Yeah... I think Apple would have lost the computer market completely by now If Microsoft wasn't producing a terrible OS like Windows. Look at companies like Dell, HP and others. They have implemented new hardware into notebooks like new processors etc. They are so quick to upgrade the hardware. But Apple is sticking with minor incremental changes and is rather focusing on iPods, iPhones etc. Apple was always ahead in offering the best hardware possible in computers but now it looks they have lost the plot and are 'very busy' with music players and cellphones.
Yeah... I think Apple would have lost the computer market completely by now If Microsoft wasn't producing a terrible OS like Windows.
So all of Apple's year or year success with Mac sales have nothing to do with theheir halo-effect products, the Apple Stores, the Get A Mac commercials, or constant revisions to OS X and their HW?
Quote:
Look at companies like Dell, HP and others. They have implemented new hardware into notebooks like new processors etc. They are so quick to upgrade the hardware. But Apple is sticking with minor incremental changes and is rather focusing on iPods, iPhones etc. Apple was always ahead in offering the best hardware possible in computers but now it looks they have lost the plot and are 'very busy' with music players and cellphones.
Apple has been releasing new processors with each Intel revision, which is about 2x a year. They are even releasing processors from Intel no one has (like the Santa Rosa/Penryns with Montevina features in the last iMac), no one wants until Apple uses it (like the MBA's small form factor 22mm^2 Santa Rosa Merom Processor), and that one has righty away (like the 3.2GHz 4-core "Harpertown" Xeons that were showcased in the Mac Pro).
Are the units here correct? Is it really mm or should it be cm. 0.42mm thinner... barely measurable!
I'm assuming 0.42mm is correct, if the Nano was 0.42cm thinner then I think it would ridiculously thin, the current one is only 0.65cm thick after all.
BlueTooth would be nice but I'm beginning to wonder if Apple will ever support it fully. Bluetooth just provides for a huge amount of I/O options.
6.
GPS. Mixed feelings here as it might drive up the price to much. One of the reasons that I mentioned USB and BlueTooth first is that they give options for things like GPS. Still I believe that location aware apps will become huge.
I hope Bluetooth is added...GPS is nice with Bluetooth, I can use my Bluetooth GPS dongle. also Bluetooth stereo headset would be nice to use in the gym.
Although iPods and iPhones bring lots of revenues to Apple Inc. However it is not so good for Apple to focus on these things so much. Apple is known for computers, and of late they have given a low priorities to computers. It is really bad.
I think it is way too late to object. Apple has been getting about as much money from iPods as they have from computers, this has been true for a few years now. Apple has been a consumer electronics company for a while. It may shift towards computers a bit as the iPod market is getting closer to saturation and Macs sales are growing as quickly as iPod sales did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmc6000
People still use AutoCAD?!?!?! Those mockups are u-g-l-y and the drawing tools are pretty crappy. That really looks like AutoCAD from when I was in college!
That style of drawing is pretty similar to what's on Apple's dev site so companies can design products around the iPods, such as the cases. Highly rendered drawings aren't necessary for that kind of user, it may even a hindrance, they don't need pretty, they just need the data.
On the touch side, what is the potential for Apple replacing the Classic with the touch? That would mean both SSD and a HD option in order to address those customers who need a large HD. That would be interesting as it moves OS X deeper into the iPod environment.
Could it be that the Shuffle will be the only iPod not using OS X?
That style of drawing is pretty similar to what's on Apple's dev site so companies can design products around the iPods, such as the cases. Highly rendered drawings aren't necessary for that kind of user, it may even a hindrance, they don't need pretty, they just need the data.
They don't give the diameters of the "holes." That's a pretty important one.
On the touch side, what is the potential for Apple replacing the Classic with the touch? That would mean both SSD and a HD option in order to address those customers who need a large HD. That would be interesting as it moves OS X deeper into the iPod environment.
An HDD-sporting iPod touch would be heavier, thicker and have terrible battery life (because to eliminate interface latency, the disk would have to be spinning at all times).
Most people who need a large capacity iPod already have an iPod classic or iPod video. That's a niche market. Apple's best selling iPod was the nano in 2006 and in Apple's recent earnings notes, the iPod shuffle and iPod touch were their best selling iPods.
So it's far more likely Apple will simply retire the classic altogether. They didn't give it that name for nothing.
So all of Apple's year or year success with Mac sales have nothing to do with theheir halo-effect products, the Apple Stores, the Get A Mac commercials, or constant revisions to OS X and their HW?
