celebrian23
Jul 20, 11:17 AM
With NF you get three movies at a time, and you can get plans with more. It does require a little planning, but right now, the quantity of content you can get in a month for the price can't be beat. If you think it's so stupid, what do you propose as the smarter alternative?
For iTMS to beat it, it would have to match netflix's pricing as well, which would be $1 or less per rental. I don't see that happening. They'd also have to have better quality and include all DVD extras with all movies.
Until then, I'll happily stick with netflix.
I don't use netflix, but I think it's a great thing and itms isn't going to be able to overtake it. I'd take netflix over any computer movie rental service anyday
For iTMS to beat it, it would have to match netflix's pricing as well, which would be $1 or less per rental. I don't see that happening. They'd also have to have better quality and include all DVD extras with all movies.
Until then, I'll happily stick with netflix.
I don't use netflix, but I think it's a great thing and itms isn't going to be able to overtake it. I'd take netflix over any computer movie rental service anyday
MacQuest
Nov 29, 09:31 PM
He has a point about the XBox... It did start out slower but now is surely considered a predominant player in the market (no pun intended;) ).
Yeah, out of all 3 major options. [Sony, Nintendo, and miCrapsoft] :rolleyes:
Real hard. :p
I bet even I could have whipped up a console one night a few years back and kicked them out of the top 3. ;)
I remember reading sales figures in '04 between PS3 and XSUX. It was something like 74+ million PS3's to 13.x million XSUX's.:D
As has been mentioned several times throughout this thread, there are WAY more manufacturers AND models to contend with in the digital audio player market.
Yeah, out of all 3 major options. [Sony, Nintendo, and miCrapsoft] :rolleyes:
Real hard. :p
I bet even I could have whipped up a console one night a few years back and kicked them out of the top 3. ;)
I remember reading sales figures in '04 between PS3 and XSUX. It was something like 74+ million PS3's to 13.x million XSUX's.:D
As has been mentioned several times throughout this thread, there are WAY more manufacturers AND models to contend with in the digital audio player market.
WeegieMac
Apr 2, 02:39 AM
As far as I know, Snow Leopard "fixed" what Leopard started. Mac OS X Lion is a completely new OS with new features, most of which are not present in Snow Leopard.
See, I would have to disagree with that.
All of the framework, the underlaying core system changes, were done in Leopard and then refined in Snow Leopard.
All Lion is adding, from what I've seen, is interface changes and some new features that, lets be honest, not every user is going to bother with. Sure, Launchpad looks nice, even in it's frame rate lacking beta form, and Mission Control is a new take on Expose, but other than that it's iOS inspired UI changes, a new version of Safari, and some application interface changes (Mail & iCal come to mind).
I don't think Lion will be a �29/$29 upgrade, but I think given that it'll launch on the Mac App Store, it will follow the example of iLife and Aperture and be cheaper to purchase online than it is off the shelf in a box.
See, I would have to disagree with that.
All of the framework, the underlaying core system changes, were done in Leopard and then refined in Snow Leopard.
All Lion is adding, from what I've seen, is interface changes and some new features that, lets be honest, not every user is going to bother with. Sure, Launchpad looks nice, even in it's frame rate lacking beta form, and Mission Control is a new take on Expose, but other than that it's iOS inspired UI changes, a new version of Safari, and some application interface changes (Mail & iCal come to mind).
I don't think Lion will be a �29/$29 upgrade, but I think given that it'll launch on the Mac App Store, it will follow the example of iLife and Aperture and be cheaper to purchase online than it is off the shelf in a box.
miketcool
Aug 16, 10:20 AM
Can't believe they got rid of the click wheel though, although that rectangular thing would probably work the screen pretty well.
I'm sure there might be a software hack that enables that.
I'm sure there might be a software hack that enables that.
imnotatfault
Aug 19, 09:09 AM
I disagree with pretty much everything you said here Manic Mouse :D.
