... Steve Jobs also acknowledged that the 1986 decision to not license the original Mac OS had been a bad decision, but stressed that he was no longer part of the company when that decision was made.
...
Mac users and Mac loyalists were betrayed by Steve Jobs and, with its high prices and limited choice of models or options, Apple doesn't have a bright future.
A company should listen to its customers and aim to grow its market share, for otherwise, it should cease to exist.
I get your point but disagree. No matter whether Apple should license it's OS years ago or not, doing this now would be a great mistake. This was discussed too many times so I won't go on it again. The relevant bit in this discussion is that currently Apple offers complete solutions with great overall user experience. Even MS is abandoning it's own model because it has serious drawbacks (XBox, Zune, plans and hints for own mobile phone).
"Listening to customers" does not mean listening literally. As I commented above, SJ believes that the customer does not know what he or she wants in technical terms. When the customer says "I want Quad Core processor here" he or she could actually mean "I want my images and video to be processed faster". This could be achieved by utilizing the GPU already sitting in the computer rather than adding raw power. Apple controls both the hardware and the software and can make this happen. HP, Dell or Microsoft can not.
This brings the limitation of choices. It's a tradeoff. You can not have everything for everybody, and cheap.
Mac users and Mac loyalists were betrayed by Steve Jobs and, with its high prices and limited choice of models or options, Apple doesn't have a bright future.
It's been "high prices and limited choice of models or options" for over ten years now. When exactly is this "Apple doesn't have a bright future" thing going to set in? I suppose making billions more every year + more cash on hand than MS, record quarters, record Mac sales, domination of the Premium notebook market, all the mindshare, not to mention Apple setting the bar in non-Mac areas, means they don't have a "bright future." Hell, MS' fear of Apple is palpable, having already lost control of the Premium end of the market. MS spent hundreds of millions of dollars on their Laptop Losers campaign and what happened? Apple ended up selling more Macs. The list goes on and on.
Actually, Apple seems to be the ONLY ONE in the tech industry with a bright future right now. Apple is doing virtually everything right, especially since 2006. Apple leads the industry. When Apple sneezes everyone else grabs a kleenex.
The "high prices" = Premium market. That's kinda the idea. That's the whole point.
LOL, is your trolling always so ineffective? I mean, one would think that after posting several paragraphs you'd actually produce something coherent.
The only thing worse than trolling, is trolling that makes no sense.
I already store a 2.5 Hdd back there on my imac. Only difference is I use a strip of double sided sticky tape. Costs .30 cents and keeps the hdd completely hidden.
[QUOTE=nvidia2008;1483686]For my PC my goal was not the latest and greatest but the most value for money for what I wanted to do, which was enjoy smoothly playing the latest PC games.
Hi nvidia2008,
The key point is "value for money". I have always insisted that the mac would never ever replace the PC. Both of them actually complement each other in many aspects. Without the PC, the Apple would never be able to sell so many units if they insist on only "apple parts". It is the pc market that is driving the costs down and with such a huge market, any new innovation or upgrades would achieve economies of scale within a very short period of time. As an apple user, I must thank MS for their effort. They created the thirst for computing and the ever innovation towards more powerful cpus and gpus.
It is then that the apple would benefit greatly in terms of costs and of course profits. The imac actually in my view represents the core of apple computer. Notebooks are nice. Everybody needs/want one but the desktop is where the battle is won or lost. I would dare to say that the imac pricing appears to be the upper limit and a litmus test to see how much premium a person would be willing to pay for the "apple experience'. The mini is a joke and the costs of the Pro series is even a bigger joke. Most average mac user would only consider the imac i.e. between the lower end or the highest spec model. They are greatly hindered by the cost factor of the pro even if they want better spec.
For notebooks, other factors including form, size and design play a very big part but for the desktop segment, these factors lose their shine a little. People still tend to look for specs. If the specs does not justify the price, then the consumer would still hesitate.
I believe that apple has realised this and thus the imac refresh/upgrades are appearing faster and the leap is getting bigger and bigger. The imac segment is actually very price sensitive even among hardcore apple user. For the notebook segment, apple can convince the user to pay more for design, sleek and the feeling of owning a mac and of course the "showboating" among friends to appear cool and modern. However, the desktop is sitting in your home or office, thus no one really bothers. The imac thus becomes more "Pc like" where specs and value becomes more important.