Apple has been releasing new processors with each Intel revision, which is about 2x a year. They are even releasing processors from Intel no one has (like the Santa Rosa/Penryns with Montevina features in the last iMac), no one wants until Apple uses it (like the MBA's small form factor 22mm^2 Santa Rosa Merom Processor), and that one has righty away (like the 3.2GHz 4-core "Harpertown" Xeons that were showcased in the Mac Pro).
What about the laptops...can u compare the hardware with the latest that Dell is offering in Lattitude E series?
Can you supply some stats of a site that lists the specs we can compare them to newest chips by Intel. If they are new refreshes for Dell then the MB, MBP and MBA will all have these same chips too soon enough. Apple has used Intel's fastest chips, most efficient chips for it's notebooks since moving to Intel, sans the Extreme chips which use more power and thus run hotter. Dell and HP et al. have been getting the mass produced chips a little sooner than Apple, but you have to remember that Apple's entire line of notebooks uses only a handful of Intel's highest-end chips, non-Extreme chips, while the others sell most of their machines usng cheaper and/or older processors so the fact that Dell and HP outsell Apple in the budget in means nothing here because Apple doesn't compete there.
edit: These are definitely Montevina chip and they are nice for Dell notebooks and a major change for them, which they state. They are finally offering a backlit keyboard, too. They offer a 64GB SSD for an additional $650 over the default 80GB HDD price. I thought they would have been cheaper by now.
I am not talking about the budget. Look at the Dell's website for stats..they offer Centrino 2 processor with 2.8 GHz speed, DDR3 RAM support and higher FSB. My point is that Apple is so focused on iPods and iPhones that they upgrade computer hardware after others have already done that. So they are no longer the pioneer in computer business (if u forget about the OS X for a sec.). iPods and iPhone can provide a good revenue in short term, however, in long term Apple will have to look back to computers if they want to survive in the market. So computers should be the first priority not iPods and iPhone..thats what I wanted to assert.
very different huh, you can tell that by the CAD drawing... amazing... I don't see 'very different' in those drawings but hey, it could be just me.
Perhaps I overstated that a tad.
It is both much larger and a different shape though. If it is for a camera, it's a needlessly large hole for the tiny iPhone camera lens and the wrong shape. It's different enough to make it questionable whether it's really for a camera at all.
I am not talking about the budget. Look at the Dell's website for stats..they offer Centrino 2 processor with 2.8 GHz speed, DDR3 RAM support and higher FSB. My point is that Apple is so focused on iPods and iPhones that they upgrade computer hardware after others have already done that. So they are no longer the pioneer in computer business (if u forget about the OS X for a sec.). iPods and iPhone can provide a good revenue in short term, however, in long term Apple will have to look back to computers if they want to survive in the market. So computers should be the first priority not iPods and iPhone..thats what I wanted to assert.
You either missed the point or aren't reading. How is Apple going to announce, and have their stores stocked with all models in all speeds that very day before others can announce them and have them on their websites for sale but shipping out days later? But that isn't even what your suggesting, you suggest that Apple doesn't care about Macs or its users because it doesn't have the next gen Intel chips well before other others due and in quantities that exceeding their competitors? How exactly is Apple going to get ahold of these Intel chips well before everyone else? These aren't some oddball chip that Intel is using Apple to promote, These are the the mainstream chips of which Apple uses a butt-load more than the others out of the gate. HP and Dell sell a lot more computers than Apple, but Apple has 66% of the >$1000 consumer notebook market and they do it with only using 6 different chips from Intel. That is not the same as Dell and HP using Intel's gamut and selling mostly old tech in <$700 notebooks.
You're right on that. That's a more convincing argument.
It's also entirely possible that this a real CAD drawing (which is an essential for any product BTW). The idea that because it "looks like AutoCAD" it must be a fake or something is just silly.
Most CAD programs have the ability to hide/show various layers or parts of the image so that one can see the wireframe in the absence of some of the measurements. What's to stop this from being an entirely real CAD drawing, with some of the messier layers hidden?
Like all rumours this could be completely fake, but a lot of the criticism of it here is unfounded and not very well thought out.
HP and Dell sell a lot more computers than Apple, but Apple has 66% of the consumer notebook reason and does it with only using 6 different chips from Intel.
I believe 66% is how much Apple has of the $1000 consumer computer market as a whole, not laptops in particular.
That doesn't really make your point any less valid though. Apple is selling more laptops than desktops, so that percentage is likely higher.
It is both much larger and a different shape though. If it is for a camera, it's a needlessly large hole for the tiny iPhone camera lens and the wrong shape. It's different enough to make it questionable whether it's really for a camera at all.
I'm not sure what hole you're talking about. Unless of course you're referring to the "home screen" button that is prominent on both the Touch and the iPhone and is certainly not a camera.
Comments
Can you explain in detail?
