skiltrip
Oct 1, 07:51 AM
Its been almost a month now how come their aren't more cases now now?
Not sure. I do however, find it funny, that some of the major case manufacturers take so long to release cases. I realize the understanding is that Apple doesn't leak the specs until the day of the Keynote announcement. But, there were eBay sellers with silicone cases available the day of the Keynote (they may have even been up before, I didn't look) that fit perfectly. I bought some of them. So there ARE leaks in China, and the cheap case manufacturers get their hands on them successfully, so I don't know why the major manufacturers aren't privy to the same leaks.
Not sure. I do however, find it funny, that some of the major case manufacturers take so long to release cases. I realize the understanding is that Apple doesn't leak the specs until the day of the Keynote announcement. But, there were eBay sellers with silicone cases available the day of the Keynote (they may have even been up before, I didn't look) that fit perfectly. I bought some of them. So there ARE leaks in China, and the cheap case manufacturers get their hands on them successfully, so I don't know why the major manufacturers aren't privy to the same leaks.
usptact
May 3, 04:12 AM
And they will call this "revolution" and amazing feature which is worth $$$... classic and very usual from Apple.
Cougarcat
Apr 12, 08:42 PM
Also the guy who took a nice iMovie and made it unusable. I hope he doesn't fsck up FCP. Even iMovie had background rendering until he stripped it out.
From what I understand that was Steve Job's doing. The guy made a separate simple movie app, and Jobs liked it so much he decided to make it the new iMovie.
From what I understand that was Steve Job's doing. The guy made a separate simple movie app, and Jobs liked it so much he decided to make it the new iMovie.
sunfast
Sep 1, 12:52 PM
A 23" iMac would be awesome. I hope it would have the extra grunt to match its size. :)
dongmin
Jan 13, 01:34 AM
Hmm maybe they could get around this by shipping bluetooth headphones with it.
And the no-plug dock charging sounds good too.
Imagine a ultra portable macbook with no ports.
It would have a docking station with a lot of ports in the dock but it would all wirelessly be transfered to the macbook.
No clicking into the dock. Just set it down.
If the dock could be integrated into the desk it could look like you are just setting it on the desk.
But it is wirelessly sending power and signals with the dock which has usb, firewire, large HD, optical drive, headphone jacks, and other ports that are hidden under the desk.
Edit: just realized that in the time I took to reply someone else already pointed out bluetooth headphones.
So the only way to use a thumb drive or download photos from a camera or sync your iPod/iPhone is through your dock when you're at home???
This IS the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a while.
And the no-plug dock charging sounds good too.
Imagine a ultra portable macbook with no ports.
It would have a docking station with a lot of ports in the dock but it would all wirelessly be transfered to the macbook.
No clicking into the dock. Just set it down.
If the dock could be integrated into the desk it could look like you are just setting it on the desk.
But it is wirelessly sending power and signals with the dock which has usb, firewire, large HD, optical drive, headphone jacks, and other ports that are hidden under the desk.
Edit: just realized that in the time I took to reply someone else already pointed out bluetooth headphones.
So the only way to use a thumb drive or download photos from a camera or sync your iPod/iPhone is through your dock when you're at home???
This IS the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a while.
rasmasyean
Mar 19, 05:32 PM
That's why the US shouldn't have invaded Iraq.
I don't think so. Gaddafi willingly traded Libya's oil, currently no oil at all is traded, and I don't think the rebels (unorganized as they are) will do a good job at it anytime soon. The nations now supporting the air strikes against Gaddafi would have been better off quietly sending him weapons to mute the rebels if they wanted oil.
Even if it didn't directly affect the oil trade, I wouldn't be surprised if yet another US base or two somehow gets negotiated into the aftermath. That's also "securing the oil". If we one day figure out how to do fusion, and make electric cars work or something, we wouldn't give a crap about which leader kills eachother there.
I don't think so. Gaddafi willingly traded Libya's oil, currently no oil at all is traded, and I don't think the rebels (unorganized as they are) will do a good job at it anytime soon. The nations now supporting the air strikes against Gaddafi would have been better off quietly sending him weapons to mute the rebels if they wanted oil.
