syklee26
Sep 7, 10:33 AM
I checked around at comp usa, best buy and even the apple store to see if the mini's they had in stock would be reduced in price because of the new ones that came out.
Best buy and Comp USA had no clue that new models were released and would not budge in price. I dont know what the apple store policy is.
Shouldnt comp usa and best buy reduce the price of the core solo minis they have left?
technically they are NOT the same system because previously 1.66 Duo had superdrive but the new system has combo drive in it. and i think for 1.66 system Hard drive shrunk to 60gb.
Best buy and Comp USA had no clue that new models were released and would not budge in price. I dont know what the apple store policy is.
Shouldnt comp usa and best buy reduce the price of the core solo minis they have left?
technically they are NOT the same system because previously 1.66 Duo had superdrive but the new system has combo drive in it. and i think for 1.66 system Hard drive shrunk to 60gb.
eenu
Aug 16, 11:05 AM
As much as i love ipod and apple rumors it is getting stressful and frustrating that we hear these rumors every damn week and nothing comes out of them. Last week we had the iphone, the week before we had the 2nd part of the none touch stuff it just goes on and on and its peeing me off, im begining to doubt wherther there will ever be a phone or touchscreen thing.
I agree to an extent but this is a rumours site.....so as such your going to get this. If it stresses you that much just don't read the ones you think are the same.
I agree to an extent but this is a rumours site.....so as such your going to get this. If it stresses you that much just don't read the ones you think are the same.
monke
Jan 1, 07:05 PM
This year better be good!
I sure hope so.
Where did you find that image? Are there others?
On the Apple website, right in the middle of the main page. :)
I sure hope so.
Where did you find that image? Are there others?
On the Apple website, right in the middle of the main page. :)
vaderhater245
Mar 18, 03:21 PM
I think the E6750 is the cpu? maybe? PPD for my gt 260 is around 4-5k so your PPD sounds about right.
Glad you are here again, we need the points!!
My power was off for about an hour this am for some reason and I didn't get to folding again until now :(
E6750 is an older "65nm" core2duo, 2.66 stock. Good to hear about the ppd. Current info at the moment.
GPU: 548p project running at 5319.91 ppd.
CPU: 225p project running at 295.89 ppd.
Might be time to upgrade the cpu...
Glad you are here again, we need the points!!
My power was off for about an hour this am for some reason and I didn't get to folding again until now :(
E6750 is an older "65nm" core2duo, 2.66 stock. Good to hear about the ppd. Current info at the moment.
GPU: 548p project running at 5319.91 ppd.
CPU: 225p project running at 295.89 ppd.
Might be time to upgrade the cpu...
encro
Apr 27, 11:41 AM
I can't be the only one that is sick to death with regards to car analogies. Grrr
kerryb
Apr 26, 01:09 PM
I don't even think the word "App" is really officially a word. As for generic terms, everyone uses generic terms to describe their company's products and brand names, as that's the only way you can allow people to make a link between something they already know, and the product.
"Apple" is also generic, yet everyone agrees that it's fairly reserved for Apple inc. So are many other names that companies patent to avoid others using it.
App is not an official word but "ape" as in "he aped my every move" is.
"Apple" is also generic, yet everyone agrees that it's fairly reserved for Apple inc. So are many other names that companies patent to avoid others using it.
App is not an official word but "ape" as in "he aped my every move" is.
ksgant
Apr 19, 06:41 PM
Does this mean a Mini update is right behind it?
I hope so, and I also hope they don't skimp out on the Mini.
According to the Buyer's Guide, it's been over 300 days since the Mini was updated and the average is 248 days. So they're a tad behind.
I hope so, and I also hope they don't skimp out on the Mini.
According to the Buyer's Guide, it's been over 300 days since the Mini was updated and the average is 248 days. So they're a tad behind.
yukyuklee
Feb 24, 10:58 PM
nice clean setup.
Thanks man! I got the idea from you lol
Do I see a white iPhone 3G/3GS peeking in there?
LOL good eyes! Yes a 16GB iPhone 3GS but it's gone to my gf... I upgraded to the iPhone4 :)
Thanks man! I got the idea from you lol
Do I see a white iPhone 3G/3GS peeking in there?
LOL good eyes! Yes a 16GB iPhone 3GS but it's gone to my gf... I upgraded to the iPhone4 :)
guez
Sep 7, 02:52 PM
I have been a Mac user since 1986. I'm not a superuser or a gamer, but the one thing I have learned is to avoid models with too much built-in obsolescence (e.g. my old firewire-less, low-resolution clamshell iBook and the late-model CD-burner-less white iBook G3 that replaced it, not to mention the Powerbook 150 [agh!], Mac Classic [aaagggh!], etc.). Except for the lack of built-in DVD capability, the lampshade 700 MHZ G4 iMac has been a great investment.
So here is my question. Are the $599 mini and $999 iMac going to become obsolete much faster than the $1199 iMac? Do the dedicated video RAM and Core 2 Duo (iMacs) make much of difference? I already have an external DVD burner and plan to buy 2GB RAM.
So here is my question. Are the $599 mini and $999 iMac going to become obsolete much faster than the $1199 iMac? Do the dedicated video RAM and Core 2 Duo (iMacs) make much of difference? I already have an external DVD burner and plan to buy 2GB RAM.
solvs
Jan 2, 03:00 AM
I'm hoping they release a mini laptop. That's the only thing I really care about. Which means they probably won't.
I try not to expect too much so I'm not disappointed.
I try not to expect too much so I'm not disappointed.
mc68k
Oct 5, 06:41 PM
hey, congrats to you for 6 million!!thanks! with those bigadv units i almost feel like im cheating!
