I really hope they play some short film (four or so minutes) with snippets of Steve Jobs announcements and maybe even a making of the Apple Park tie in before the official keynote. Something to pay homage to Steve Jobs, after all, they did name the theater after him so it only seems fitting right?
I’d love to see it air as an hour-long episode on one of those shows that detail how a megastructure is built.
They are claiming the world's first mobile AI processing unit.
The official presentation isn't until tomorrow but if what is being claimed actually works on the device, they may have upped the ante a little. This makes me think Apple might also have something along those lines for their big reveal on the 12th.
Nobody cares. Even "if" they have a machine learning processor on board, how will it get used? The biggest problem with Android is device makers adding their own custom hardware that isn't actually supported by Android. So none of your Apps will properly take advantage of those features.
The rest of the 970 is generic off-the-shelf A73, A53 and Mali parts. Nothing new here, just another SoC based on ARM cores. At least Samsung and Qualcomm are now trying their hand at making their own custom cores, although they are still WAY behind Apple in this regard. The A11 should hit 4,000 single core, which makes it literally double that of the 835 or 8895. Quite amazing how far ahead Apple is.
If nobody cared, this site wouldn't have half as much Google and Samsung content.
Well congrats to you for your considerable efforts to increase that content further, Your loyalties to Android OS and Android OEM's surely have been noted by your handlers.
Sad, neither you nor I are buying iPhone 8's; me because I'm more interested in waiting for next year's, and completely happy with my iPhone 7 Plus, and you because you will be unable to remain the newest contrarian on AI if you capitulate.
I am actually in the market for an iPhone this year but it depends entirely on price. That would appear to rule out the iPhone 8 but the iPhone 7s is on my radar although it wouldn't be for me personally it would be my cash flowing into Apple Sales International. LOL.
...based on your comments, yet are constantly hawking arcane features and cost benefits of Android OEM's. One would almost think that you are avoiding speaking out on anything superior in iOS or iPhone hardware.
It's a question of balance. I don't need to sing the praises of Apple constantly here (I have a lot of Apple gear and that speaks volumes) but there is so much ignorance spurted out on Android and Android handsets that someone needs to remind people that much of it has little to do with hard fact (it's often embarrassing to read how I'll informed some people are) and Apple, in spite of what some here proclaim, has much catching up do in many areas.
People here gleefully poked fun at Samsung for the Note 7 fiasco but then tried to round it out to the Android handset market, failing to see for example, that Huawei's Supercharge technology leaves anything Apple currently has looking decidedly behind the times.
I live in both worlds and don't lap up whatever gets dumped on my plate just because it's this or that platform.
Another topic is how Apple does business, which I do not personally like but that is a personal opinion and everybody is free to their own opinion on that subject.
I get that you are just here to correct the record and balance the "opinions", and you have confirmed that on more than this occasion, but so excited to see you state that "you have lots of Apple Gear and that speaks volumes".
Yeah, that's it.
Of course it does. Do you think I have accumulated this stuff because I hate it?
I don't even post in the vast majority of threads. I let them go. I'm not some kind of policeman but when people go blatantly out of their way to post absurd, often false statements, I sometimes chime in with a different viewpoint. It is often backed up with links, quotes etc.
And my viewpoint isn't aimed at ridiculing anyone, getting stroppy or generally being a fool. Just a bit of balance. And I'm definitely not some kind of Captain Android. ;-)
Your "teaching" moments are in your head.
That you think your providing something to us basically means you got some screwed up perspective on yourself. You bring nothing to the table but aggravation and button pushing. You know this. That's why you are here. That's how you get your jolly. You are the classic troll.
I don't really don't give a hoot about you importing your crapload of Android Bias here; you're just dumping garbage.
Mac mini???? Bahahahahahaha! Who gives a shit about the Mac mini? Any new Mac mini is going to be the same as what's available today, only with faster processors and the latest Intel graphics. I wouldn't get your hopes up on anything more.
First, LOTS of people give a shit about the Mac mini. "Lots' obviously being a relative term in comparison to the iPhone, but enough that it keeps coming up. I can't imagine what you find funny about that, nor why you would feel inclined to insult what others wish for.
Second, a wish list for the mini could include Thunderbolt 3 on USB-C connectors to provide consistency with the new notebooks, a return to quad-core processors, and native hardware acceleration for h.265.