I really hope the iPod doesn't go down the line of convergence/frankenstein/jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none. It's a solid music player and it's main priority should be as such. In my experience with work colleagues and parents/in-laws the iPod is almost bordering on being too difficult as it is just with just music and video. Many never bother with video or podcasts or even firmware updates because they perceive it to be too complex. Adding slide-out keyboards, larger/deeper navigation menus, wifi connections, and email configuration would probably push it over the edge as far as being too technologically intimidating for most. Not to mention the size sacrifice.
Apple may bring something else to the market to compete if there really is a decent market for devices like the Mylo (which I'm personally not too sure there is).
Only if the device was separate from the iPod, which stayed truer to its roots, and more importantly, there was some sort of higher integration. Like the proposed built-in dock the mac mini would have. I still miss that.
I really hope the iPod doesn't go down the line of convergence/frankenstein/jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none. It's a solid music player and it's main priority should be as such. In my experience with work colleagues and parents/in-laws the iPod is almost bordering on being too difficult as it is just with just music and video. Many never bother with video or podcasts or even firmware updates because they perceive it to be too complex. Adding slide-out keyboards, larger/deeper navigation menus, wifi connections, and email configuration would probably push it over the edge as far as being too technologically intimidating for most. Not to mention the size sacrifice.
Apple may bring something else to the market to compete if there really is a decent market for devices like the Mylo (which I'm personally not too sure there is).
Only if the device was separate from the iPod, which stayed truer to its roots, and more importantly, there was some sort of higher integration. Like the proposed built-in dock the mac mini would have. I still miss that.
foodle
Mar 25, 06:32 PM
Oh man---I got the iPad to get the kids off the TV. Now I'm going to have to get another TV!
Are you crazy?!? The iPad is like a TV on steroids. My daughter is salivating at the prospect of my iPad 2 arriving, which means she gets the iPad 1.
Are you crazy?!? The iPad is like a TV on steroids. My daughter is salivating at the prospect of my iPad 2 arriving, which means she gets the iPad 1.
Multimedia
Sep 8, 09:38 PM
Well, the update certainly wasn't jaw-dropping, it was just a normal product cycle update. So in comparison to the new CPU's in the iMac, oh, and the whole 24" screen business, the mini update kind of pales in comparison.
That said, I did buy one today from CompUSA! :D I was very surprised that they had them in already, they even got some of the new low end iMacs yesterday, no 24 inchers yet.
So now my office will be pleasantly furnished with a new Mac mini, wireless keyboard and Mighty Mouse. Everyone else in the building runs Windows (although a few have ACD's), but it shouldn't be too difficult to convert them once they see my little powerhouse of a mini. My boss was already blown away when I showed it to him, he called in three other people to look at it.
Fish in a barrel, my friends. ;)
Mine: Dual 2.0 G5 PowerMac - survived lightning strike
Wife: 1Ghz G4 iBook
30gig iPod Video w/ IS
Airport Express - didn't survive lightning Did you buy the 1.66 or 1.83 model? Would You Mind Comparative Testing It Against Your Dual 2 G5 Please? I need to know if it is in fact faster even at these slower speeds. I have a spare Dual 2 G5 here now I got at Fry's for $864.26 a few weeks ago. I need to know how it stacks up to a mini in performance.
When I was at Fry's yesterday, I tried a few things on a 1.83 MacBook and found it to be much slower than I expected - I think slower than the dual 2 G5. What do you think? Can you put them side by side and run some comparisons?
That said, I did buy one today from CompUSA! :D I was very surprised that they had them in already, they even got some of the new low end iMacs yesterday, no 24 inchers yet.
So now my office will be pleasantly furnished with a new Mac mini, wireless keyboard and Mighty Mouse. Everyone else in the building runs Windows (although a few have ACD's), but it shouldn't be too difficult to convert them once they see my little powerhouse of a mini. My boss was already blown away when I showed it to him, he called in three other people to look at it.
