Apple seen unloading new MacBook Pros and (possibly) iMacs at WWDC

2456

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 106
    aegisdesignaegisdesign Posts: 2,914member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Alonso Perez View Post


    A MacBook Pro (RED).



    Ooh, pretty.



    Probably not very practical in real life though. I'd be scared to get it scratched.



    I'm looking forward to see if they change the Finder substantially - not just deleting metal and adding crap like a slideshow that doesn't show you all the files in the directory if you've more than a screens worth and bad spotlight integration. I dug out BeOS a few months back for old time's sake and it's just painful how crap the Finder is compared to BeOS's tracker from a decade previous.



    And the other thing to fix is networking. OSX Networking is just terrible. If they want us backing up with Time Machine, then I hope they fix networking first. Waiting ten minutes for Finder to realise a share has gone away before you regain control again from the beachball is just stupid. Having to use Sharepoints to share folders like you could in MacOS v7 is stupid.



    Actually, there's just one thing they need to fix - kill the beachball. I don't think BeOS even had an equivalent 'I'm busy' pointer. With all the ex-Be employees at Apple you'd think they'd get suitably annoyed with it by now and fix it.
  • Reply 22 of 106
    marshallmarshall Posts: 14member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Alonso Perez View Post


    But I'd like to see this:

    A MacBook Pro (RED).



    I couldn't care less about black, but I would pay more for (RED).
  • Reply 23 of 106
    stompystompy Posts: 389member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jawzzy View Post


    Is it just me, or does it seem like that analyst checked out the MacRumors Buyer's Guide?







    MacRumors has reset the "Days since last update" for minor things like adding the 17" edu iMac. If you're tracking this yourself but didn't consider this a real update, your average days since update obviously wouldn't match MR. If you're an analyst, are you going to track the averages yourself or just borrow someone else's work?
  • Reply 24 of 106
    pbpb Posts: 4,242member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by marshall View Post


    I couldn't care less about black, but I would pay more for (RED).



    Sorry, I find the red rather irritating. I would not like to have to work on a machine coloured like that.



    And to comment on the original rumor here, no, I don't believe a second that Apple would release in the Leopard show new MBPs and redesigned iMacs.
  • Reply 25 of 106
    uconn1uconn1 Posts: 1member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Alonso Perez View Post


    But I'd like to see this:







    A MacBook Pro (RED).



    You can have any color you want as long as your willing to pay for it...



    http://www.colorwarepc.com/products/...x?configid=493
  • Reply 26 of 106
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,285member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by andrewcod View Post


    Yes, but there has been some speculation that Apple will also include a virtualisation solution, similar to the likes of Parallels. Personally however, I'm more looking forward to the new Finder UI that everyone keeps suggesting will happen.



    Apple has already said that they wouldn't be doing that, so, we'll see.
  • Reply 27 of 106
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,285member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jawzzy View Post


    Is it just me, or does it seem like that analyst checked out the MacRumors Buyer's Guide?







    More likely, the MacRumors buying guide uses the reports from the analysts.
  • Reply 28 of 106
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,285member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by John the Geek View Post


    This guy needs to buy a freakin clue. Apple's world does not revolve around Windows. If it did, Legacy BIOS would have been a feature of the Intel Macs from the start, not an afterthought firmware update.



    Boot Camp and Parallels are both great ideas for those poor schmucks who still need Windows occasionally (like myself) But with that done Apple has it's own stuff to worry about. And Leopard is going to be about Leopard, not Windows. Apple has already confirmed this.



    In a way, it does. Otherwise Apple wouldn't have developed BootCamp in the first place.



    Years ago, Apple even produced their own x86 cards for their machines.



    Windows compatability is an important strategic move by Apple. It's considered to be critical for users of Windows who might like to juimp over, but otherwise couldn't.



    It's also being considered as a stepping stone for businesses, who otherwise wouldn't ever get an Apple product.