Third, what would be wrong with just a CPU and GPU upgrade? I might pull the trigger based on that alone.
I like the mini but its been steadily losing ground to the base iMac in terms of bang for the buck. Eventually you just say, I'll take the free monitor, thanks.
The iMac is probably a better value proposition than the mini, but the form-factor is a liability for what I suspect are the most common use cases (ex. home theatre, light-duty server, something to perform crunching/rendering/transcoding so as not to tie up the owners' "primary" mac). That's what I use it for, and the comments here seem to suggest that others are also using theirs in applications other than the traditional user-facing desktop computer model. In applications like those, the display is either the TV or a remote connection like screen sharing. The iMac's built-in display is not only superfluous, but an impediment to convenient placement.
I don't know a lot of mini owners personally, but of the ones I do, only one could substitute an iMac. For me and the other owners I know, the need to fit the computer into a rack or on a shelf makes using an iMac either impossible or at least really inconvenient.
That’s 11 for the last one. 8 (in the normal cycle) is 12, but apparently they ARE actually going to release either two models or just 7 with a modified body for its ‘lower price’ release.
I'm with you. Clearly the next one should be the iPhone 2 to fill in that glaring numbering gap.
Did we ever learn what the "S" stands for?
Do we care? Surely it’s an arbitrary model number simply to differentiate it from non-s models.
Why do we care? Call it curiosity. Call it wanting insight into the Apple corporate thought process. Surely the decision wasn't arbitrary. Steve didn't say "I don't want to go to iPhone 6 yet, add a random letter on the end of the iPhone 5 name." There was some reason why it wasn't called the iPhone 5x or 5p or 5ex or 5fu. Personally I think "s" was a particularly bad choice (strictly because of the pluralization challenge). Obviously at the end of the day, it's not a bid deal, but we're not exactly ending world hunger on this site.
For comparison, for the past 15 years ago, Oracle has stuck a letter on the end of their major version to highlight their current focus. Larry Ellison was a good friend of Steve Jobs, so this isn't completely irrelevant. After Oracle 7 came Oracle 8i and 9i where "i" stood for "internet." This was followed by 10g and 11g (g for "grid computing") and now 12c (c for cloud).
You're overthikng it. It really doesn't matter what the S stands for, just as it didn't matter what iPod meant. What matters is what the S does, not what it means. The S says this model is newer than the one without an S. This is the information is conveys and its objective. It's has significance thusly. Like people don't hear "SE" and think "special edition". They simply know you're talking about the small iPhone. These are model signifiers. Car makers have been doing this for decades.
It doesn’t matter now, that’s true. But when the 3GS came out, Steve held it up and said; “The “S” stands for speed.” I remember that very well. The 3GS was about twice as fast as my 3G.
Yes, but notice that was a brief onstage quip and never mentioned once in marketing documentation. Ultimately the S is open to interpretation and it’s this ambiguity which is the reason for its use. When Siri came along with the 4S a few people said “so s stand for Siri, this time”. The importatant point for Apple is the S is a differentiator. S signifies different and new.
That’s 11 for the last one. 8 (in the normal cycle) is 12, but apparently they ARE actually going to release either two models or just 7 with a modified body for its ‘lower price’ release.
I'm with you. Clearly the next one should be the iPhone 2 to fill in that glaring numbering gap.
Did we ever learn what the "S" stands for?
Do we care? Surely it’s an arbitrary model number simply to differentiate it from non-s models.
Why do we care? Call it curiosity. Call it wanting insight into the Apple corporate thought process. Surely the decision wasn't arbitrary. Steve didn't say "I don't want to go to iPhone 6 yet, add a random letter on the end of the iPhone 5 name." There was some reason why it wasn't called the iPhone 5x or 5p or 5ex or 5fu. Personally I think "s" was a particularly bad choice (strictly because of the pluralization challenge). Obviously at the end of the day, it's not a bid deal, but we're not exactly ending world hunger on this site.
For comparison, for the past 15 years ago, Oracle has stuck a letter on the end of their major version to highlight their current focus. Larry Ellison was a good friend of Steve Jobs, so this isn't completely irrelevant. After Oracle 7 came Oracle 8i and 9i where "i" stood for "internet." This was followed by 10g and 11g (g for "grid computing") and now 12c (c for cloud).
