Macs are expensive. Why does it cost $400 dollars to go to 1 GB of RAM to 4 GB of RAM? I can buy 4 GB of RAM for less then $100
Then buy the 4gb elsewhere. Apple RAM upgrades are for suckers anyways. Buy TechWorks, its what Apple uses for OEM anyways. Please don't complain for the sake of complaining.
Australia isn't an island - it's a continent. Around the size of the US actually. Calling the Land Down Under an island is, to the Aussies, like saying that the Mac is a Windows based computer. I know - I'm married to one.
I doubt very much that a $100 price-cut is all it would take for sales of Macs to 'skyrocket.' If so, Apple would have done it. Indeed, I especially doubt it will be you, since Apple makes 'deafeningly loud' computers that are not 'good.' $100 will change your mind? Give me a break.
Go troll somewhere else?
Is it trolling to have an opinion?
Honestly, if he was saying, "Nyah, nyah, Macs sucks, PCs rule" or some other vomit, I'd be the first to have the admin delete the post, or I'd be dropping the flame bombs. But he isn't doing that.
I kind of agree with you guys there... Maybe if Apple released something like the Open Computer and Open Computer Pro, starting at $400 and $1000 and it didn't cost an extra 100 dollars when 5 feet north of the US border, Mac sales would rocket. That is of course if they were good computers, that weren't deafeningly loud.
$400 isn't going to happen. Apple has no interest in going into the eMachines, micro-margins segment of the market. A $1000 Apple mini-tower sure would be nice, however .
But... isn't Psystar (makers of the Open Computer and OC Pro) perhaps going out of business? Seems to be a lot of worries along those lines:
Macs are expensive. Why does it cost $400 dollars to go to 1 GB of RAM to 4 GB of RAM? I can buy 4 GB of RAM for less then $100
Mac RAM upgrade pricing has always been bad through Apple, I've never used them, always went to Ramseeker.com or Crucial's site and saved a bunch of money.
If Apple is that dumb, I am for hire. Who couldn't call unexclusiveness as a winner??
I agree with you. Officially, Apple and AT&T never disclosed the exclusivity duration. In 2007, reports said it was 5 years and lately some said 2 years. I don't think Apple would ever glue itself to something for more than a year.
This is what I think. Apple and AT&T agreed on a year contract where the iPhone is exclusive to AT&T. After the 1st year, the iPhone will be allowed to work on another network (unlocked) but AT&T stores are the only carrier to sell the iPhone with discount. For the 25 million 3G iPhone Apple want to sell I really doubt that AT&T networks can handle half of that traffic. When I bought my iPhone in August 07 my Edge connection was much faster. Now it is getting slower and slower, which I think it is mainly because the cell tower in My area covers the whole university and I have seen more people use iPhones than last year.
Australia isn't an island - it's a continent. Around the size of the US actually. Calling the Land Down Under an island is, to the Aussies, like saying that the Mac is a Windows based computer. I know - I'm married to one.
Yeah, I am an Aussie, and we aren't an island. We are US sized, and we just have more room!
Actually, i know 4 or 5 Americans, too, as a matter of fact.
And it is a massive insult, too :P
I've had about enough of the wait for the iPhone in Australia. I just want it. I don't care about the carrier, as long as they stick to a reasonable plan. 'Cause I live in a city with great reception (actually, its been rated independently the most "livable" city in the world - its a lie, there is no iPhone so it is nowhere near livable :P)
And it shouldn't. The only device that could possibly play a HD movie right now is the iPod Touch or iPhone, and even then I'm sure the HW could handle the Mbps. There would also take up a huge amount of the capacity, except for the iPod Classic.
The only option would be to allow iTunes owners to scale down their HD movie purchases to fit on their iDevice. That means making it compatible with the iPod Nano so about 640x480 or 720x480 at 1.5Mbps would be the maximum allowed. The problem with this is would take a very long time to re-encode and is not the type of option that would satisfy the average Apple customer who doesn't know a think about resolution and bit rates.
Until all iDevices that are capable of putting out video that can play back HD H.264 video without freezing or eating through the battery in too short a time we are not going to see HD movies for sale from iTunes Store.