Yeah... I think Apple would have lost the computer market completely by now If Microsoft wasn't producing a terrible OS like Windows. Look at companies like Dell, HP and others. They have implemented new hardware into notebooks like new processors etc. They are so quick to upgrade the hardware. But Apple is sticking with minor incremental changes and is rather focusing on iPods, iPhones etc. Apple was always ahead in offering the best hardware possible in computers but now it looks they have lost the plot and are 'very busy' with music players and cellphones.
Yeah... I think Apple would have lost the computer market completely by now If Microsoft wasn't producing a terrible OS like Windows.
So all of Apple's year or year success with Mac sales have nothing to do with theheir halo-effect products, the Apple Stores, the Get A Mac commercials, or constant revisions to OS X and their HW?
Look at companies like Dell, HP and others. They have implemented new hardware into notebooks like new processors etc. They are so quick to upgrade the hardware. But Apple is sticking with minor incremental changes and is rather focusing on iPods, iPhones etc. Apple was always ahead in offering the best hardware possible in computers but now it looks they have lost the plot and are 'very busy' with music players and cellphones.
Apple has been releasing new processors with each Intel revision, which is about 2x a year. They are even releasing processors from Intel no one has (like the Santa Rosa/Penryns with Montevina features in the last iMac), no one wants until Apple uses it (like the MBA's small form factor 22mm^2 Santa Rosa Merom Processor), and that one has righty away (like the 3.2GHz 4-core "Harpertown" Xeons that were showcased in the Mac Pro).
Are the units here correct? Is it really mm or should it be cm. 0.42mm thinner... barely measurable!
I'm assuming 0.42mm is correct, if the Nano was 0.42cm thinner then I think it would ridiculously thin, the current one is only 0.65cm thick after all.
5.
BlueTooth would be nice but I'm beginning to wonder if Apple will ever support it fully. Bluetooth just provides for a huge amount of I/O options.
6.
GPS. Mixed feelings here as it might drive up the price to much. One of the reasons that I mentioned USB and BlueTooth first is that they give options for things like GPS. Still I believe that location aware apps will become huge.
I hope Bluetooth is added...GPS is nice with Bluetooth, I can use my Bluetooth GPS dongle. also Bluetooth stereo headset would be nice to use in the gym.
Although iPods and iPhones bring lots of revenues to Apple Inc. However it is not so good for Apple to focus on these things so much. Apple is known for computers, and of late they have given a low priorities to computers. It is really bad.
I think it is way too late to object. Apple has been getting about as much money from iPods as they have from computers, this has been true for a few years now. Apple has been a consumer electronics company for a while. It may shift towards computers a bit as the iPod market is getting closer to saturation and Macs sales are growing as quickly as iPod sales did.
People still use AutoCAD?!?!?! Those mockups are u-g-l-y and the drawing tools are pretty crappy. That really looks like AutoCAD from when I was in college!
That style of drawing is pretty similar to what's on Apple's dev site so companies can design products around the iPods, such as the cases. Highly rendered drawings aren't necessary for that kind of user, it may even a hindrance, they don't need pretty, they just need the data.
Could it be that the Shuffle will be the only iPod not using OS X?
That style of drawing is pretty similar to what's on Apple's dev site so companies can design products around the iPods, such as the cases. Highly rendered drawings aren't necessary for that kind of user, it may even a hindrance, they don't need pretty, they just need the data.
They don't give the diameters of the "holes." That's a pretty important one.
They don't give the diameters of the "holes." That's a pretty important one.
You're right on that. That's a more convincing argument.
On the touch side, what is the potential for Apple replacing the Classic with the touch? That would mean both SSD and a HD option in order to address those customers who need a large HD. That would be interesting as it moves OS X deeper into the iPod environment.
An HDD-sporting iPod touch would be heavier, thicker and have terrible battery life (because to eliminate interface latency, the disk would have to be spinning at all times).
Most people who need a large capacity iPod already have an iPod classic or iPod video. That's a niche market. Apple's best selling iPod was the nano in 2006 and in Apple's recent earnings notes, the iPod shuffle and iPod touch were their best selling iPods.
So it's far more likely Apple will simply retire the classic altogether. They didn't give it that name for nothing.
So all of Apple's year or year success with Mac sales have nothing to do with theheir halo-effect products, the Apple Stores, the Get A Mac commercials, or constant revisions to OS X and their HW?
Apple has been releasing new processors with each Intel revision, which is about 2x a year. They are even releasing processors from Intel no one has (like the Santa Rosa/Penryns with Montevina features in the last iMac), no one wants until Apple uses it (like the MBA's small form factor 22mm^2 Santa Rosa Merom Processor), and that one has righty away (like the 3.2GHz 4-core "Harpertown" Xeons that were showcased in the Mac Pro).