Even if it didn't directly affect the oil trade, I wouldn't be surprised if yet another US base or two somehow gets negotiated into the aftermath. That's also "securing the oil". If we one day figure out how to do fusion, and make electric cars work or something, we wouldn't give a crap about which leader kills eachother there.
ciaran00
Jun 23, 11:23 AM
This doesn't sound like Apple at all. I call shenanigans.
And HP Touchsmart sucks (to me).
And HP Touchsmart sucks (to me).
Don't panic
Mar 22, 02:36 PM
ooooh. the rare red-crested triple-post!
aswitcher
Jan 2, 12:40 AM
With iTV (whatever) I expect Apple to release firmware upgrades for all current model Macs to enable their 802.11N capable wireless.
I also think the Mini and Airport Extreme/Expresses will get and update to have 11N.
I also think the Mini and Airport Extreme/Expresses will get and update to have 11N.
JoeG4
Feb 27, 04:24 PM
Yeeup sounds about right.
Digging that Mac Pro though! :D
Digging that Mac Pro though! :D
MicroByte
Sep 12, 09:12 PM
I really like it. It fits well and I like the material. It provides a good grip, slides nicely into my pocket, but doesn't slide around in my car when I place it on my center console.
I searched for the Belkin case on BestBuy.com then clicked Find in Store. The Concord Pike store was the only one within 30 min of me that showed it as in stock. However, I just did it again and it says differently. I was there at 3:30pm today and I'm sure they didn't have a rush on them this afternoon. There were a lot there of each color. I'd suggest running over there tomorrow. They are on the iPod Accessory rack near the front of the store on the far right side.
Awesome, thanks for the heads up with searching the site. I had actually gone there as well as other sites and didn't find much. They are marked NEW so they must have just added them.
IT's too bad they don't have black, but I really like that Night Sky one. Is it dark purple or dark blue? I saw you had said very dark blue, but as aznguyen316 mentioned, it looks purple on their site.
I don't think it's at any of the stores near me. All of the ones I saw today at the store I visited are marked as available, but the Night Sky shows ship to store (3 - 5 days). I'm still going to go tomorrow though.
Any chance for some pictures?
I searched for the Belkin case on BestBuy.com then clicked Find in Store. The Concord Pike store was the only one within 30 min of me that showed it as in stock. However, I just did it again and it says differently. I was there at 3:30pm today and I'm sure they didn't have a rush on them this afternoon. There were a lot there of each color. I'd suggest running over there tomorrow. They are on the iPod Accessory rack near the front of the store on the far right side.
Awesome, thanks for the heads up with searching the site. I had actually gone there as well as other sites and didn't find much. They are marked NEW so they must have just added them.
IT's too bad they don't have black, but I really like that Night Sky one. Is it dark purple or dark blue? I saw you had said very dark blue, but as aznguyen316 mentioned, it looks purple on their site.
I don't think it's at any of the stores near me. All of the ones I saw today at the store I visited are marked as available, but the Night Sky shows ship to store (3 - 5 days). I'm still going to go tomorrow though.
Any chance for some pictures?
Small White Car
Aug 29, 09:27 AM
I have to say though I hope u are wrong with regard to the Macbooks, i'm hoping for a Core 2 Duo update so I can purchase my first mac. Maybe if they don't i'll just save up some more money and buy and Core 2 Duo MBP when they're released!!
I hate to tell you this, but your "i'll just save up some more money" statement is probably the main reason Apple WON'T put Core 2 in the Macbooks!
Don't get me wrong, I'd love core 2 chips in EVERY Mac that's using Yonah now. That would be totally fantastic.
But I'm not trying to say what I WANT...I'm trying to figure out what I think Apple will DO.
Those are usually not the same thing with ANY company.
I hate to tell you this, but your "i'll just save up some more money" statement is probably the main reason Apple WON'T put Core 2 in the Macbooks!
Don't get me wrong, I'd love core 2 chips in EVERY Mac that's using Yonah now. That would be totally fantastic.