You're overthikng it. It really doesn't matter what the S stands for, just as it didn't matter what iPod meant. What matters is what the S does, not what it means. The S says this model is newer than the one without an S. This is the information is conveys and its objective. It's has significance thusly. Like people don't hear "SE" and think "special edition". They simply know you're talking about the small iPhone. These are model signifiers. Car makers have been doing this for decades.
It doesn’t matter now, that’s true. But when the 3GS came out, Steve held it up and said; “The “S” stands for speed.” I remember that very well. The 3GS was about twice as fast as my 3G.
Yes, but notice that was a brief onstage quip and never mentioned once in marketing documentation. Ultimately the S is open to interpretation and it’s this ambiguity which is the reason for its use. When Siri came along with the 4S a few people said “so s stand for Siri, this time”. The importatant point for Apple is the S is a differentiator. S signifies different and new.
What exactly do you mean? Are saying that the 3GS wasn’t faster than its predecessor? If they say it's the fastest iPhone ever don't you think that's a synonym for having the most speed or being the speediest?
PS: Did Jobs say “speed” or was that Schiller? I seem to recall Schiller saying it.
Soli said: This will be landmark event for many reasons, one of which I hope will make this the most remembered event since the original 2007 introduction of the iPhone*.
Won't be with out Steve Jobs. Tim Cook is no where close to what Steve could do with an audience...
He’s enthusiastic to be sure, but he says that he’s uncomfortable in front of large audiences. Apple has a management school, and one thing it teaches is presentation. He’s much better than in the beginning, but his quiet demeanor comes across on the stage, and his slight southern drawl doesn’t give him the sharpness needed. Steve, of course, was unmatched. Just watching some old presentations shows that.
I think the major difference -- what made Steve so great -- was that he understood the underlying technology and how it was being utilized to make people's live better -- as well as the infinite care from late and sleepless nights that went into making it a great product. Tim is doing well -- but he just doesn't have Steve's underlying emotional investment or understanding of the product.
i’m an active investor, which just means that I do all of the decisions myself, and don’t use managed accounts. So I have to be on the ball about it. Really, if you’re not doing estimates, you shouldn’t be an active investor. Just do what Buffet advises, and get a bundle of the Fortune 500 without management. Otherwise, it requires work.
Thanks for the (condescending) advice. Yeah, I happen to know a little bit about investing too, manage mine as well, so I am good.
The last thing this board needs is another sog35-type amateur investor bragging about stock price estimates for Apple (or any other stock), or some back and forth about market price forecasts. They go nowhere quickly.
I don’t know what you consider to be an amateur. You can only speak for yourself. In addition, any estimates we care to make, based on whatever facts and speculation we care to us, is our business, not yours. And remember that you are the one who. Made a condescending post to me. I didn’t make one to you. I was just explaining my position.
sorry that your superior sensibility and knowledge was hurt.
Oh gosh, not at all. I quite vividly recall our many discussions from many years ago, and your views on basic principles of valuation, and on things such as PE ratios, risk, cash flows, cost of capital, etc. Basedd on the many things you've said, I have a rather strong basis for the view I have formed.
That said, it's your wont to express any opinion on this forum, just as it is mine. It's a free country. It should be pointed out, however, that you seemed to be the one to take umbrage over my pointing out -- a couple of others pointed it out too, earlier in this thread -- that price forecasts for AAPL in the $175 region were not unique to you or sog35. I was simply saying something similar, and providing data on the median analyst forecast which also happens to be $175 per share (with a max that goes to $208). And I gave you a link.
Perhaps you or sog35 do (although I would find that difficult to believe), but I have no superior sensibility or knowledge to forecast stock prices.
As an aside, didn't AI used to have a separate section of stock price discussions (just as they did for political discussions)? I don't know if it's still there, but given the topic at hand in this blog, it seems like a discussion of stock price forecasts seems a tad misplaced.
It’s nice that you’ve formed such a strong opinion of my investing knowledge. I’d be curious as to which one if has done better during that time, but obviously, that can never happen. There’s usually a good reason as to why different people come to a similar conclusion about something, and that’s not bad. You seem to be trying to make it so though.
I said I have a 'strong basis' for my opinion. That's not the same as 'strong opinion.' Don't misstate.
I don't get into contests over who has.... er... bigger hands. I am glad you have convinced yourself that you can clearly separate luck from skill. Good for you.
