Jobs: I don't know what we're gonna do for it yet but aahh...
I recently saw the keynote jan. 06 one more time and the final words from jobs seams worth a minor scrutiny.
Steven P. Jobs at the end of MacWorld Keynote Jan 06:
Apple was founded on April fools day in 1976, we thought that was funny at the time, and what that means is that Apple will be 30 years old this April fools day, and ahhh, I don't know what we're gonna do for it yet, but since we may not see many of you before then, I just wanted to point it out
I also looked up the word "HINT" ... ....know what I mean?
Sincerely
Zab the Fab
Steven P. Jobs at the end of MacWorld Keynote Jan 06:
Apple was founded on April fools day in 1976, we thought that was funny at the time, and what that means is that Apple will be 30 years old this April fools day, and ahhh, I don't know what we're gonna do for it yet, but since we may not see many of you before then, I just wanted to point it out
I also looked up the word "HINT" ... ....know what I mean?
Sincerely
Zab the Fab
Comments
sheesh!
Originally posted by onlooker
He was probably playing a crewel April fools joke on rumor mongers. Get it? You won't until the first. That's what's so crewel about it. It's simmering. Sima, Sima, Simma-Dann-nna.
You mean 'cruel' right?
I seriously feel that when Steve would NOT say something like that, even if it was kinda casual, if it mounts to Apple doing nothing for their 30'th anniversary day.
They WILL do SOMETHING, the only questino is what? Simply a clearing of Apple.com to honnor the day? An event to launch Apples "livingroom strategy"? (what better idea than to announce:
"30 years ago we launched the Apple 1 for your offices, schools and homes. Today we are launching xxxx for your livingrooms"
Ofcause it won't be done like that exactly, but you get the idea.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN???? I DON*T KNOW!!!!! I CAN'T STAND NOT KNOWING!!!!! ....and I'm lovin' it
PLEASE...speculate away.
Sincerely
Zab the Fab
Originally posted by Zab The Fab
An event to launch Apples "livingroom strategy"? (what better idea than to announce:
"30 years ago we launched the Apple 1 for your offices, schools and homes. Today we are launching xxxx for your livingrooms"
Quadruple X Porn for our living rooms! Apple pushes porn to the next generation! Suddenly I understand the Accerlerometer patent. Picture this: A nude, full size, 3d invisible woman. You have to slide your Mac tablet over her body to see it.
Originally posted by murk
Quadruple X Porn for our living rooms! Apple pushes porn to the next generation! Suddenly I understand the Accerlerometer patent. Picture this: A nude, full size, 3d invisible woman. You have to slide your Mac tablet over her body to see it.
Originally posted by G_Warren
You mean 'cruel' right?
Yeah, but it sounds Kewel when you say crewel.
Originally posted by onlooker
Yeah, but it sounds Kewel when you say crewel.
We'll let you away with it then
EOLs for iPod Shuffle, 15" PB, Mac Mini G4, iBook G4
iPod Nano 1GB, 2GB, 4GB & 8 GB
iPod Video 40 GB, 80 GB [EDITED]
iBooks with Core Duo/Solo
MacBook Pro 12" & 17"
19", 21", 23", 30", 36" Cinema Displays
iMac 23"
Mac Mini with Core Duo /Solo
Apple Software Pro line goes Universal
iMac 30" Special Edition?
is it good enough to hold a KEY NOTE???
as we know their promise and schedule, we are introducing iWorks with SpreadSheets and of course it is universal
Originally posted by shanmugam
1st April
EOLs for iPod Shuffle, 15" PB, Mac Mini G4, iBook G4
iPod Nano 1GB, 2GB, 4GB & 8 GB
iPod Video 60 GB, 80 GB
iBooks with Core Duo/Solo
MacBook Pro 12" & 17"
19", 21", 23", 30", 36" Cinema Displays
iMac 23"
Mac Mini with Core Duo /Solo
Apple Software Pro line goes Universal
iMac 30" Special Edition?
is it good enough to hold a KEY NOTE???
Not sure if you were joking or not on most of those...but for iPod the next would be 30 60 90, or 40 80. Nano would prolly be I agree on nano somewhat, maybe less sizes I think tho. And reduced price cheapo new shuffle -- those babies are GREAT for running. Cinema won't go below 23" i dont think, but NEVER 19" i dont think. No iMac 30 ich denke.
WWDC probably reserved Mac Pro Monster ...
Originally posted by shanmugam
19", 21", 23", 30", 36" Cinema Displays
A 19" 1440x900 and a 21" 1680x1050 widescreen LCDs (ViewSonic and Gateway already got those panels) with integrated iSight would be welcome (even if 19" have the same resolution as 17", and 21" as current 20"). Expect a 24" replacement for the current 23" though.