What about the laptops...can u compare the hardware with the latest that Dell is offering in Lattitude E series?
Are the units here correct? Is it really mm or should it be cm. 0.42mm thinner... barely measurable!
It can hardly be 0.42cm thinner, otherwise it's going to be only 0.23cm thick. You can already call that a knife.
What about the laptops...can u compare the hardware with the latest that Dell is offering in Lattitude E series?
Can you supply some stats of a site that lists the specs we can compare them to newest chips by Intel. If they are new refreshes for Dell then the MB, MBP and MBA will all have these same chips too soon enough. Apple has used Intel's fastest chips, most efficient chips for it's notebooks since moving to Intel, sans the Extreme chips which use more power and thus run hotter. Dell and HP et al. have been getting the mass produced chips a little sooner than Apple, but you have to remember that Apple's entire line of notebooks uses only a handful of Intel's highest-end chips, non-Extreme chips, while the others sell most of their machines usng cheaper and/or older processors so the fact that Dell and HP outsell Apple in the budget in means nothing here because Apple doesn't compete there.
edit: These are definitely Montevina chip and they are nice for Dell notebooks and a major change for them, which they state. They are finally offering a backlit keyboard, too. They offer a 64GB SSD for an additional $650 over the default 80GB HDD price. I thought they would have been cheaper by now. Pages two and four have prices, speed, chip size, etc. if you want to check them out...
very different huh, you can tell that by the CAD drawing... amazing... I don't see 'very different' in those drawings but hey, it could be just me.
Perhaps I overstated that a tad.
It is both much larger and a different shape though. If it is for a camera, it's a needlessly large hole for the tiny iPhone camera lens and the wrong shape. It's different enough to make it questionable whether it's really for a camera at all.
I am not talking about the budget. Look at the Dell's website for stats..they offer Centrino 2 processor with 2.8 GHz speed, DDR3 RAM support and higher FSB. My point is that Apple is so focused on iPods and iPhones that they upgrade computer hardware after others have already done that. So they are no longer the pioneer in computer business (if u forget about the OS X for a sec.). iPods and iPhone can provide a good revenue in short term, however, in long term Apple will have to look back to computers if they want to survive in the market. So computers should be the first priority not iPods and iPhone..thats what I wanted to assert.
You either missed the point or aren't reading. How is Apple going to announce, and have their stores stocked with all models in all speeds that very day before others can announce them and have them on their websites for sale but shipping out days later? But that isn't even what your suggesting, you suggest that Apple doesn't care about Macs or its users because it doesn't have the next gen Intel chips well before other others due and in quantities that exceeding their competitors? How exactly is Apple going to get ahold of these Intel chips well before everyone else? These aren't some oddball chip that Intel is using Apple to promote, These are the the mainstream chips of which Apple uses a butt-load more than the others out of the gate. HP and Dell sell a lot more computers than Apple, but Apple has 66% of the >$1000 consumer notebook market and they do it with only using 6 different chips from Intel. That is not the same as Dell and HP using Intel's gamut and selling mostly old tech in <$700 notebooks.
You're right on that. That's a more convincing argument.
It's also entirely possible that this a real CAD drawing (which is an essential for any product BTW). The idea that because it "looks like AutoCAD" it must be a fake or something is just silly.
Most CAD programs have the ability to hide/show various layers or parts of the image so that one can see the wireframe in the absence of some of the measurements. What's to stop this from being an entirely real CAD drawing, with some of the messier layers hidden?
Like all rumours this could be completely fake, but a lot of the criticism of it here is unfounded and not very well thought out.
Could be real, but then again it's not that difficult to fake a CAD drawing.
I got curious after reading your Jessie Ventura footer, so I watched a YouTube. The guy is funny!
HP and Dell sell a lot more computers than Apple, but Apple has 66% of the consumer notebook reason and does it with only using 6 different chips from Intel.
I believe 66% is how much Apple has of the $1000 consumer computer market as a whole, not laptops in particular.
That doesn't really make your point any less valid though.
I believe 66% is how much Apple has of the $1000 consumer computer market as a whole, not laptops in particular.
That doesn't really make your point any less valid though.
Oops, I did mean consumer laptops over $1000.
Perhaps I overstated that a tad.
It is both much larger and a different shape though. If it is for a camera, it's a needlessly large hole for the tiny iPhone camera lens and the wrong shape. It's different enough to make it questionable whether it's really for a camera at all.
I'm not sure what hole you're talking about. Unless of course you're referring to the "home screen" button that is prominent on both the Touch and the iPhone and is certainly not a camera.