If anything is a guide, look at the latest dell desktop high end spec model and tweak the spec down say 20% and you would come close to what the new imac would probably to refreshed to.
An internal BD drive would make my ripping work easier as well. I haven't replaced all of my DVD players with Blu-Ray yet. I often rip BD's and convert them to DVD for the other players. I currently have to do this on an HP laptop, although I supposed I could buy an external BD-Rom drive for 100-200 bucks.
Why would you do that?
Why not get a Blue-ray drive that writes, like the ones from AMEX DIGITAL that reads and writes!
I like HP's disclosure on their HP HDX 18t Premium series with a BD, i.e., "As Blu-ray is new format w/new technologies, certain disc, digital connection, compatibility and/or performance issues may arise, do not constitute defects in product. Flawless playback on all systems not guaranteed. For some Blu-ray titles to play, may req. DVI or HDMI digital connection, display may req. HDCP support. This Blu-ray drive does not support writing to ultra-high-speed CD-RW media (16X to 32X advertised perf.). HD-DVD movies can't be played on this PC. " http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/sh...ies&aoid=46257
Well I, (and I think others) assumed he was talking about heat, because "limitations imposed by the design" makes no sense.
What limitations? How could it being thinner possibly have any bearing on anything at all with an all-in-one computer? There's room for a mother board, a hard drive, an optical drive, ports, fans, and all the regular stuff that's in any computer. The power envelope is the same, and there is nothing being "left out" because of it's thinness unless you count something like a graphics card slot which is never going to happen in an all-in-one unless it stops being an all-in-one and turns into a mini-tower.
The only thing that makes any sense when someone says "problems with it's thinness" is the always mentioned heat issue (which doesn't actually exist), or that tired old argument that all-in-ones are lame in and of themselves and everything should be a tower of some kind.
How about putting a full function, top of the line graphics card in there? I'm not saying a slot, but it could just as well be on the board. Have you seen the size of something like an nVidia GeForce 295 GTX? Do you even know how much heat it has to dissipate? In my homemade PC, my GeForce 275 GTX card is so big I could barely fit it in the huge Gigabyte aluminum case I have. The thin design is a limitation. It requires that you put mobile or less powerful graphics in there. Considering there are plenty of people who dual boot and play games in the Windows environment, this would be a huge plus. Not to mention, there is a slight possibility with larger numbers of Mac users that some of the more resource heavy games just might see porting to the Mac if it had the hardware to process those games. Also, with OpenCL, this makes the machine even more powerful.
Um . . . Apple is doing exactly what customers want. That kind of explains record quarters, record Mac sales (in a recession), outpacing the rest of the industry several years running, domination of the Premium segment of the market ($1000+ noteboks), Macs #1 in customer satisfaction several years running, unprecedented increases in marketshare, the list just goes on and on.
Why the hell would Apple license out OS X?
Have you been in a coma since 2006?
Not sure if Apple is giving the trolls what they want, though. Sorry about that.
First of all, this doesn't mean Apple is doing what customers want. This just means that people are tired of the alternative, and are looking elsewhere to fill their needs. The iPod has opened people's minds up to Apple, and they're looking.
Apple was #1 in customer satisfaction when their market share dipped so low that people questioned why I was even bothering to use a Mac, still. Apple has always had a high customer satisfaction rating.
Marketshare increasing, profits increasing, customer satisfaction the highest in the industry, everyone and their dog trying their hardest to copy Apple products and business model .... yea, I'd say Apple is right. Stop bitchin' and just buy the stock/ products and enjoy the ride.
Best post of the day!
Agreed, have confidence in Apple's PHD's already! Sheez!
I do like the iMacs all-in-one design. One cable (pwr) coming out the back. With my BT mouse and keyboard (and 8 rechargeable batteries) wireless all in one printer, I almost hate to connect my iPhone because it means another cable out the back. I hate the excessive cables/pwr bricks dust/dirt attracting detritus of the PC world!
MY friend apple engineer's all stood back speechless at the incredible beauty of the new gamma adjusted display with the <<green>> glass on top / Matte looks much duller and fades over time .
i own at least 5 working macs at a time for over 7 yrs and the new MBP15 3.02GHZ is as good or better than my hd tv . All my matte laptops including the recent black MB feel kinda icky for there graphics my imac 2 yr old still has good graphics.
