOULD LOOK GOOD TOO
GOOD night you all
peace 9
i don't understand what your saying TS
all these old titles have been converted to blu ray ??
where does hbo fit in ??
answer careful because you may talk me into buying a blu ray player for car chase scene in BULLIT or FRENCH CONNECTION
OR I GUESS THE GOD FATHWR WOULD LOOK GOOD TOO
GOOD night you all
peace 9
No, no- I'm saying most have not and Blu-ray discs haven't barely entered into the old classics catalogue.
BTW- I have Bullit and it looks amazing.
HBO has been filming in HD for about 3 years now with the exception of Larry David. HBO has their own HD channel However HD channels again do not compare to a Blu-Ray where you see the full 1080P HD.
Everything was not shot in cinemascope. Even from the past, most movies were not shot with large frames and wide vistas.
Correct- but they were shot with 35millimeter which is HD also. Casablanca, Wizard of Oz , etc all appear with levels of detail as if we've never seen them before.
Two of my favourite movies. Hmm...
Lemon Bon Bon.
Coming from one of my favorite posters,
Lemon Bon Bon.
My kids broke my 24" iMac last week, they snagged the power cord and it went flying off of my desk and smashed the screen. My insurance company picked up the iMac this week with the view to repair or replace it. Kinda hoping they replace it with the 27" one now, seeing as it is cheaper too.
Also, beware, Apple didn't use safety glass so. If your iMac glass screen breaks it shatters and is razor sharp.
I never thought about getting my kids to break the computer one week or so before the new ones are introduced. I shall try your technique next round
No, no- I'm saying most have not and Blu-ray discs haven't barely entered into the old classics catalogue.
BTW- I have Bullit and it looks amazing.
HBO has been filming in HD for about 3 years now with the exception of Larry David. HBO has their own HD channel However HD channels again do not compare to a Blu-Ray where you see the full 1080P HD.
I suspect the next refresh of the Mac Pros will see Bluray intro and matte displays (hope I am right about this one). If you are going to introduce 'a bag of hurt', why not place them in the professional line ups. I find the bag of hurt lies more in the glossy glass displays. I, for one, am skipping this round of announcement (yet again) and wait for gloss to hit matte. I am sure the Apple Tablet will be gloss.
I am not really into Bluray. The disc cost $150 each in my part of the world. Seriously, how many times over am I going to watch a movie for that amount of money. Enuf said. Wait for 2010.
There seems to be a real interest here in something between the Mini & the Mac Pro
- the iMac - a great consumer machine, but not that great for more demanding tasks
- the Mac Pro - too expensive for all but the most affluent graphics designer
- the Mini - just not powerful enough for anything other than emails & watching dvds (ok, and doing some light server tasks)
- hmmm, what could the answer be?
Checked with the local service centres here. iMacs and MacBooks are the most problematic Apple machines. I have owned a mirrored door G4 for over 5 years. It's never seen a doctor. Same goes with my Cinema Display... [touch wood] ... Machines were designed to last ... in those days.
Who is "many"? Many on Apple fansites? Which means a minority of a minority of Apple's market.
If there was actually enough demand for it, we might have seen one already. Desktop sales are horrible in the entire industry. Apple isn't going to spend time developing a hole into which they can throw money.
Except back a few years ago when they designed those P.O.S. "Pizza Box" Quadra models...
Worst desktops, EVER!
New iMacs. Better than last gen. Mac sales are currently 3/4 laptops. Want to even that out, if possible.
Next...(seriously, why overstate the obvious AI????)
I suspect the next refresh of the Mac Pros will see Bluray intro and matte displays (hope I am right about this one). If you are going to introduce 'a bag of hurt', why not place them in the professional line ups. I find the bag of hurt lies more in the glossy glass displays. I, for one, am skipping this round of announcement (yet again) and wait for gloss to hit matte. I am sure the Apple Tablet will be gloss.
I am not really into Bluray. The disc cost $150 each in my part of the world. Seriously, how many times over am I going to watch a movie for that amount of money. Enuf said. Wait for 2010.
Blu Ray is a bag of hurt for more than just licensing reasons. Apple has absolutely no desire to give their customers a NEW reason to go out and plunk down $50 US on one movie, when that same customer knows that $50 can go a lot further in the iTunes store. Including High Definition content that you can watch on your Mac.
There really is no reason for a Mac user to need Blu Ray, and there never will be.