    BIOS has nothing to do with this at all.
  • Reply 29 of 106
    kd86kd86 Posts: 42member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ascii View Post


    Airplanes are for chumps too.



    I think your brain is for chumps.
  • Reply 30 of 106
    kd86kd86 Posts: 42member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaveGee View Post


    I still don't quite understand the infatuation behind stock splits other than companies that do them do so because their stock is doing well and have a (misguided?) mentality that if the price is 'too high' it could scare investors away. People would understand that the action of a split (by itself) doesn't really "DO" anything...



    Heck, why not wish Apple would pull a reverse stock split? Say 1 for 4, then your Apple shares would be worth $450 bucks each!!!



    Back on track... I for one am for the 1st time in a long time anxious to see a new Mac Book Pro... My trusty 1st gen 17" PowerBook G4 1.3GHz (I think) is on it's very last leg... The power cord is all but shot (hanging together by a wish and a prayer) and just two weeks ago I dropped (fell from the couch actually) it and the panel that rides over the LCD cracked and ... while it still works it's like looking a screen thru a cracked window.



    Dave



    It's partially like a gift to the shareholders. Ok, let's say I own 500 shares of AAPL and there is a 2 for 1 stock split. That means I now have 1000 shares. And let's say AAPL goes up $1/share tomorrow. Well that means by the end of the day tomorrow, I'm up $1000 in my position in AAPL when I would've only been up $500 with half the number of shares. Each share may be worth less initially after the split, but if it keeps doing as well as it has been, there would be a lot of happy investors, because each day they'd be making twice as much as they would have before the split. Do you see why shareholders of any stock that is doing really well might want this to happen? On the other hand, your reverse split scenario would have the opposite effect so I HIGHLY doubt any investor would be too happy about this. They'd probably sue Apple
  • Reply 31 of 106
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KD86 View Post


    I think your brain is for chumps.



    If you are important enough people will come to you.
  • Reply 32 of 106
    louzerlouzer Posts: 1,054member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KD86 View Post


    It's partially like a gift to the shareholders. Ok, let's say I own 500 shares of AAPL and there is a 2 for 1 stock split. That means I now have 1000 shares. And let's say AAPL goes up $1/share tomorrow. Well that means by the end of the day tomorrow, I'm up $1000 in my position in AAPL when I would've only been up $500 with half the number of shares. Each share may be worth less initially after the split, but if it keeps doing as well as it has been, there would be a lot of happy investors, because each day they'd be making twice as much as they would have before the split. Do you see why shareholders of any stock that is doing really well might want this to happen? On the other hand, your reverse split scenario would have the opposite effect so I HIGHLY doubt any investor would be too happy about this. They'd probably sue Apple



    Um, nice jump there. Assuming that the stock's going up a $1, so let's split the stock, so then that'll be like $2! Woohoo! Certainly it wouldn't just go up .50 after the split. That just wouldn't happen.



    And if we're going to take it like this, then let's do a 100-1 stock split. That way, when the price goes up a $1 tomorrow, we'd make $50,000!!!!!!!!!
  • Reply 33 of 106
    aegisdesignaegisdesign Posts: 2,914member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PB View Post


    Sorry, I find the red rather irritating. I would not like to have to work on a machine coloured like that.



    As long as the inside is silver/grey it'd be quite nice I reckon. Red annodizing has a habit of turning pink eventually in sunlight though so you'd possibly end up with a pink top and a red base after a few years - not good.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PB View Post


    And to comment on the original rumor here, no, I don't believe a second that Apple would release in the Leopard show new MBPs and redesigned iMacs.