So your thought that apple would lose quality for speeded up production is wrong . they speeded up production and made a great product
thats apple !!
I never said they would lose quality. I said here were obvious reasons and benefits to glossy that not everyone is sold on. Learn to read and learn to to conjugate; "speeded up" LOL. What I did say, is that they did it to streamline their production, ie. it's easier to make 1 version of a product. That's true for any manufacturer. I'm not pro or against glossy, but I am pro choice (LOL NPI) and if you read my response I was mostly pro glossy. I have no reason to replace the studio's displays yet and have not used them much for production work only in the office. Finally it's obvious fewer choices for the consumer is usually a bad thing and since we can only get Apple products from 1 manufacturer i don't think Apple forcing glossy displays is exactly fair to their consumers though somewhat understood on my behalf even if I think Apple should provide a choice.
I don't know of any mouse that would be universally acceptable.
There is no one fits all. There are too many variables*.
It's like buying a golf glove. And, you would never buy somebody a golf glove off the shelf unless they were standing right next to you.
* And if you don't know what "variables" mean and you have Snow Leopard, select the word and right click on it.
The original Microsoft Explorer 3.0 mouse is universally heralded. No other mouse is as good. Even the re-released Explorer 3.0 doesn't do the original justice - they've cheapened it. Say what you want about big bad Microsoft, but they used to make the best peripherals around. It's no longer the case, as they've gone to sticker lettering on the keys, and horrible, over-featured keyboards and mice, everything wireless but doesn't work right, redesigning the key layouts, and very badly at that... You have to look long and hard to find quality keyboards and mice, these days. The PC market has moved more and more to toward "cheaper is better" and it shows.
I don't know of any mouse that would be universally acceptable.
There is no one fits all. There are too many variables*.
It's like buying a golf glove. And, you would never buy somebody a golf glove off the shelf unless they were standing right next to you.
* And if you don't know what "variables" mean and you have Snow Leopard, select the word and right click on it.
There is a lot that Apple can do to their mighty mouse design from adding a proper scroll wheel, fixing those "squeezable" side buttons to the ergonomic feel and user experience. The mouse is Apple's weakest design IMHO.
Whenever I get a new Mac the first thing I replace is the mouse.
The original Microsoft Explorer 3.0 mouse is universally heralded. No other mouse is as good. Even the re-released Explorer 3.0 doesn't do the original justice - they've cheapened it. Say what you want about big bad Microsoft, but they used to make the best peripherals around. It's no longer the case, as they've gone to sticker lettering on the keys, and horrible, over-featured keyboards and mice, everything wireless but doesn't work right, redesigning the key layouts, and very badly at that... You have to look long and hard to find quality keyboards and mice, these days. The PC market has moved more and more to toward "cheaper is better" and it shows.
The best keyboard I've ever used was the extended keyboard that came with the 8100/80. Typing on that was amazing, it had a full set of function keys that you could place a plastic quickkeys template over from QuarkXpress. Ahh those were the days!
Internal BD-Rom drives are actually very cheap. They can be had for about a hundred bucks retail. With Apple's buying power, they could be had for much less. There is no loss here as they are all compatible with the various DVD formats. That leaves either licensing costs, or coding costs to implement DRM, or a combination of both.
Whatever it is, I hope they resolve it soon. I hate going to another machine just to rip a blue-ray when I could be working on my Mac instead.
Check out Apple performance agains the rest of the industry and you will find out that you are an exception, not the rule. Also check out the customer satisfaction rates.
Performance gains?!?!?!?!?
Going from a 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo in 2008 to, wait for it, a 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo in 2009. Big gain there
Going from an 8800M GTX (Apple calls it an 8800GS) to a GT130 (die shrunk 9600M). No improvement again.
Exactly where is Apple improving performance? Putting in the amount of RAM and size of HD common in sub-$600 PCs back in 2008? That's not even keeping up with the Joneses.
Apple software is where things have been getting better. That and Apple customer service is why they have a better satisfaction rate. Apple notebooks fare well against direct competition, but their desktop lineup is mediocre at best and is badly outperformed by PC hardware costing half as much.
Making the iMac thinner will only appeal to people who value form over function and can afford to replace their computer every couple of years.