MacBoobsPro
Aug 7, 05:50 AM
An iPhone, not as a cell phone, but as a landline skype style wifi cordless phone to go with iChat. Wouldn't that make sense for Apple to make? Ties in with their computers & iLife, would work in all countries, and would be easy, and possibly cheap for them to make.
Steve Jobs, would probably want want to make a phone that transitions seamlessly between indoor wifi and the cell networks.
I was thinking that. Maybe thats why the iPhone pix look more like a house phone instead of cell phone?
Hmmmm... ?
Steve Jobs, would probably want want to make a phone that transitions seamlessly between indoor wifi and the cell networks.
I was thinking that. Maybe thats why the iPhone pix look more like a house phone instead of cell phone?
Hmmmm... ?
Dont Hurt Me
Sep 1, 02:52 PM
Apple used to have all-in-ones, consumer towers, pro towers, etc. Remember the PowerMac 6400? Too many products is too confusing for the consumer. If that means that a couple of people can't get the exact configuration they want, so be it.Apple still needs to sell a not overpriced cube, Millions,perhaps billions have monitors that are just fine. What they need is a machine between near nothing Mini and workstation MacPro. Its been said a million times so here it is again.:)
alectheking
Mar 25, 03:42 PM
Can the new GPU even do 1080p?
No, the whole article was a written lie. You obviously didn't watch the video either.
No, the whole article was a written lie. You obviously didn't watch the video either.
MacSA
Sep 6, 12:17 PM
I just bought a Core Duo on the 21st, needless to say I'm pissed. Anyone know apple's price match policy?
Dont bother, its not worth the hassle, you'll notice a 0.5 second difference in some speed test thats all. If youd bought a Core Solo, it might be worth it.
Dont bother, its not worth the hassle, you'll notice a 0.5 second difference in some speed test thats all. If youd bought a Core Solo, it might be worth it.
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
pagansoul
Sep 7, 06:12 PM
For the prices they are asking $14/15 for a new movie that can only be viewed on 2 computers and a portable doesn't cut it for me as it would be better to just buy the DVD. The TV shows at $2 is like iTunes and I have only used that to download free pilots and some of Surface I just had to see. :D With HD and BRay coming out I find the price of a simple DVD drop so if I want something I tend to get it, usually used for $5-10. Still, I do see people renting off the site for 2 to 4 dollars if they have the time and bandwidth.
steve jr.
Jun 22, 06:13 PM
Hmmm, I see this being the next step for the iPad, not an iMac. A few people here have said the iPad needs more productivity - programming, word processing, etc, and I think this is it.
About it being too difficult to make the Mac OS completely touch ready, ehh, it's all tap, just a lot of elements to make tap ready.
End of the Mac? Not hardly! They're looking to make portable computers more powerful - not replace really awesome machines with less productive ones. The desktop will always exist in some form (with the nintendo 3DS - they achieved a "3D" holographic display that doesn't require glasses - my prediction, the next Mac UI), just how we use portable machines is changing because they are becoming more powerful.
About it being too difficult to make the Mac OS completely touch ready, ehh, it's all tap, just a lot of elements to make tap ready.
End of the Mac? Not hardly! They're looking to make portable computers more powerful - not replace really awesome machines with less productive ones. The desktop will always exist in some form (with the nintendo 3DS - they achieved a "3D" holographic display that doesn't require glasses - my prediction, the next Mac UI), just how we use portable machines is changing because they are becoming more powerful.
evilgEEk
Jul 18, 08:16 PM
i wouldnt even pay a $1.99 if the resolution is the same as the current video content on iTunes... HORRID!
I'm definitely with you there. I want to both rent and purchase movies, but if they're going to be 320x240 then forget it. I'm not paying my hard-earned cash for that.
DVD quality and at least 5.1 surround is what I would require before I rented any movies from Apple.
I'm definitely with you there. I want to both rent and purchase movies, but if they're going to be 320x240 then forget it. I'm not paying my hard-earned cash for that.
DVD quality and at least 5.1 surround is what I would require before I rented any movies from Apple.
ethernet76
Sep 6, 10:39 AM
And aren't there more new announcements next week on the 12th? I dread to think of what new killer products/updates they are reserving that for!
Yeah I can't wait for an updated iPod Hi-fi.
Yeah I can't wait for an updated iPod Hi-fi.
dr Dunkel
Apr 22, 06:14 AM
The NASCAR and F1 cars are not consumer, road-driven vehicles. This is like comparing a Mac Pro to the giant supercomputers that run NASA. Keep in mind, there are varying degrees of professionality (I may have made that word up).
I think one could make the same comaprison with the M3 and the M3 GT2. The former is a high-ish end consumer product, much like the MBP and the latter is a professional product for three times the money.
The NASA supercomputer/F1 comparison is too extreme.
I think one could make the same comaprison with the M3 and the M3 GT2. The former is a high-ish end consumer product, much like the MBP and the latter is a professional product for three times the money.
The NASA supercomputer/F1 comparison is too extreme.
jbyun04
Jun 23, 01:37 AM
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/80/211502142_db3000b150.jpg?v=0
If anybody's seen that Date Night movie with Tina Fey and Steve Carrell, Mark Wahlberg uses custom touch screen Macs (well you can tell it's iMacs and ACDs but they made it look like a typical Spy style touch screen) in the movie and it looks a lot like that. If that's what Apple releases, I would be blown away.
If anybody's seen that Date Night movie with Tina Fey and Steve Carrell, Mark Wahlberg uses custom touch screen Macs (well you can tell it's iMacs and ACDs but they made it look like a typical Spy style touch screen) in the movie and it looks a lot like that. If that's what Apple releases, I would be blown away.
mazola
Sep 7, 09:53 AM
And 'The Boatniks' too!
Morod
Apr 21, 11:34 AM
It doesn't take long for crap politics to enter a thread....
No comments:
Post a Comment