It’s still just an opinion. If you state that basis it would be easier to evaluate it. Otherwise, we don’t know anything about it, and it’s just another opinion among many.
I told you it's based on numerous conversations we've had over the years. Do you seriously expect me to recount those?
Oh, yes, he does. And if you don't dance for him (recount your past conversations for his amusement), he's right. He'll tell you all about how right he is.
You are really being a pain in the ass for continuing this in the matter you are. Do you want me to flag YOU? I rarely gave points to people when I was a mod, just told them to knock it off, but you’re becoming a real problem here.
I wonder why you are no longer a mod?
I was a mod for years, and they switch them up after a time. Only the admins are permanent, as long as they continue to work here, that is.
Mac mini???? Bahahahahahaha! Who gives a shit about the Mac mini? Any new Mac mini is going to be the same as what's available today, only with faster processors and the latest Intel graphics. I wouldn't get your hopes up on anything more.
First, LOTS of people give a shit about the Mac mini. "Lots' obviously being a relative term in comparison to the iPhone, but enough that it keeps coming up. I can't imagine what you find funny about that, nor why you would feel inclined to insult what others wish for.
Second, a wish list for the mini could include Thunderbolt 3 on USB-C connectors to provide consistency with the new notebooks, a return to quad-core processors, and native hardware acceleration for h.265.
Third, what would be wrong with just a CPU and GPU upgrade? I might pull the trigger based on that alone.
LOTS is a very relative term....Lots could be 1000, or it could be 50. The bottomline is that the Mac mini is just about the worst selling Mac they have in the lineup. Just because you have a use for it, doesn't mean LOTS of people give a shit about the Mac mini.
Maybe you aren't thinking this, but there are those out there (including here in AI forums) that seem to think Apple is going to make this modular Mac mini with swappable RAM, and storage as well as discrete graphics, and all for $799!!! This simply isn't gonna happen.
I've said it here many times and I'll say it again...the Mac mini exists for one reason and one reason only, so nobody can say Macs are expensive. They used to be for switchers, but in today's world I'd like to know how many "switchers" buy a Mac mini over an iMac. The same can be said for the MacBook Air...it only exists so people can't say Apple's notebooks aren't too expensive.
That’s 11 for the last one. 8 (in the normal cycle) is 12, but apparently they ARE actually going to release either two models or just 7 with a modified body for its ‘lower price’ release.
I'm with you. Clearly the next one should be the iPhone 2 to fill in that glaring numbering gap.
Did we ever learn what the "S" stands for?
Do we care? Surely it’s an arbitrary model number simply to differentiate it from non-s models.
Why do we care? Call it curiosity. Call it wanting insight into the Apple corporate thought process. Surely the decision wasn't arbitrary. Steve didn't say "I don't want to go to iPhone 6 yet, add a random letter on the end of the iPhone 5 name." There was some reason why it wasn't called the iPhone 5x or 5p or 5ex or 5fu. Personally I think "s" was a particularly bad choice (strictly because of the pluralization challenge). Obviously at the end of the day, it's not a bid deal, but we're not exactly ending world hunger on this site.
For comparison, for the past 15 years ago, Oracle has stuck a letter on the end of their major version to highlight their current focus. Larry Ellison was a good friend of Steve Jobs, so this isn't completely irrelevant. After Oracle 7 came Oracle 8i and 9i where "i" stood for "internet." This was followed by 10g and 11g (g for "grid computing") and now 12c (c for cloud).
You're overthikng it. It really doesn't matter what the S stands for, just as it didn't matter what iPod meant. What matters is what the S does, not what it means. The S says this model is newer than the one without an S. This is the information is conveys and its objective. It's has significance thusly. Like people don't hear "SE" and think "special edition". They simply know you're talking about the small iPhone. These are model signifiers. Car makers have been doing this for decades.
It doesn’t matter now, that’s true. But when the 3GS came out, Steve held it up and said; “The “S” stands for speed.” I remember that very well. The 3GS was about twice as fast as my 3G.
Yes, but notice that was a brief onstage quip and never mentioned once in marketing documentation. Ultimately the S is open to interpretation and it’s this ambiguity which is the reason for its use. When Siri came along with the 4S a few people said “so s stand for Siri, this time”. The importatant point for Apple is the S is a differentiator. S signifies different and new.