Fish in a barrel, my friends. ;)
Mine: Dual 2.0 G5 PowerMac - survived lightning strike
Wife: 1Ghz G4 iBook
30gig iPod Video w/ IS
Airport Express - didn't survive lightning Did you buy the 1.66 or 1.83 model? Would You Mind Comparative Testing It Against Your Dual 2 G5 Please? I need to know if it is in fact faster even at these slower speeds. I have a spare Dual 2 G5 here now I got at Fry's for $864.26 a few weeks ago. I need to know how it stacks up to a mini in performance.
When I was at Fry's yesterday, I tried a few things on a 1.83 MacBook and found it to be much slower than I expected - I think slower than the dual 2 G5. What do you think? Can you put them side by side and run some comparisons?
notabadname
Apr 21, 11:54 AM
Yeah, because Google doesn't track any data on people :rolleyes:
macidiot
Jul 19, 04:41 PM
How could the analysts be off by almost a billion dollars? Are they held to account for this?
Of course not. Their job is to not be accurate. Their job is to generate revenue, usually in the form of stock trades. If they are accurate, it is usually because the company they are covering essentially gave them the EXACT numbers.
Analyst downgrades stock, people sell. Analyst upgrades stock, people buy. rinse, repeat every couple of months.
However, most analysts are pleasant people. Must be from those mid-six figure salaries.
Of course not. Their job is to not be accurate. Their job is to generate revenue, usually in the form of stock trades. If they are accurate, it is usually because the company they are covering essentially gave them the EXACT numbers.
Analyst downgrades stock, people sell. Analyst upgrades stock, people buy. rinse, repeat every couple of months.
However, most analysts are pleasant people. Must be from those mid-six figure salaries.
scott523
Nov 15, 11:23 AM
How can this get negative votes? In fact, how do a lot of perfectly benign threads get negative votes? Are there just members out there who vote negative on everything?It could be the fact that the 8-core Mac Pro butchered the iTunes encoding and Quake 4 test? I'm shocked myself that Mac Pro tied for the lowest score in the iTunes test.
kazmac
Apr 19, 01:31 PM
I'm looking forward to seeing the new iMacs (and eventually Mac Minis).
Computer-wise I'm set for the next 3 years, but it's always nice to see the computers get updated.
Fingers crossed for no screen etc. issues.
Computer-wise I'm set for the next 3 years, but it's always nice to see the computers get updated.
Fingers crossed for no screen etc. issues.
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?
SMM
Nov 15, 06:52 PM
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
I work with business applications, many of which are database intensive. I can think of many examples which would greatly improve performance and application reliability, if I could run processes in parallel, rather than in series.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
I work with business applications, many of which are database intensive. I can think of many examples which would greatly improve performance and application reliability, if I could run processes in parallel, rather than in series.
whooleytoo
Jul 20, 05:47 AM
And since just about all OEM's wil preload Vista on their machines, the sales-numbers will be HUGE.
I think this is the key - once Vista comes out what OEM will be able to continue selling PCs with XP installed? Even if Vista's hardware requirements were a Core 2 Duo with 2GB RAM, they'd build every PC with a minimum of a Core 2 Duo with 2GB RAM, because they can't afford not to be on the Vista bandwagon.
I think this is the key - once Vista comes out what OEM will be able to continue selling PCs with XP installed? Even if Vista's hardware requirements were a Core 2 Duo with 2GB RAM, they'd build every PC with a minimum of a Core 2 Duo with 2GB RAM, because they can't afford not to be on the Vista bandwagon.
tirk
Mar 22, 05:11 PM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
Why don't you go and buy a Zune. You would simultaneously improve the average IQ of both Zune and iPod users! :p
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
Why don't you go and buy a Zune. You would simultaneously improve the average IQ of both Zune and iPod users! :p
currentinterest
Jan 13, 02:23 AM
Why does the banner have to reference only one product or service? Perhaps it refers to a theme shared by all introductions at MacWorld.
MacRumors
Jan 1, 05:09 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
With Macworld San Francisco (MWSF) quickly approaching, MacRumors provides this Rumor Roundup as a summary of major rumors circulating around the Mac Web before the big event. (Previous MacRumors MWSF roundups: 2006 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/01/20060105230546.shtml), 2005 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/01/20050110022542.shtml), 2004 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/01/20040101213714.shtml), 2003 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/01/20030104183532.shtml), and 2002 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/01/20020106151501.shtml).)