So you're saying that other than the ATv and the iPhone/itouch, Apple has no machines that can play back their HD video?
That includes the Mini, the iMacs, the MBP's, the Mac Pro, and with external monitors, the MacBooks and Air.
Australia isn't an island - it's a continent. Around the size of the US actually. Calling the Land Down Under an island is, to the Aussies, like saying that the Mac is a Windows based computer. I know - I'm married to one.
i wonder what websites they test for web share? I bet that has something to do with it. If they dont test facebook, that could skew results one way or the other.
I expect it has more to do with social trends than anything else.
Many people I know do not seem to 'surf' the net as they used to, and live in facebook land instead, or use computers as TV's streaming youtube/iPlayer.
And as mac's are generally better equipped for web2 social sites, maybe this is the reason.
I'm just guessing here. But i find it very hard to believe msft is gaining ground on the mac.
mid 20 and top 24 have better video card if you are into 3d graphic or 3d gaming.
It's not the video card, it's the LCD panel itself. The quality of the 20" LCD panel was reduced. There's a ton of references to this, but here's one that bubbled up in google:
And it shouldn't. The only device that could possibly play a HD movie right now is the iPod Touch or iPhone, and even then I'm sure the HW could handle the Mbps. There would also take up a huge amount of the capacity, except for the iPod Classic.
The only option would be to allow iTunes owners to scale down their HD movie purchases to fit on their iDevice. That means making it compatible with the iPod Nano so about 640x480 or 720x480 at 1.5Mbps would be the maximum allowed. The problem with this is would take a very long time to re-encode and is not the type of option that would satisfy the average Apple customer who doesn't know a think about resolution and bit rates.
Until all iDevices that are capable of putting out video that can play back HD H.264 video without freezing or eating through the battery in too short a time we are not going to see HD movies for sale from iTunes Store.
The ATV can play them fine as can a Mac. So the answer to the problem, you correctly highlight, would be to somehow add a mechanism that detects the non HD playing devices in iTunes and stops export to them with a warning message they cannot be exported at that resolution to that device.
Definition of an island: 'a land area with water all around it'.
So then, as you can sail all the way around given enough time, the Americas are also an island and so is Euro-Asia and ... wait a minute the Earth is covered in them!
I'm sorry, have you actually spoken to an Austin rep?
Actually, I used Apple support several times and when I asked where they were located, they told me that they were in Austin. It seems that the time of day that you call can make a big difference in where they route you.
So you're saying that other than the ATv and the iPhone/itouch, Apple has no machines that can play back their HD video?
That includes the Mini, the iMacs, the MBP's, the Mac Pro, and with external monitors, the MacBooks and Air.
How disappointing!
Oh no, most Macs in the install base and all new Macs can easily play HD media. The problem lies with consumers thinking they can easily and quickly move these files to their iDevices like other audio and video so they pay for the more expensive HD media and then realize when it's too late that they can't move these over. Then they blame Apple. If I were at Apple i'd rather not give the option at all.
Of course, the whole idea of purchasing HD media from iTS could be with the studios wanting more control.
I think sometimes we forget that the average computer user is not that savvy, and I want to quash that idea because no man is an island, like Australia.
Allowing direct purchase makes the Apple TV more useful as a stand-alone device, but purchases could run into storage limitations. Xbox Live allows unlimited re-downloading of purchased content to mitigate that but that has not been iTunes' policy.
I dont know why any one would waste their money an a $15.00 digital download when you could buy the DVD for the same price which could be converted to digital.
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act prohibits circumventing copy protection, which allows content owners to make fair-use/personal-use copying illegal simply by putting a lock on it, even if it's a lock like CSS that everybody has the key to. Using HandBrake you'd never know a DVD is copy protected, but it is and you're breaking the lock and breaking the law. It's a very stupid law but for some reason we can't get rid of it.
Comments
Macs are expensive. Why does it cost $400 dollars to go to 1 GB of RAM to 4 GB of RAM? I can buy 4 GB of RAM for less then $100
Then buy the 4gb elsewhere. Apple RAM upgrades are for suckers anyways. Buy TechWorks, its what Apple uses for OEM anyways. Please don't complain for the sake of complaining.