Ever since the personal computer was invented the most important measurements have always been reliability and performance per dollar because those tell you how many years you'll get from your purchase and thus what it'll really cost you.
I believe today's Core i7 PCs are as powerful as the iMac will be in 2012. So take the lifespan of the iMac and add 3 years. Now that would be good value for the consumer, but it would kill Apple to have machines last 6 years because sales would plummet. They have to make them good enough to get you to buy them, but crappy enough that you'll need to replace them frequently.
Viewed from that perspective it's clear that Apple doesn't want customers who can do simple math. They would rather have us shut up, go away and buy a PC. If we install OS X on our PCs then we're supporting the Mac software market so that's OK.
There is a lot that Apple can do to their mighty mouse design from adding a proper scroll wheel, fixing those "squeezable" side buttons to the ergonomic feel and user experience. The mouse is Apple's weakest design IMHO.
Whenever I get a new Mac the first thing I replace is the mouse.
And I'll bet that it takes you more time to choose the ideal mouse than your Mac.
I just walked into our computer lab and there are 84 stations. There are only 4 stations that have the same mouse, and are all Apple's latest iteration. Most of the graphic stations are manned with users who have bought their own mouse/trackball/corded/wireless/1-5 button, etc. Some even take them home after class.
Not just because it fits them like a glove, but some, believe it or not, won't use another person's mouse because of the H1N1 virus.
I wouldn't want Apple to waste time designing a mouse.
Internal BD-Rom drives are actually very cheap. They can be had for about a hundred bucks retail. With Apple's buying power, they could be had for much less. There is no loss here as they are all compatible with the various DVD formats. That leaves either licensing costs, or coding costs to implement DRM, or a combination of both.
Whatever it is, I hope they resolve it soon. I hate going to another machine just to rip a blue-ray when I could be working on my Mac instead.
Just how would you rip a Blue-ray on a Mac or any other computer with an internal BD-ROM?
Comments
... Steve Jobs also acknowledged that the 1986 decision to not license the original Mac OS had been a bad decision, but stressed that he was no longer part of the company when that decision was made.
...
Mac users and Mac loyalists were betrayed by Steve Jobs and, with its high prices and limited choice of models or options, Apple doesn't have a bright future.
A company should listen to its customers and aim to grow its market share, for otherwise, it should cease to exist.
I get your point but disagree. No matter whether Apple should license it's OS years ago or not, doing this now would be a great mistake. This was discussed too many times so I won't go on it again. The relevant bit in this discussion is that currently Apple offers complete solutions with great overall user experience. Even MS is abandoning it's own model because it has serious drawbacks (XBox, Zune, plans and hints for own mobile phone).
"Listening to customers" does not mean listening literally. As I commented above, SJ believes that the customer does not know what he or she wants in technical terms. When the customer says "I want Quad Core processor here" he or she could actually mean "I want my images and video to be processed faster". This could be achieved by utilizing the GPU already sitting in the computer rather than adding raw power. Apple controls both the hardware and the software and can make this happen. HP, Dell or Microsoft can not.
This brings the limitation of choices. It's a tradeoff. You can not have everything for everybody, and cheap.
Mac users and Mac loyalists were betrayed by Steve Jobs and, with its high prices and limited choice of models or options, Apple doesn't have a bright future.
It's been "high prices and limited choice of models or options" for over ten years now. When exactly is this "Apple doesn't have a bright future" thing going to set in? I suppose making billions more every year + more cash on hand than MS, record quarters, record Mac sales, domination of the Premium notebook market, all the mindshare, not to mention Apple setting the bar in non-Mac areas, means they don't have a "bright future." Hell, MS' fear of Apple is palpable, having already lost control of the Premium end of the market. MS spent hundreds of millions of dollars on their Laptop Losers campaign and what happened? Apple ended up selling more Macs. The list goes on and on.
Actually, Apple seems to be the ONLY ONE in the tech industry with a bright future right now. Apple is doing virtually everything right, especially since 2006. Apple leads the industry. When Apple sneezes everyone else grabs a kleenex.
The "high prices" = Premium market. That's kinda the idea. That's the whole point.
LOL, is your trolling always so ineffective? I mean, one would think that after posting several paragraphs you'd actually produce something coherent.
The only thing worse than trolling, is trolling that makes no sense.
http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/backpack-imac-shelf-12-08-2009/
I already store a 2.5 Hdd back there on my imac. Only difference is I use a strip of double sided sticky tape. Costs .30 cents and keeps the hdd completely hidden.