While Apple's popularity continues to rise, the media coverage for Apple rumors reached an all time high this year.
Apple Phone (or Not?)
The one rumor that has received the greatest exposure is, of course, the Apple branded phone (formerly the iPhone (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061218064022.shtml)). Talk of an Apple-branded cell phone has been ongoing for years, however.
In when asked directly (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/09/20020911210852.shtml) "Will there be an iPhone?", Steve Jobs replied "One never knows. We don't usually discuss products we haven't announced." In when questioned again about an Apple phone, Steve Jobs stated (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/05/20030529030024.shtml) that they did not "feel they could add much value to current cell phones."
The Apple Phone rumor flickered to life again in February 2006 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/02/20060203203837.shtml) when research group UBS said "not to rule out an Apple-branded cell phone later this year". PiperJaffray made a bolder statement (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060317152445.shtml) in March 2006 with a 75% chance of a iPhone in the next 12 months. Similar claims came from a J.P. Morgan analyst (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060319140832.shtml) that "chatter about the [Apple Phone] is all over the food chain".
What finally triggered worldwide attention can be traced back to this Commercial Times report (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/11/20061115090741.shtml) that Taiwan's Hon Hai has received a 12 million unit contract for the rumored Apple phone to be released in the first half of 2007. While regular MacRumors readers might realize that these Taiwanese supply reports have been wrong in the past, the proposed time-frame correlated (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060915182716.shtml) with an earlier ThinkSecret report also pointing to "early 2007" for the release. As well, a reliable MacRumors source provided a description (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060913215342.shtml) (and artist rendition) of what one of the existing prototype phones looked like at that time.
The first detailed specs came from Kevin Rose (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061203094854.shtml) who had been previously known (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/01/20060110081233.shtml) to have some inside information. Other (conflicting) claims/specs are also listed here:
- 2GB ($249), 4GB ($449), Slide out keyboard, "cool" OS, All Phone providers (Kevin Rose (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061203094854.shtml))
- 4GB ($599), 8GB ($649), Metal, Cingular Wireless, Full screen LCD, Virtual Click Wheel (Morgan Stanley analyst (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061213162456.shtml))
- GSM/EDGE device only (ThinkSecret (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061215091228.shtml))
While many news outlets are pointing towards Macworld San Francisco as the launch date of the Apple Phone, none of the more credible rumors have specifically pointed to Macworld as the launch day for the device:
- 1st half of 2007 (1 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/11/20061115090741.shtml), 2 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060915182716.shtml), 3 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061205105051.shtml), 4 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061213162456.shtml))
- Not at Macworld SF (1 (http://www.theage.com.au/news/phones--pdas/iphone-could-be-put-on-hold/2006/12/11/1165685598310.html?from=rss))
- January (1 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061203094854.shtml))
- Macworld San Francisco (0)
While nothing would preclude Apple from announcing a phone at Macworld for a later launch, the evidence for a Macworld launch remains mostly speculative.
Mac Pro
Appleinsider suggested in October (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/10/20061025231946.shtml) that an 8-Core Mac Pro was ready to launch as early as November 2006. While this did not take place, an upcoming 2.0GHz quad-core chip (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2326) due in January will be priced at a reasonable $690/chip, similar to the current 2.66GHz dual-core Woodcrest that is currently offered in Mac Pros.
A recent Macscoop report (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061229234528.shtml) claimed that the 8-core Mac would be on track for a January release.
iTV
Apple surprised many when they revealed the iTV in September (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060912161621.shtml) at the "Showtime" media event. The $299 device offers a living room appliance that interfaces your media content to your television. A brief overview was provided, but the final shipping product was not promised until the first quarter of 2007.
Many expect Apple will provide more details of the iTV at Macworld.
Leopard
Leopard was first previewed (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060807161421.shtml) in August, revealing Time Machine, Spaces, Core Animation, and more (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/).