I doubt very much that a $100 price-cut is all it would take for sales of Macs to 'skyrocket.' If so, Apple would have done it. Indeed, I especially doubt it will be you, since Apple makes 'deafeningly loud' computers that are not 'good.' $100 will change your mind? Give me a break.
Go troll somewhere else?
Is it trolling to have an opinion?
Honestly, if he was saying, "Nyah, nyah, Macs sucks, PCs rule" or some other vomit, I'd be the first to have the admin delete the post, or I'd be dropping the flame bombs. But he isn't doing that.
.
I kind of agree with you guys there... Maybe if Apple released something like the Open Computer and Open Computer Pro, starting at $400 and $1000 and it didn't cost an extra 100 dollars when 5 feet north of the US border, Mac sales would rocket. That is of course if they were good computers, that weren't deafeningly loud.
$400 isn't going to happen. Apple has no interest in going into the eMachines, micro-margins segment of the market. A $1000 Apple mini-tower sure would be nice, however
But... isn't Psystar (makers of the Open Computer and OC Pro) perhaps going out of business? Seems to be a lot of worries along those lines:
http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/15/p...gerated-still/
Macs are expensive. Why does it cost $400 dollars to go to 1 GB of RAM to 4 GB of RAM? I can buy 4 GB of RAM for less then $100
Mac RAM upgrade pricing has always been bad through Apple, I've never used them, always went to Ramseeker.com or Crucial's site and saved a bunch of money.
.
If Apple is that dumb, I am for hire. Who couldn't call unexclusiveness as a winner??
I agree with you. Officially, Apple and AT&T never disclosed the exclusivity duration. In 2007, reports said it was 5 years and lately some said 2 years. I don't think Apple would ever glue itself to something for more than a year.
This is what I think. Apple and AT&T agreed on a year contract where the iPhone is exclusive to AT&T. After the 1st year, the iPhone will be allowed to work on another network (unlocked) but AT&T stores are the only carrier to sell the iPhone with discount. For the 25 million 3G iPhone Apple want to sell I really doubt that AT&T networks can handle half of that traffic. When I bought my iPhone in August 07 my Edge connection was much faster. Now it is getting slower and slower, which I think it is mainly because the cell tower in My area covers the whole university and I have seen more people use iPhones than last year.
Australia isn't an island - it's a continent. Around the size of the US actually. Calling the Land Down Under an island is, to the Aussies, like saying that the Mac is a Windows based computer. I know - I'm married to one.
Yeah, I am an Aussie, and we aren't an island. We are US sized, and we just have more room!
Actually, i know 4 or 5 Americans, too, as a matter of fact.
And it is a massive insult, too :P
I've had about enough of the wait for the iPhone in Australia. I just want it. I don't care about the carrier, as long as they stick to a reasonable plan. 'Cause I live in a city with great reception (actually, its been rated independently the most "livable" city in the world - its a lie, there is no iPhone so it is nowhere near livable :P)
Yeah, I am an Aussie, and we aren't an island. We are US sized, and we just have more room!
So... you're not surrounded by water on all sides? By definition you are an island.
But don't take my word for it:
And it shouldn't. The only device that could possibly play a HD movie right now is the iPod Touch or iPhone, and even then I'm sure the HW could handle the Mbps. There would also take up a huge amount of the capacity, except for the iPod Classic.
The only option would be to allow iTunes owners to scale down their HD movie purchases to fit on their iDevice. That means making it compatible with the iPod Nano so about 640x480 or 720x480 at 1.5Mbps would be the maximum allowed. The problem with this is would take a very long time to re-encode and is not the type of option that would satisfy the average Apple customer who doesn't know a think about resolution and bit rates.
Until all iDevices that are capable of putting out video that can play back HD H.264 video without freezing or eating through the battery in too short a time we are not going to see HD movies for sale from iTunes Store.
So you're saying that other than the ATv and the iPhone/itouch, Apple has no machines that can play back their HD video?
That includes the Mini, the iMacs, the MBP's, the Mac Pro, and with external monitors, the MacBooks and Air.
How disappointing!