But I'm not trying to say what I WANT...I'm trying to figure out what I think Apple will DO.
Those are usually not the same thing with ANY company.
Sydde
Mar 19, 05:39 PM
Sorry, failed to include a :rolleyes: , and just happened to hit on something that actually exists.
I could have easily used LoseFaceBook, but I thought the other rolled off the tongue better. :o
Actually, the second hit on Disgracebook is a blog where the author is talking about a bulletin board for gossip, insults and bathroom-stall cellphone pictures.
I could have easily used LoseFaceBook, but I thought the other rolled off the tongue better. :o
Actually, the second hit on Disgracebook is a blog where the author is talking about a bulletin board for gossip, insults and bathroom-stall cellphone pictures.
BRLawyer
Apr 19, 02:05 PM
[SIZE=1]
Back on topic....... Supposedly, Ivy Bridge (next year?) will support USB 3. I wonder if it will be possible to have some sort of a Thunderbolt to USB 3 interface. I would hate to buy a new iMac now and not be able to take advantage of the USB 3 speed when it becomes more widely used in the next few years. Or is that not something to worry about?
Why would you want to use a SLOWER interface in the first place? As far as ports are concerned, TB should be able to work with everything (USB, FW etc.) anyway, provided the right adapters are used...
Back on topic....... Supposedly, Ivy Bridge (next year?) will support USB 3. I wonder if it will be possible to have some sort of a Thunderbolt to USB 3 interface. I would hate to buy a new iMac now and not be able to take advantage of the USB 3 speed when it becomes more widely used in the next few years. Or is that not something to worry about?
Why would you want to use a SLOWER interface in the first place? As far as ports are concerned, TB should be able to work with everything (USB, FW etc.) anyway, provided the right adapters are used...
Object-X
Nov 28, 03:25 AM
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
NebulaClash
Sep 15, 08:08 AM
No one has offered to have an Apple Rep come out to my house to pick up my iPhone 4 to fit the case, because that's unreasonable.
Right, and what Apple has proposed doing is very reasonable. They have a product that works well for the majority of users. It's the highest-rated phone CR tested. For a few people, there is an issue. All summer long Apple has allowed everyone, those with the issue and all of those with no problems, to have a free case. Now they are saying you've had plenty of time to get your free case, now we will just give it to those who, you know, actually need one. Just let us know, and you get the bumper free. How on earth is that hard?
Meanwhile they are going to alter the design of the phone so that even this issue will go away for future models.
What does CR want? A total recall? For what? Most people have no issue, there is no danger, the few people who have the issue get a free solution, what would be the point of doing it any other way?
Auto manufacturers publicize the issue, make a solution possible, but it's up to the car's owner to approach the dealership to get that free solution. CR sez this is a good thing.
Apple publicizes the issue, makes a solution possible, but it's up to the phone's owner to approach Apple to get that free solution. CR sez this is unacceptable.
All other phone manufacturers get ignored.
Hypocrisy.
Right, and what Apple has proposed doing is very reasonable. They have a product that works well for the majority of users. It's the highest-rated phone CR tested. For a few people, there is an issue. All summer long Apple has allowed everyone, those with the issue and all of those with no problems, to have a free case. Now they are saying you've had plenty of time to get your free case, now we will just give it to those who, you know, actually need one. Just let us know, and you get the bumper free. How on earth is that hard?
Meanwhile they are going to alter the design of the phone so that even this issue will go away for future models.
What does CR want? A total recall? For what? Most people have no issue, there is no danger, the few people who have the issue get a free solution, what would be the point of doing it any other way?
Auto manufacturers publicize the issue, make a solution possible, but it's up to the car's owner to approach the dealership to get that free solution. CR sez this is a good thing.
Apple publicizes the issue, makes a solution possible, but it's up to the phone's owner to approach Apple to get that free solution. CR sez this is unacceptable.
All other phone manufacturers get ignored.
Hypocrisy.
hulugu
Nov 29, 08:58 PM
Why are we still talking about the Zune. Does anyone really care? It's just another mp3 player among so many others behind iPod. :rolleyes:
It will never match the iPod's popularity, ever.