Over the following months, only a few additional features have been revealed (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/10/20061024174114.shtml), and no word of the "secret" features Apple has held back from their public preview.
The latest minor feature revealed has been the use of XAR (http://macgeek.freeflux.net/blog/archive/2006/12/30/macos-x-10-5-new-package-format-xar.html) for Leopard's package format.
Apple would likely demonstrate Leopard again at Macworld San Francisco, but the final release is not expected until "Spring 2007".
New Displays
Some sporadic reports (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061222114846.shtml) of new displays have been distributed, but have been tainted by claims that they represent efforts to intentionally spread false information to rumor sites. As such, these rumors should be viewed with skepticism.
iLife '07
Unlike most Apple updates, the iLife suite has seen regular yearly updates released at the Macworld San Francisco expo. iWork '07 has been said to include (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/10/20061011213410.shtml) significant updates to Keynote and Pages as well as the introduction of a new spreadsheet application code named "Lasso".
Video iPod, and Others?
Surprisingly, little attention has been given to the rumored full Video iPod despite clear evidence (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/10/20061026073133.shtml) that Apple has been considering such a form factor. The latest word has placed the device in the early 2007 timeframe (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/10/20061018143033.shtml).
Three new iPod models were said to be in the works (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061207145756.shtml) for but not necessarily at Macworld.
Summary
Surprisingly few Macworld San Francisco specific rumors have emerged this year in the months leading up to the event. This final week, however, always represents a busy time for rumors with last minute leaks common.
If you would like to meet up with other MacRumors members, this thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=256873) lists others going to the event.
No live Quicktime stream is typically available for the keynote event. Instead, we will provide live coverage of the event at MacRumorsLive.com (http://www.macrumorslive.com/). The keynote takes place at 9am Pacific time on January 9th, 2007.
[[ digg this (http://digg.com/apple/Macworld_San_Francisco_2007_Rumor_Roundup) ]]
With Macworld San Francisco (MWSF) quickly approaching, MacRumors provides this Rumor Roundup as a summary of major rumors circulating around the Mac Web before the big event. (Previous MacRumors MWSF roundups: 2006 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/01/20060105230546.shtml), 2005 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/01/20050110022542.shtml), 2004 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/01/20040101213714.shtml), 2003 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/01/20030104183532.shtml), and 2002 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/01/20020106151501.shtml).)
While Apple's popularity continues to rise, the media coverage for Apple rumors reached an all time high this year.
Apple Phone (or Not?)
The one rumor that has received the greatest exposure is, of course, the Apple branded phone (formerly the iPhone (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061218064022.shtml)). Talk of an Apple-branded cell phone has been ongoing for years, however.
In when asked directly (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/09/20020911210852.shtml) "Will there be an iPhone?", Steve Jobs replied "One never knows. We don't usually discuss products we haven't announced." In when questioned again about an Apple phone, Steve Jobs stated (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/05/20030529030024.shtml) that they did not "feel they could add much value to current cell phones."
The Apple Phone rumor flickered to life again in February 2006 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/02/20060203203837.shtml) when research group UBS said "not to rule out an Apple-branded cell phone later this year". PiperJaffray made a bolder statement (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060317152445.shtml) in March 2006 with a 75% chance of a iPhone in the next 12 months. Similar claims came from a J.P. Morgan analyst (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060319140832.shtml) that "chatter about the [Apple Phone] is all over the food chain".
What finally triggered worldwide attention can be traced back to this Commercial Times report (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/11/20061115090741.shtml) that Taiwan's Hon Hai has received a 12 million unit contract for the rumored Apple phone to be released in the first half of 2007. While regular MacRumors readers might realize that these Taiwanese supply reports have been wrong in the past, the proposed time-frame correlated (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060915182716.shtml) with an earlier ThinkSecret report also pointing to "early 2007" for the release. As well, a reliable MacRumors source provided a description (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060913215342.shtml) (and artist rendition) of what one of the existing prototype phones looked like at that time.