Well, I’m agreeing with what you’re saying about this. I just brought it up because that was the first use of it, and Steve himself said it. The only other designation that had meaning, other than the numbering itself, was that “G” in “3G”, and 3GS”.
That’s 11 for the last one. 8 (in the normal cycle) is 12, but apparently they ARE actually going to release either two models or just 7 with a modified body for its ‘lower price’ release.
I'm with you. Clearly the next one should be the iPhone 2 to fill in that glaring numbering gap.
Did we ever learn what the "S" stands for?
Do we care? Surely it’s an arbitrary model number simply to differentiate it from non-s models.
Why do we care? Call it curiosity. Call it wanting insight into the Apple corporate thought process. Surely the decision wasn't arbitrary. Steve didn't say "I don't want to go to iPhone 6 yet, add a random letter on the end of the iPhone 5 name." There was some reason why it wasn't called the iPhone 5x or 5p or 5ex or 5fu. Personally I think "s" was a particularly bad choice (strictly because of the pluralization challenge). Obviously at the end of the day, it's not a bid deal, but we're not exactly ending world hunger on this site.
For comparison, for the past 15 years ago, Oracle has stuck a letter on the end of their major version to highlight their current focus. Larry Ellison was a good friend of Steve Jobs, so this isn't completely irrelevant. After Oracle 7 came Oracle 8i and 9i where "i" stood for "internet." This was followed by 10g and 11g (g for "grid computing") and now 12c (c for cloud).
You're overthikng it. It really doesn't matter what the S stands for, just as it didn't matter what iPod meant. What matters is what the S does, not what it means. The S says this model is newer than the one without an S. This is the information is conveys and its objective. It's has significance thusly. Like people don't hear "SE" and think "special edition". They simply know you're talking about the small iPhone. These are model signifiers. Car makers have been doing this for decades.
It doesn’t matter now, that’s true. But when the 3GS came out, Steve held it up and said; “The “S” stands for speed.” I remember that very well. The 3GS was about twice as fast as my 3G.
Yes, but notice that was a brief onstage quip and never mentioned once in marketing documentation. Ultimately the S is open to interpretation and it’s this ambiguity which is the reason for its use. When Siri came along with the 4S a few people said “so s stand for Siri, this time”. The importatant point for Apple is the S is a differentiator. S signifies different and new.
What exactly do you mean? Are saying that the 3GS wasn’t faster than its predecessor? If they say it's the fastest iPhone ever don't you think that's a synonym for having the most speed or being the speediest?
PS: Did Jobs say “speed” or was that Schiller? I seem to recall Schiller saying it.
Steve said it. It’s possible that Schiller did too, but I don’t remember it. I tend to remember things Steve said, though most people don’t always. I remember his remark about making everybody happy when asked about 3rd party app support too, which was something that most people missed.
Soli said: This will be landmark event for many reasons, one of which I hope will make this the most remembered event since the original 2007 introduction of the iPhone*.
Won't be with out Steve Jobs. Tim Cook is no where close to what Steve could do with an audience...
He’s enthusiastic to be sure, but he says that he’s uncomfortable in front of large audiences. Apple has a management school, and one thing it teaches is presentation. He’s much better than in the beginning, but his quiet demeanor comes across on the stage, and his slight southern drawl doesn’t give him the sharpness needed. Steve, of course, was unmatched. Just watching some old presentations shows that.
I think the major difference -- what made Steve so great -- was that he understood the underlying technology and how it was being utilized to make people's live better -- as well as the infinite care from late and sleepless nights that went into making it a great product. Tim is doing well -- but he just doesn't have Steve's underlying emotional investment or understanding of the product.
Steve was like any entrepreneur, but he was just better at this whole marketing thing, because he really BELIEVED. Cook is really much better than he’s given credit for. Just watch presentations from other large companies, and you'll see what I mean. I think he also really believes, as do the others below him. But Steve had a talent for this, without having to learn it. Natural charismatics, are rare.
edit; the usual typos, errors in auto correction that I always seem to miss until much later.
Mac mini???? Bahahahahahaha! Who gives a shit about the Mac mini? Any new Mac mini is going to be the same as what's available today, only with faster processors and the latest Intel graphics. I wouldn't get your hopes up on anything more.