    They're overdue, as is a Mac Mini update so who knows. I still want to know where iWork 07 has gone.
  • Reply 34 of 106
    squeaksqueak Posts: 26member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KD86 View Post


    It's partially like a gift to the shareholders. Ok, let's say I own 500 shares of AAPL and there is a 2 for 1 stock split. That means I now have 1000 shares. And let's say AAPL goes up $1/share tomorrow. Well that means by the end of the day tomorrow, I'm up $1000 in my position in AAPL when I would've only been up $500 with half the number of shares. Each share may be worth less initially after the split, but if it keeps doing as well as it has been, there would be a lot of happy investors, because each day they'd be making twice as much as they would have before the split. Do you see why shareholders of any stock that is doing really well might want this to happen? On the other hand, your reverse split scenario would have the opposite effect so I HIGHLY doubt any investor would be too happy about this. They'd probably sue Apple



    Investors are not dumb. If in your scenario the stock went up $1 post split, then had the split not have happened, the stock would have raised $2.



    You don't get free equity with a split. The P/E ratio stays the same.
  • Reply 35 of 106
    louzerlouzer Posts: 1,054member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Phizz View Post


    "Apple seen unloading new MacBook Pros and (possibly) iMacs at WWDC"



    That title makes it sound like someone caught a picture on their camera of delivery men carting boxes through the back doors of Moscone West...



    And I bet the reason its only "(possibly) iMacs" because of union issues. Working overtime, that kind of thing.



    I actually read "unload" more like trying to get rid of something you don't want, as in "Apple's going to have some crappy new macbooks coming that they're going to try to unload on people at WWDC".



    Which is actually worse then the way you read it.
  • Reply 36 of 106
    aegisdesignaegisdesign Posts: 2,914member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ascii View Post


    If you are important enough people will come to you.



    Too right. And in these days of carbon footprint reduction and easy to use video conferencing, I'd have to agree with your 'Airplanes are for chumps'.



    It'd have to be a damn good reason to get me on a plane.
  • Reply 37 of 106
    louzerlouzer Posts: 1,054member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by slughead View Post


    The investor reaction looks pretty erratic to me.



    As an investor, you should be worried. Notice the two times the stock dropped. It was WWDC!!!!!



    And I think its still foolish for apple to treat WWDC, a special developer's event that costs bigtime $$$ to get in, as just another MacWorld keynote party or something. Its bad enough when they show off new features of an OS, and the developers there from whom they ripped off the features get to go "Oh, great, there's my business down the crapper!".
  • Reply 38 of 106
    louzerlouzer Posts: 1,054member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aegisdesign View Post


    Too right. And in these days of carbon footprint reduction and easy to use video conferencing, I'd have to agree with your 'Airplanes are for chumps'.



    It'd have to be a damn good reason to get me on a plane.



    How about "Steve Jobs requests your presence at the unveiling of their next new gadget"?
  • Reply 39 of 106
    tchwojkotchwojko Posts: 139member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KD86 View Post


    It's partially like a gift to the shareholders. Ok, let's say I own 500 shares of AAPL and there is a 2 for 1 stock split. That means I now have 1000 shares. And let's say AAPL goes up $1/share tomorrow. Well that means by the end of the day tomorrow, I'm up $1000 in my position in AAPL when I would've only been up $500 with half the number of shares. Each share may be worth less initially after the split, but if it keeps doing as well as it has been, there would be a lot of happy investors, because each day they'd be making twice as much as they would have before the split. Do you see why shareholders of any stock that is doing really well might want this to happen? On the other hand, your reverse split scenario would have the opposite effect so I HIGHLY doubt any investor would be too happy about this. They'd probably sue Apple



    No, if it didn't split, it would have gone up $2/share. Let's say a stock is at $100 today. The next day it goes up 1%. If it split, it would go up $1. If it doesn't split, it would go up $0.50. Either way, your portfolio would increase by 1%.



    It can help liquidity of both the stock and options, though AAPL is fairly liquid already.
  • Reply 40 of 106
    aegisdesignaegisdesign Posts: 2,914member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Louzer View Post


    How about "Steve Jobs requests your presence at the unveiling of their next new gadget"?



    Ah go on then.



    As long as he's paying and planting some trees to offset.
Sign In or Register to comment.