The first detailed specs came from Kevin Rose (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061203094854.shtml) who had been previously known (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/01/20060110081233.shtml) to have some inside information. Other (conflicting) claims/specs are also listed here:
- 2GB ($249), 4GB ($449), Slide out keyboard, "cool" OS, All Phone providers (Kevin Rose (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061203094854.shtml))
- 4GB ($599), 8GB ($649), Metal, Cingular Wireless, Full screen LCD, Virtual Click Wheel (Morgan Stanley analyst (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061213162456.shtml))
- GSM/EDGE device only (ThinkSecret (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061215091228.shtml))
While many news outlets are pointing towards Macworld San Francisco as the launch date of the Apple Phone, none of the more credible rumors have specifically pointed to Macworld as the launch day for the device:
- 1st half of 2007 (1 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/11/20061115090741.shtml), 2 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060915182716.shtml), 3 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061205105051.shtml), 4 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061213162456.shtml))
- Not at Macworld SF (1 (http://www.theage.com.au/news/phones--pdas/iphone-could-be-put-on-hold/2006/12/11/1165685598310.html?from=rss))
- January (1 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061203094854.shtml))
- Macworld San Francisco (0)
While nothing would preclude Apple from announcing a phone at Macworld for a later launch, the evidence for a Macworld launch remains mostly speculative.
Mac Pro
Appleinsider suggested in October (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/10/20061025231946.shtml) that an 8-Core Mac Pro was ready to launch as early as November 2006. While this did not take place, an upcoming 2.0GHz quad-core chip (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2326) due in January will be priced at a reasonable $690/chip, similar to the current 2.66GHz dual-core Woodcrest that is currently offered in Mac Pros.
A recent Macscoop report (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061229234528.shtml) claimed that the 8-core Mac would be on track for a January release.
iTV
Apple surprised many when they revealed the iTV in September (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060912161621.shtml) at the "Showtime" media event. The $299 device offers a living room appliance that interfaces your media content to your television. A brief overview was provided, but the final shipping product was not promised until the first quarter of 2007.
Many expect Apple will provide more details of the iTV at Macworld.
Leopard
Leopard was first previewed (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060807161421.shtml) in August, revealing Time Machine, Spaces, Core Animation, and more (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/).
Over the following months, only a few additional features have been revealed (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/10/20061024174114.shtml), and no word of the "secret" features Apple has held back from their public preview.
The latest minor feature revealed has been the use of XAR (http://macgeek.freeflux.net/blog/archive/2006/12/30/macos-x-10-5-new-package-format-xar.html) for Leopard's package format.
Apple would likely demonstrate Leopard again at Macworld San Francisco, but the final release is not expected until "Spring 2007".
New Displays
Some sporadic reports (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061222114846.shtml) of new displays have been distributed, but have been tainted by claims that they represent efforts to intentionally spread false information to rumor sites. As such, these rumors should be viewed with skepticism.
iLife '07
Unlike most Apple updates, the iLife suite has seen regular yearly updates released at the Macworld San Francisco expo. iWork '07 has been said to include (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/10/20061011213410.shtml) significant updates to Keynote and Pages as well as the introduction of a new spreadsheet application code named "Lasso".
Video iPod, and Others?
Surprisingly, little attention has been given to the rumored full Video iPod despite clear evidence (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/10/20061026073133.shtml) that Apple has been considering such a form factor. The latest word has placed the device in the early 2007 timeframe (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/10/20061018143033.shtml).
Three new iPod models were said to be in the works (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061207145756.shtml) for but not necessarily at Macworld.
Summary
Surprisingly few Macworld San Francisco specific rumors have emerged this year in the months leading up to the event. This final week, however, always represents a busy time for rumors with last minute leaks common.
If you would like to meet up with other MacRumors members, this thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=256873) lists others going to the event.
No live Quicktime stream is typically available for the keynote event. Instead, we will provide live coverage of the event at MacRumorsLive.com (http://www.macrumorslive.com/). The keynote takes place at 9am Pacific time on January 9th, 2007.