First, LOTS of people give a shit about the Mac mini. "Lots' obviously being a relative term in comparison to the iPhone, but enough that it keeps coming up. I can't imagine what you find funny about that, nor why you would feel inclined to insult what others wish for.
Second, a wish list for the mini could include Thunderbolt 3 on USB-C connectors to provide consistency with the new notebooks, a return to quad-core processors, and native hardware acceleration for h.265.
Third, what would be wrong with just a CPU and GPU upgrade? I might pull the trigger based on that alone.
LOTS is a very relative term....Lots could be 1000, or it could be 50. The bottomline is that the Mac mini is just about the worst selling Mac they have in the lineup. Just because you have a use for it, doesn't mean LOTS of people give a shit about the Mac mini.
Maybe you aren't thinking this, but there are those out there (including here in AI forums) that seem to think Apple is going to make this modular Mac mini with swappable RAM, and storage as well as discrete graphics, and all for $799!!! This simply isn't gonna happen.
I've said it here many times and I'll say it again...the Mac mini exists for one reason and one reason only, so nobody can say Macs are expensive. They used to be for switchers, but in today's world I'd like to know how many "switchers" buy a Mac mini over an iMac. The same can be said for the MacBook Air...it only exists so people can't say Apple's notebooks are too expensive.
Quite right. There's no reason at all for the Mac Mini anymore; Apple has no need to push x86 switchers to MacOS.
Still, I can see a market for a "Pro" AppleTV which would include AirPort, and media storage internally, and/or via USB Type C.
Given a second HDMI port for a BD Player connection, such a device could manage BD, CD, and DVD media seamlessly with iTunes; Home Theater suitable for a great number of people.
Tim's biggest problem is that he doesn't have stage persona and his voice is tiring to listen to. Unfortunately he is also robotic and uses a monotonous tone.
That isn't a criticism of him. He just isn't cut out for large presentations, in fact most of us aren't. I was not a big Jobs fan but his presentations were well constructed and delivered. Obviously they suffered towards the end due to underlying illness.
I think Tim manages an uncomfortable situation as best he can and logically tries to hand over tasks to others ASAP while on stage.
He must dread it but there's no way out of it.
I'm not aware of any natural born presenters in Apple higher management right now.
Craig has come on a lot over the years, even running demos on completely different areas within the same presentation but still needs experience.
We should all give thanks that Jony Ive is limited to video appearances though. He makes Tim seem like Steve.
Mac mini???? Bahahahahahaha! Who gives a shit about the Mac mini? Any new Mac mini is going to be the same as what's available today, only with faster processors and the latest Intel graphics. I wouldn't get your hopes up on anything more.
First, LOTS of people give a shit about the Mac mini. "Lots' obviously being a relative term in comparison to the iPhone, but enough that it keeps coming up. I can't imagine what you find funny about that, nor why you would feel inclined to insult what others wish for.
Second, a wish list for the mini could include Thunderbolt 3 on USB-C connectors to provide consistency with the new notebooks, a return to quad-core processors, and native hardware acceleration for h.265.
Third, what would be wrong with just a CPU and GPU upgrade? I might pull the trigger based on that alone.
LOTS is a very relative term....Lots could be 1000, or it could be 50. The bottomline is that the Mac mini is just about the worst selling Mac they have in the lineup. Just because you have a use for it, doesn't mean LOTS of people give a shit about the Mac mini.
Maybe you aren't thinking this, but there are those out there (including here in AI forums) that seem to think Apple is going to make this modular Mac mini with swappable RAM, and storage as well as discrete graphics, and all for $799!!! This simply isn't gonna happen.
I've said it here many times and I'll say it again...the Mac mini exists for one reason and one reason only, so nobody can say Macs are expensive. They used to be for switchers, but in today's world I'd like to know how many "switchers" buy a Mac mini over an iMac. The same can be said for the MacBook Air...it only exists so people can't say Apple's notebooks are too expensive.
There are special use cases where the Mini is very popular, but as you say, it’s a relative term. If that popularity is a couple of hundred thousand a year, and the rest adds another million, or even two, Apple might not think that upgrading them is going to make much of a difference. They know where these are selling. It’s also possible that margins are somewhat lower. It could also be that they’re simply tired of the line and are willing to see it die out. Possibly they see the iPad as their entry device these days, and iOS as more important.
there could be a lot of reasons they haven’t done anything with this. I think it’s too bad. If they could maintain an entry version for the $599 it was for some time, they could get a fair number of sales if they started ADVERTIZING Macs again, the way they did for years.