Hi nvidia2008,
The key point is "value for money". I have always insisted that the mac would never ever replace the PC. Both of them actually complement each other in many aspects. Without the PC, the Apple would never be able to sell so many units if they insist on only "apple parts". It is the pc market that is driving the costs down and with such a huge market, any new innovation or upgrades would achieve economies of scale within a very short period of time. As an apple user, I must thank MS for their effort. They created the thirst for computing and the ever innovation towards more powerful cpus and gpus.
It is then that the apple would benefit greatly in terms of costs and of course profits. The imac actually in my view represents the core of apple computer. Notebooks are nice. Everybody needs/want one but the desktop is where the battle is won or lost. I would dare to say that the imac pricing appears to be the upper limit and a litmus test to see how much premium a person would be willing to pay for the "apple experience'. The mini is a joke and the costs of the Pro series is even a bigger joke. Most average mac user would only consider the imac i.e. between the lower end or the highest spec model. They are greatly hindered by the cost factor of the pro even if they want better spec.
For notebooks, other factors including form, size and design play a very big part but for the desktop segment, these factors lose their shine a little. People still tend to look for specs. If the specs does not justify the price, then the consumer would still hesitate.
I believe that apple has realised this and thus the imac refresh/upgrades are appearing faster and the leap is getting bigger and bigger. The imac segment is actually very price sensitive even among hardcore apple user. For the notebook segment, apple can convince the user to pay more for design, sleek and the feeling of owning a mac and of course the "showboating" among friends to appear cool and modern. However, the desktop is sitting in your home or office, thus no one really bothers. The imac thus becomes more "Pc like" where specs and value becomes more important.
If anything is a guide, look at the latest dell desktop high end spec model and tweak the spec down say 20% and you would come close to what the new imac would probably to refreshed to.
An internal BD drive would make my ripping work easier as well. I haven't replaced all of my DVD players with Blu-Ray yet. I often rip BD's and convert them to DVD for the other players. I currently have to do this on an HP laptop, although I supposed I could buy an external BD-Rom drive for 100-200 bucks.
Why would you do that?
Why not get a Blue-ray drive that writes, like the ones from AMEX DIGITAL that reads and writes!
1. http://www.amexdigital.com/Press_Rel...ti%20Drive.htm
2. http://www.amexdigital.com/Press_Rel...ulti_Drive.htm
I like HP's disclosure on their HP HDX 18t Premium series with a BD, i.e., "As Blu-ray is new format w/new technologies, certain disc, digital connection, compatibility and/or performance issues may arise, do not constitute defects in product. Flawless playback on all systems not guaranteed. For some Blu-ray titles to play, may req. DVI or HDMI digital connection, display may req. HDCP support. This Blu-ray drive does not support writing to ultra-high-speed CD-RW media (16X to 32X advertised perf.). HD-DVD movies can't be played on this PC. " http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/sh...ies&aoid=46257
Well I, (and I think others) assumed he was talking about heat, because "limitations imposed by the design" makes no sense.
What limitations? How could it being thinner possibly have any bearing on anything at all with an all-in-one computer? There's room for a mother board, a hard drive, an optical drive, ports, fans, and all the regular stuff that's in any computer. The power envelope is the same, and there is nothing being "left out" because of it's thinness unless you count something like a graphics card slot which is never going to happen in an all-in-one unless it stops being an all-in-one and turns into a mini-tower.
The only thing that makes any sense when someone says "problems with it's thinness" is the always mentioned heat issue (which doesn't actually exist), or that tired old argument that all-in-ones are lame in and of themselves and everything should be a tower of some kind.
How about putting a full function, top of the line graphics card in there? I'm not saying a slot, but it could just as well be on the board. Have you seen the size of something like an nVidia GeForce 295 GTX? Do you even know how much heat it has to dissipate? In my homemade PC, my GeForce 275 GTX card is so big I could barely fit it in the huge Gigabyte aluminum case I have. The thin design is a limitation. It requires that you put mobile or less powerful graphics in there. Considering there are plenty of people who dual boot and play games in the Windows environment, this would be a huge plus. Not to mention, there is a slight possibility with larger numbers of Mac users that some of the more resource heavy games just might see porting to the Mac if it had the hardware to process those games. Also, with OpenCL, this makes the machine even more powerful.