Australia isn't an island - it's a continent. Around the size of the US actually. Calling the Land Down Under an island is, to the Aussies, like saying that the Mac is a Windows based computer. I know - I'm married to one.
You're married to a Windows based computer?
How odd!
I know things are strange down there, but really.
At least marry a Mac. I know a few cute ones.
Many people are holding back the last month or so to purchase iPhone2(me included).
I suppose the same could be said for apples other computer offerings, it's all due for a refresh.
I expect it has more to do with social trends than anything else.
Many people I know do not seem to 'surf' the net as they used to, and live in facebook land instead, or use computers as TV's streaming youtube/iPlayer.
And as mac's are generally better equipped for web2 social sites, maybe this is the reason.
I'm just guessing here. But i find it very hard to believe msft is gaining ground on the mac.
The 20" is cheap, but it also has a crap LCD panel. The 24" is the way to fly.
Sheldon
mid 20 and top 24 have better video card if you are into 3d graphic or 3d gaming.
mid 20 and top 24 have better video card if you are into 3d graphic or 3d gaming.
It's not the video card, it's the LCD panel itself. The quality of the 20" LCD panel was reduced. There's a ton of references to this, but here's one that bubbled up in google:
http://www.tuaw.com/2007/09/12/20-im...olor-problems/
Sheldon
And it shouldn't. The only device that could possibly play a HD movie right now is the iPod Touch or iPhone, and even then I'm sure the HW could handle the Mbps. There would also take up a huge amount of the capacity, except for the iPod Classic.
The only option would be to allow iTunes owners to scale down their HD movie purchases to fit on their iDevice. That means making it compatible with the iPod Nano so about 640x480 or 720x480 at 1.5Mbps would be the maximum allowed. The problem with this is would take a very long time to re-encode and is not the type of option that would satisfy the average Apple customer who doesn't know a think about resolution and bit rates.
Until all iDevices that are capable of putting out video that can play back HD H.264 video without freezing or eating through the battery in too short a time we are not going to see HD movies for sale from iTunes Store.
The ATV can play them fine as can a Mac. So the answer to the problem, you correctly highlight, would be to somehow add a mechanism that detects the non HD playing devices in iTunes and stops export to them with a warning message they cannot be exported at that resolution to that device.
So... you're not surrounded by water on all sides? By definition you are an island.
But don't take my word for it:
Good answer.
Definition of an island: 'a land area with water all around it'.
So then, as you can sail all the way around given enough time, the Americas are also an island and so is Euro-Asia and ... wait a minute the Earth is covered in them!
You're married to a Windows based computer?
How odd!
:-)
People aren't satisfied with simple electronic toys anymore.
Seriously though - Australia is an Island.
World's biggest island. World's smallest continent.
I remember learning all about it in infants school (elementary school?)
I'm sorry, have you actually spoken to an Austin rep?
Actually, I used Apple support several times and when I asked where they were located, they told me that they were in Austin. It seems that the time of day that you call can make a big difference in where they route you.
Just a thought.
So you're saying that other than the ATv and the iPhone/itouch, Apple has no machines that can play back their HD video?
That includes the Mini, the iMacs, the MBP's, the Mac Pro, and with external monitors, the MacBooks and Air.
How disappointing!
Oh no, most Macs in the install base and all new Macs can easily play HD media. The problem lies with consumers thinking they can easily and quickly move these files to their iDevices like other audio and video so they pay for the more expensive HD media and then realize when it's too late that they can't move these over. Then they blame Apple. If I were at Apple i'd rather not give the option at all.
Of course, the whole idea of purchasing HD media from iTS could be with the studios wanting more control.
I think sometimes we forget that the average computer user is not that savvy, and I want to quash that idea because no man is an island, like Australia.
I dont know why any one would waste their money an a $15.00 digital download when you could buy the DVD for the same price which could be converted to digital.
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act prohibits circumventing copy protection, which allows content owners to make fair-use/personal-use copying illegal simply by putting a lock on it, even if it's a lock like CSS that everybody has the key to. Using HandBrake you'd never know a DVD is copy protected, but it is and you're breaking the lock and breaking the law. It's a very stupid law but for some reason we can't get rid of it.