Everyone knows the C in the iPhone 5C stood for Cheap so it makes sense that the new attractive OLED iPhone will be called the iPhone 7SEX with new Apple escort service delivery.
Mac mini???? Bahahahahahaha! Who gives a shit about the Mac mini? Any new Mac mini is going to be the same as what's available today, only with faster processors and the latest Intel graphics. I wouldn't get your hopes up on anything more.
First, LOTS of people give a shit about the Mac mini. "Lots' obviously being a relative term in comparison to the iPhone, but enough that it keeps coming up. I can't imagine what you find funny about that, nor why you would feel inclined to insult what others wish for.
Second, a wish list for the mini could include Thunderbolt 3 on USB-C connectors to provide consistency with the new notebooks, a return to quad-core processors, and native hardware acceleration for h.265.
Third, what would be wrong with just a CPU and GPU upgrade? I might pull the trigger based on that alone.
LOTS is a very relative term....Lots could be 1000, or it could be 50. The bottomline is that the Mac mini is just about the worst selling Mac they have in the lineup. Just because you have a use for it, doesn't mean LOTS of people give a shit about the Mac mini.
Maybe you aren't thinking this, but there are those out there (including here in AI forums) that seem to think Apple is going to make this modular Mac mini with swappable RAM, and storage as well as discrete graphics, and all for $799!!! This simply isn't gonna happen.
I've said it here many times and I'll say it again...the Mac mini exists for one reason and one reason only, so nobody can say Macs are expensive. They used to be for switchers, but in today's world I'd like to know how many "switchers" buy a Mac mini over an iMac. The same can be said for the MacBook Air...it only exists so people can't say Apple's notebooks are too expensive.
Quite right. There's no reason at all for the Mac Mini anymore; Apple has no need to push x86 switchers to MacOS.
Still, I can see a market for a "Pro" AppleTV which would include AirPort, and media storage internally, and/or via USB Type C.
Given a second HDMI port for a BD Player connection, such a device could manage BD, CD, and DVD media seamlessly with iTunes; Home Theater suitable for a great number of people.
I think that Apple is missing the boat by not making a cheap, basic Tv device as Amazon and Google are doing. We know that Apple has slipped to four or five in tv hardware sales, and a new, expensive, 4K model isn’t going to change that much. Because of a lack of a popular, cheap, way of getting movies and Tv shows, their renting and sales of Tv shows and movies has also slipped. They used to be number one there, but they’re closer to number three now.
i get that Apple wants to change the way we watch Tv, but those efforts are failing there. I’m willing to bet that what they’re doing now is a result of failing to secure agreements at the pricing they want for what they wanted to do. Meanwhile, even small players are gaining access to the content Apple is having problems with, because they are willing to play ball more. We see Sonos doing very well with that, and others too. Maybe if Apple came out with a $60-$75 Tv device, that might change. If Apple were back on top in rentals and purchase, they would have more leverage, but as they slip, whatever leverage they may have had, slips too.
amazon gives a certain number of movies. Tv shows and music away for free each month with Prime. I think they lose money with Prime for most of those users. I just use Prime for shipping. But others take advantage of everything else. Amazon is willing to lose money on these services, but Apple isn’t, maybe they should.
Tim's biggest problem is that he doesn't have stage persona and his voice is tiring to listen to. Unfortunately he is also robotic and uses a monotonous tone.
That isn't a criticism of him. He just isn't cut out for large presentations, in fact most of us aren't. I was not a big Jobs fan but his presentations were well constructed and delivered. Obviously they suffered towards the end due to underlying illness.
I think Tim manages an uncomfortable situation as best he can and logically tries to hand over tasks to others ASAP while on stage.
He must dread it but there's no way out of it.
I'm not aware of any natural born presenters in Apple higher management right now.
Craig has come on a lot over the years, even running demos on completely different areas within the same presentation but still needs experience.
We should all give thanks that Jony Ive is limited to video appearances though. He makes Tim seem like Steve.
You seem to see these events as superficial entertainment; a performance. I don't. Tim is displaying a stronger personna as each event occurs. He shows the same fire within himself, the same laser focus for Apple, that Steve did, and that is what I, and most of the rest of us foliowing Apple, see every day.