Um . . . Apple is doing exactly what customers want. That kind of explains record quarters, record Mac sales (in a recession), outpacing the rest of the industry several years running, domination of the Premium segment of the market ($1000+ noteboks), Macs #1 in customer satisfaction several years running, unprecedented increases in marketshare, the list just goes on and on.
Why the hell would Apple license out OS X?
Have you been in a coma since 2006?
Not sure if Apple is giving the trolls what they want, though. Sorry about that.
First of all, this doesn't mean Apple is doing what customers want. This just means that people are tired of the alternative, and are looking elsewhere to fill their needs. The iPod has opened people's minds up to Apple, and they're looking.
Apple was #1 in customer satisfaction when their market share dipped so low that people questioned why I was even bothering to use a Mac, still. Apple has always had a high customer satisfaction rating.
Marketshare increasing, profits increasing, customer satisfaction the highest in the industry, everyone and their dog trying their hardest to copy Apple products and business model .... yea, I'd say Apple is right. Stop bitchin' and just buy the stock/ products and enjoy the ride.
Best post of the day!
Agreed, have confidence in Apple's PHD's already! Sheez!
I do like the iMacs all-in-one design. One cable (pwr) coming out the back. With my BT mouse and keyboard (and 8 rechargeable batteries) wireless all in one printer, I almost hate to connect my iPhone because it means another cable out the back. I hate the excessive cables/pwr bricks dust/dirt attracting detritus of the PC world!
Also fix the arm so it has a height adjustment. Not everyone is 5' 10". And it has to get a new mouse. Peace.
MY friend apple engineer's all stood back speechless at the incredible beauty of the new gamma adjusted display with the <<green>> glass on top / Matte looks much duller and fades over time .
i own at least 5 working macs at a time for over 7 yrs and the new MBP15 3.02GHZ is as good or better than my hd tv . All my matte laptops including the recent black MB feel kinda icky for there graphics my imac 2 yr old still has good graphics.
So your thought that apple would lose quality for speeded up production is wrong . they speeded up production and made a great product
thats apple !!
I never said they would lose quality. I said here were obvious reasons and benefits to glossy that not everyone is sold on. Learn to read and learn to to conjugate; "speeded up" LOL. What I did say, is that they did it to streamline their production, ie. it's easier to make 1 version of a product. That's true for any manufacturer. I'm not pro or against glossy, but I am pro choice (LOL NPI) and if you read my response I was mostly pro glossy. I have no reason to replace the studio's displays yet and have not used them much for production work only in the office. Finally it's obvious fewer choices for the consumer is usually a bad thing and since we can only get Apple products from 1 manufacturer i don't think Apple forcing glossy displays is exactly fair to their consumers though somewhat understood on my behalf even if I think Apple should provide a choice.
it is so functional and it look amazing still...
And it has to get a new mouse.
Why?
I don't know of any mouse that would be universally acceptable.
There is no one fits all. There are too many variables*.
It's like buying a golf glove. And, you would never buy somebody a golf glove off the shelf unless they were standing right next to you.
* And if you don't know what "variables" mean and you have Snow Leopard, select the word and right click on it.
Why?
I don't know of any mouse that would be universally acceptable.
There is no one fits all. There are too many variables*.
It's like buying a golf glove. And, you would never buy somebody a golf glove off the shelf unless they were standing right next to you.
* And if you don't know what "variables" mean and you have Snow Leopard, select the word and right click on it.
The original Microsoft Explorer 3.0 mouse is universally heralded. No other mouse is as good. Even the re-released Explorer 3.0 doesn't do the original justice - they've cheapened it. Say what you want about big bad Microsoft, but they used to make the best peripherals around. It's no longer the case, as they've gone to sticker lettering on the keys, and horrible, over-featured keyboards and mice, everything wireless but doesn't work right, redesigning the key layouts, and very badly at that... You have to look long and hard to find quality keyboards and mice, these days. The PC market has moved more and more to toward "cheaper is better" and it shows.
Why?
I don't know of any mouse that would be universally acceptable.
There is no one fits all. There are too many variables*.
It's like buying a golf glove. And, you would never buy somebody a golf glove off the shelf unless they were standing right next to you.