Originally posted by Cosmos 1999
A 19" 1440x900 and a 21" 1680x1050 widescreen LCDs (ViewSonic and Gateway already got those panels) with integrated iSight would be welcome (even if 19" have the same resolution as 17", and 21" as current 20"). Expect a 24" replacement for the current 23" though.
so if those screenresolutions are currently available why change?
what's wrong with the 17" and the 20"? that it has to be replaced by a 19" and 21"?
why not the 17" of the current powerbookG4 17" instead of a 21"?
why?
But the fact is 17" begin to disapear across the PC market while 19" are becoming the standard: customers will soon consider 17" as old tech.
Originally posted by Cosmos 1999
I'm with you on this one, I think too that all these 19" have just bigger pixels and none advantage over 17", except perhaps with games and movies.
But the fact is 17" begin to disapear across the PC market while 19" are becoming the standard: customers will soon consider 17" as old tech.
so?
i've had a 19" lacie blue since 1998, now that is old tech.
there is no advantage if the number of pixels isn't higher except an advantage in fuel consumption.
the 20"iMac sells beter than the 17" because it offers more pixels for a good price.
the reason why 17" disapears is because the number of pixels, not because of the size of those pixels.
so stop propagating 19", 21" and 24" -screens only for the fact that they are available and other manufacturers offer them.
and if you might be visual impaired you can always buy a nice 1280x768 26" lcd tv for the same price as a 20" apple cinema display and use it with a mac mini
Originally posted by gar
so?
i've had a 19" lacie blue since 1998, now that is old tech.
there is no advantage if the number of pixels isn't higher except an advantage in fuel consumption.
the 20"iMac sells beter than the 17" because it offers more pixels for a good price.
the reason why 17" disapears is because the number of pixels, not because of the size of those pixels.
so stop propagating 19", 21" and 24" -screens only for the fact that they are available and other manufacturers offer them.
and if you might be visual impaired you can always buy a nice 1280x768 26" lcd tv for the same price as a 20" apple cinema display and use it with a mac mini
You don't get it. In fact I ideally think the same as you, but the real market don't think like us.
19" LCD are replacing 17" LCD in stores on the low-end (precedently occupied by 15" LCD), even if I, you, we want or don't want it. Is is a plain FACT.
This 17" vs 19" is all about the low-end category. 15" don't exist anymore. Most people don't do as us, comparing number of pixels to size and dpi. They don't see that 17" and 19" are both 1280x1024, they rather see this 19" will display their pictures, their DVD and TV shows bigger than that 17" for about the same price. The price point becomes so tight between the two variants that 17" LCD mecanically goes out of the market, pushed outside by bigger but comparable priced 19" LCD, even if they don't bring more pixels.
Now, why launch a higher priced Apple 17" LCD while all the market is playing 19" on the same category? (low-end). Common people would just see Apple display offer as "smaller".
Then, on the prosumer side, you currently have Apple Cinema Display 20", widescreen, with space and a good pixel density. I AGREE WITH YOU that a 21" wide with the exact same definition (1680x1050) is NOT better. But in case Apple propose a first 19" model, they have to differenciate the upper model with more than one little inch to explain simply the price gap between a 19" and a 20" (i.e : but isn't that 20" much overpriced for one inch?). I don't speak about geeks, I speak about very common people who don't care about WUXGA.
As for 23"->24", it is just that most panel manufacturers are now going 24" with their newest and better panels instead of the older 23" for the same price.
I don't speak about geeks, I speak about very common people who don't care about WUXGA.
i second that... it is market/price decides ... if we can get 19" for few more dollars? why not? (even though it offers the same resolution as 17") also APPLE can get better price when they choose display size which are more common on the current market
iMac
Also increase in display size, will make it thinner n thinner, there you go! one reason to increase the display size of iMac!!
While some think it's wildly interesting to debate what size the monitor might be (no offense guys ) let's take another stab at the big question:
What will they do for Apple's 30'th anniversary ?
Simply clear the frontpage at apple.com ?
Introduce new Intel Macs ?
Attack the living room with all they got?
WHAT WILL HAPPEN??? remember this only comes around once in a lifetime !
Sincerely
Zab the Fab
Originally posted by Zab The Fab
SO!
While some think it's wildly interesting to debate what size the monitor might be (no offense guys )
Lol!
- I say one inch taller!
- No, it will be the same size.
- But size matters!
- No, pixel count is more important.
let's take another stab at the big question:
What will they do for Apple's 30'th anniversary ?
Well, attacking the living room seems plausible to me. I hope a 802.11n Airport AV streamer at 600 Mbps with FrontRow inside, and composite/S-video/VGA/DVI/HDMI-out to plug on HDTVs.