[[ digg this (http://digg.com/apple/Macworld_San_Francisco_2007_Rumor_Roundup) ]]
bluebomberman
Nov 29, 01:38 PM
Where else can they go? The brain, I guess?
W1MRK
Apr 16, 06:48 PM
haha, if you can master than then I'm sure any other car will be simple
Do you have to double clutch or can you float based on the Tach and Speedometer?
Do you have to double clutch or can you float based on the Tach and Speedometer?
jxyama
Apr 16, 08:22 AM
Very interesting point but I want Apple's share to grow ! The whole point of this thread is to get Apple into every home - right now, its being done by the Ipod but sales can't continue this good forever so they must push the Macintosh into more homes and business.
if you want apple in every home, why don't you buy Macs and give them away? (sarcasm)
the whole point of this thread is NOT to get apple into every home. you started the thread claiming apple is in need of help. apple does not need help, as others have posted many, many times.
apple will not try to put Macs in every home at the expense of its business. yeah, it makes great products. but it's not a charity - they are not going to start modifying their core business model just so everyone can have their product. get over it. Mac is not meant for everyone.
lexus is nice. bmw is nice. are you going to petition that they should offer lower priced version of their cars so everyone could have one? a three story house with huge lawn and furnished basement is nice. are you going to petition morgage companies so that everyone could have a multi-million dollar morgages to get those houses and wreck their business because 99% of them will default?
if you want apple in every home, why don't you buy Macs and give them away? (sarcasm)
the whole point of this thread is NOT to get apple into every home. you started the thread claiming apple is in need of help. apple does not need help, as others have posted many, many times.
apple will not try to put Macs in every home at the expense of its business. yeah, it makes great products. but it's not a charity - they are not going to start modifying their core business model just so everyone can have their product. get over it. Mac is not meant for everyone.
lexus is nice. bmw is nice. are you going to petition that they should offer lower priced version of their cars so everyone could have one? a three story house with huge lawn and furnished basement is nice. are you going to petition morgage companies so that everyone could have a multi-million dollar morgages to get those houses and wreck their business because 99% of them will default?
EagerDragon
Jul 19, 08:47 PM
Source? :rolleyes:
Little birdy. running the code.
Little birdy. running the code.
wordoflife
Nov 27, 10:01 PM
http://www.pittsburghhotplate.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/starbucks_il_divino.jpg
Was in the mood for one of these while getting my Mac looked at by a Genius..
Was in the mood for one of these while getting my Mac looked at by a Genius..
levitynyc
Mar 25, 03:50 PM
Time to grab a 10 foot HDMI cord.
GregA
Dec 28, 02:14 AM
the option to dock and iPod simply is so out of place that I do not know why it keeps getting brought up. iTV is focused on streaming content from your computer, not your iPod.I've been wondering about this. Assuming the iTV is just a streaming device which shows a movie stored on iTunes on your PC or Mac, it is probably reasonably simple for Apple to make the iTV also stream video from an iPod (including Nano or even Shuffle).
Of course, why not just plug your iPod directly into the TV? And if there's a movie on your iPod, it came via your iTunes anyway so you can stream from there right...?
I'm not sure what the answer to that is. I do think there's scope for buying a movie in a store, downloading to iPod, and uploading to your iTunes (assuming that you have a low bandwidth net connection).
Is there scope for buying a movie in a store, downloading to iPod, and watching on TV? Or buying a movie in a store, downloading to a 1GB ram drive, and watching on your iTV? I think if I was going to the store anyway, I'd probably buy the HD-DVD instead. But for rental it might work.
Of course, why not just plug your iPod directly into the TV? And if there's a movie on your iPod, it came via your iTunes anyway so you can stream from there right...?
I'm not sure what the answer to that is. I do think there's scope for buying a movie in a store, downloading to iPod, and uploading to your iTunes (assuming that you have a low bandwidth net connection).
Is there scope for buying a movie in a store, downloading to iPod, and watching on TV? Or buying a movie in a store, downloading to a 1GB ram drive, and watching on your iTV? I think if I was going to the store anyway, I'd probably buy the HD-DVD instead. But for rental it might work.
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น