* And if you don't know what "variables" mean and you have Snow Leopard, select the word and right click on it.
There is a lot that Apple can do to their mighty mouse design from adding a proper scroll wheel, fixing those "squeezable" side buttons to the ergonomic feel and user experience. The mouse is Apple's weakest design IMHO.
Whenever I get a new Mac the first thing I replace is the mouse.
The original Microsoft Explorer 3.0 mouse is universally heralded. No other mouse is as good. Even the re-released Explorer 3.0 doesn't do the original justice - they've cheapened it. Say what you want about big bad Microsoft, but they used to make the best peripherals around. It's no longer the case, as they've gone to sticker lettering on the keys, and horrible, over-featured keyboards and mice, everything wireless but doesn't work right, redesigning the key layouts, and very badly at that... You have to look long and hard to find quality keyboards and mice, these days. The PC market has moved more and more to toward "cheaper is better" and it shows.
The best keyboard I've ever used was the extended keyboard that came with the 8100/80. Typing on that was amazing, it had a full set of function keys that you could place a plastic quickkeys template over from QuarkXpress. Ahh those were the days!
Likely
200$ cheaper
No or less chin
LED Backlit Screen
Mobile Quad Core i7 (high end model)
Unlikely
Matte option
SSD option
Replaceable HD
Very unlikely
USB 3.0
ATI 5850 GPU option
No CD/DVD/BD (physical disc are dead like floppy at the time, please free up all that space in MB, MBP & iMac !)
-
Whatever it is, I hope they resolve it soon. I hate going to another machine just to rip a blue-ray when I could be working on my Mac instead.
Check out Apple performance agains the rest of the industry and you will find out that you are an exception, not the rule. Also check out the customer satisfaction rates.
Performance gains?!?!?!?!?
Going from a 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo in 2008 to, wait for it, a 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo in 2009. Big gain there
Going from an 8800M GTX (Apple calls it an 8800GS) to a GT130 (die shrunk 9600M). No improvement again.
Exactly where is Apple improving performance? Putting in the amount of RAM and size of HD common in sub-$600 PCs back in 2008? That's not even keeping up with the Joneses.
Apple software is where things have been getting better. That and Apple customer service is why they have a better satisfaction rate. Apple notebooks fare well against direct competition, but their desktop lineup is mediocre at best and is badly outperformed by PC hardware costing half as much.
Making the iMac thinner will only appeal to people who value form over function and can afford to replace their computer every couple of years.
Ever since the personal computer was invented the most important measurements have always been reliability and performance per dollar because those tell you how many years you'll get from your purchase and thus what it'll really cost you.
I believe today's Core i7 PCs are as powerful as the iMac will be in 2012. So take the lifespan of the iMac and add 3 years. Now that would be good value for the consumer, but it would kill Apple to have machines last 6 years because sales would plummet. They have to make them good enough to get you to buy them, but crappy enough that you'll need to replace them frequently.
Viewed from that perspective it's clear that Apple doesn't want customers who can do simple math. They would rather have us shut up, go away and buy a PC. If we install OS X on our PCs then we're supporting the Mac software market so that's OK.
There is a lot that Apple can do to their mighty mouse design from adding a proper scroll wheel, fixing those "squeezable" side buttons to the ergonomic feel and user experience. The mouse is Apple's weakest design IMHO.
Whenever I get a new Mac the first thing I replace is the mouse.
And I'll bet that it takes you more time to choose the ideal mouse than your Mac.
I just walked into our computer lab and there are 84 stations. There are only 4 stations that have the same mouse, and are all Apple's latest iteration. Most of the graphic stations are manned with users who have bought their own mouse/trackball/corded/wireless/1-5 button, etc. Some even take them home after class.
Not just because it fits them like a glove, but some, believe it or not, won't use another person's mouse because of the H1N1 virus.
I wouldn't want Apple to waste time designing a mouse.
Internal BD-Rom drives are actually very cheap. They can be had for about a hundred bucks retail. With Apple's buying power, they could be had for much less. There is no loss here as they are all compatible with the various DVD formats. That leaves either licensing costs, or coding costs to implement DRM, or a combination of both.
Whatever it is, I hope they resolve it soon. I hate going to another machine just to rip a blue-ray when I could be working on my Mac instead.
Just how would you rip a Blue-ray on a Mac or any other computer with an internal BD-ROM?