I think the feeling was, this is the last full measure for anyone expecting to knock the iPod off its pedestal without a serious sea-change in technology, to mix my metaphors a little.
Sony tried, Dell tried, Creative is trying, and really only Samsung and SanDisk are having any success. The real threat it appeared was from Microsoft who could use their money and leverage the support of WMA, the XBox, and other technologies to support the Zune.
Instead, Microsoft made a clunky box, reinvented the software wheel, and severed the Zune from all the PlaysForSure companies. The only real leverage the Zune has is it's connection with the XBox, which the iPod can do as well. The Zune is a massive duplication of effort, and will surely do more to eliminate the smaller players in the market, such as SanDisk, than affect the iPod's sales.
Furthermore, I would ask anyone to avoid buying the Zune, no one should reward Microsoft for releasing a product that is effectively unfinished. Really for $250.00 you get to do their beta testing, and that's not a privilege anyone should have to endure.
It will never match the iPod's popularity, ever.
I think the feeling was, this is the last full measure for anyone expecting to knock the iPod off its pedestal without a serious sea-change in technology, to mix my metaphors a little.
Sony tried, Dell tried, Creative is trying, and really only Samsung and SanDisk are having any success. The real threat it appeared was from Microsoft who could use their money and leverage the support of WMA, the XBox, and other technologies to support the Zune.
Instead, Microsoft made a clunky box, reinvented the software wheel, and severed the Zune from all the PlaysForSure companies. The only real leverage the Zune has is it's connection with the XBox, which the iPod can do as well. The Zune is a massive duplication of effort, and will surely do more to eliminate the smaller players in the market, such as SanDisk, than affect the iPod's sales.
Furthermore, I would ask anyone to avoid buying the Zune, no one should reward Microsoft for releasing a product that is effectively unfinished. Really for $250.00 you get to do their beta testing, and that's not a privilege anyone should have to endure.
wmmk
Nov 27, 05:30 PM
I hope it happens. This would not only be great for Mac Mini buyers, but also laptop owners. We already have 13-17 inches of screen real estate, so 17 more sounds just about perfect! I just hope there'd be a non iSight option so that laptop users wouldn't be paying a premium for something they already paid for.
iJohnHenry
Mar 19, 03:17 PM
Break out the champers.
CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/19/libya.civil.war/index.html).
CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/19/libya.civil.war/index.html).
lOUDsCREAMEr
Jul 19, 06:41 PM
Here are historical Mac sales by quarter.
1Q2000 - 1,377,000
2Q2000 - 1,043,000
3Q2000 - 1,016,000
4Q2000 - 1,122,000
1Q2001 - 659,000
2Q2001 - 751,000
3Q2001 - 827,000
4Q2001 - 850,000
1Q2002 - 659,000
2Q2002 - 813,000
3Q2002 - 808,000
4Q2002 - 734,000
1Q2003 - 743,000
2Q2003 - 711,000
3Q2003 - 771,000
4Q2003 - 787,000
1Q2004 - 743,000
2Q2004 - 749,000
3Q2004 - 771,000
4Q2004 - 787,000
1Q2005 - 1,046,000
2Q2005 - 1,070,000
3Q2005 - 1,182,000
4Q2005 - 1,236,000
1Q2006- 1,254,000
2Q2006- 1,112,000
3Q2006- 1,327,000
what happened exactly in between 2000-Q4 and 2001-Q1?
1Q2000 - 1,377,000
2Q2000 - 1,043,000
3Q2000 - 1,016,000
4Q2000 - 1,122,000
1Q2001 - 659,000
2Q2001 - 751,000
3Q2001 - 827,000
4Q2001 - 850,000
1Q2002 - 659,000
2Q2002 - 813,000
3Q2002 - 808,000
4Q2002 - 734,000
1Q2003 - 743,000
2Q2003 - 711,000
3Q2003 - 771,000
4Q2003 - 787,000
1Q2004 - 743,000
2Q2004 - 749,000
3Q2004 - 771,000
4Q2004 - 787,000
1Q2005 - 1,046,000
2Q2005 - 1,070,000
3Q2005 - 1,182,000
4Q2005 - 1,236,000
1Q2006- 1,254,000
2Q2006- 1,112,000
3Q2006- 1,327,000
what happened exactly in between 2000-Q4 and 2001-Q1?