I note that in most of your comments, you attempt to distract and divert attention from all the things that Apple does well, things that it is improving on, and things that it is leading on.
That must require a lot of energy on your part; working at being such a perfectly superficial, and shallow, participant on AI, as you have just demonstrated above, and so many times prior.
Comments
That you think your providing something to us basically means you got some screwed up perspective on yourself.
You bring nothing to the table but aggravation and button pushing. You know this. That's why you are here. That's how you get your jolly.
You are the classic troll.
I don't really don't give a hoot about you importing your crapload of Android Bias here; you're just dumping garbage.
Go do it somewhere else.
I don't know a lot of mini owners personally, but of the ones I do, only one could substitute an iMac. For me and the other owners I know, the need to fit the computer into a rack or on a shelf makes using an iMac either impossible or at least really inconvenient.
PS: Did Jobs say “speed” or was that Schiller? I seem to recall Schiller saying it.
LOTS is a very relative term....Lots could be 1000, or it could be 50. The bottomline is that the Mac mini is just about the worst selling Mac they have in the lineup. Just because you have a use for it, doesn't mean LOTS of people give a shit about the Mac mini.
Maybe you aren't thinking this, but there are those out there (including here in AI forums) that seem to think Apple is going to make this modular Mac mini with swappable RAM, and storage as well as discrete graphics, and all for $799!!! This simply isn't gonna happen.
I've said it here many times and I'll say it again...the Mac mini exists for one reason and one reason only, so nobody can say Macs are expensive. They used to be for switchers, but in today's world I'd like to know how many "switchers" buy a Mac mini over an iMac. The same can be said for the MacBook Air...it only exists so people can't say Apple's notebooks aren't too expensive.
edit; the usual typos, errors in auto correction that I always seem to miss until much later.
Still, I can see a market for a "Pro" AppleTV which would include AirPort, and media storage internally, and/or via USB Type C.
Given a second HDMI port for a BD Player connection, such a device could manage BD, CD, and DVD media seamlessly with iTunes; Home Theater suitable for a great number of people.
That isn't a criticism of him. He just isn't cut out for large presentations, in fact most of us aren't. I was not a big Jobs fan but his presentations were well constructed and delivered. Obviously they suffered towards the end due to underlying illness.
I think Tim manages an uncomfortable situation as best he can and logically tries to hand over tasks to others ASAP while on stage.
He must dread it but there's no way out of it.
I'm not aware of any natural born presenters in Apple higher management right now.
Craig has come on a lot over the years, even running demos on completely different areas within the same presentation but still needs experience.
We should all give thanks that Jony Ive is limited to video appearances though. He makes Tim seem like Steve.
there could be a lot of reasons they haven’t done anything with this. I think it’s too bad. If they could maintain an entry version for the $599 it was for some time, they could get a fair number of sales if they started ADVERTIZING Macs again, the way they did for years.
/s
I think that Apple is missing the boat by not making a cheap, basic Tv device as Amazon and Google are doing. We know that Apple has slipped to four or five in tv hardware sales, and a new, expensive, 4K model isn’t going to change that much. Because of a lack of a popular, cheap, way of getting movies and Tv shows, their renting and sales of Tv shows and movies has also slipped. They used to be number one there, but they’re closer to number three now.
i get that Apple wants to change the way we watch Tv, but those efforts are failing there. I’m willing to bet that what they’re doing now is a result of failing to secure agreements at the pricing they want for what they wanted to do. Meanwhile, even small players are gaining access to the content Apple is having problems with, because they are willing to play ball more. We see Sonos doing very well with that, and others too. Maybe if Apple came out with a $60-$75 Tv device, that might change. If Apple were back on top in rentals and purchase, they would have more leverage, but as they slip, whatever leverage they may have had, slips too.
amazon gives a certain number of movies. Tv shows and music away for free each month with Prime. I think they lose money with Prime for most of those users. I just use Prime for shipping. But others take advantage of everything else. Amazon is willing to lose money on these services, but Apple isn’t, maybe they should.
I note that in most of your comments, you attempt to distract and divert attention from all the things that Apple does well, things that it is improving on, and things that it is leading on.
That must require a lot of energy on your part; working at being such a perfectly superficial, and shallow, participant on AI, as you have just demonstrated above, and so many times prior.