DeathChill
Apr 3, 01:50 AM
Great ad. When they can't compete on specs Apple should try to use fuzzy math (sorry, logic) to convince people that there is more to their products. That's the only way for Apple to keep the profit margin.
Where are they not competing on specs here? The CPU is almost identical and the iPad 2's GPU is much better. I guess you can take better camera's over thickness and weight.
Like when device can be useful with poor specs. Are you talking about those iPad 2 cameras? How useful are those with their embarrassing specs?
They are useful for FaceTime, which is what they were designed for. What are the purpose of the Xoom camera's, besides to say that they have them?
Where are they not competing on specs here? The CPU is almost identical and the iPad 2's GPU is much better. I guess you can take better camera's over thickness and weight.
Like when device can be useful with poor specs. Are you talking about those iPad 2 cameras? How useful are those with their embarrassing specs?
They are useful for FaceTime, which is what they were designed for. What are the purpose of the Xoom camera's, besides to say that they have them?
tktaylor1
Feb 5, 02:09 PM
2002 Audi A4. 18th birthday present
jxyama
Mar 19, 11:11 AM
You take the low end model, subtract the cost for the monitor and you have a computer that is sitting in the $500.00 - $600.00 range. Many people already have monitors and if not, you can find a decent one for relatively low cost.
since CRT monitors cost next to nothing these days, eMac price can't be lowered that much even if it was headless. that will just eat into the profits. and why give the money for the monitor to other companies?
apparently, apple's marketing dept. has concluded that the sale of AIO units with bigger margin turns more profit than that can be expected from increased sale of headless units with smaller margin. and as long as apple's profitable, there's no reason to argue that their strategy is wrong...
eMac and iMac are for people who want to take home a box, open it up, plug in the power and start using them. they are NOT meant for people who want the absolute cheapest computers. right now, apple is not interested in making that kind of "cheapest" computers... nor has they ever been. the only time that happened was when they allowed clones and that certainly went nowhere because Macs were suddenly a commodity and apple took a major hit as "premium" hardware company.
mind you, apple could change their mind and offer such a headless machine in the future, if their dept. sees that the computer market is changing. so while you may well be 100% correct in principle, apple hasn't had to or is yet to find a reason to offer such a headless.
since CRT monitors cost next to nothing these days, eMac price can't be lowered that much even if it was headless. that will just eat into the profits. and why give the money for the monitor to other companies?
apparently, apple's marketing dept. has concluded that the sale of AIO units with bigger margin turns more profit than that can be expected from increased sale of headless units with smaller margin. and as long as apple's profitable, there's no reason to argue that their strategy is wrong...
eMac and iMac are for people who want to take home a box, open it up, plug in the power and start using them. they are NOT meant for people who want the absolute cheapest computers. right now, apple is not interested in making that kind of "cheapest" computers... nor has they ever been. the only time that happened was when they allowed clones and that certainly went nowhere because Macs were suddenly a commodity and apple took a major hit as "premium" hardware company.
mind you, apple could change their mind and offer such a headless machine in the future, if their dept. sees that the computer market is changing. so while you may well be 100% correct in principle, apple hasn't had to or is yet to find a reason to offer such a headless.
maclaptop
Apr 10, 01:59 PM
Although in sports cars, sequential gearboxes are best.
When I move to the US though, I will probably be driving an Automatic, it will be simply something to get me from A to B. Rather than over here when I drive around lovely B (country) roads to get to places and a manual gearboxes are just more fun on twisty roads.
Yes in terms of quick shifting a sequential gearbox is it.
When I move to the US though, I will probably be driving an Automatic, it will be simply something to get me from A to B. Rather than over here when I drive around lovely B (country) roads to get to places and a manual gearboxes are just more fun on twisty roads.
Yes in terms of quick shifting a sequential gearbox is it.
