digitalbiker
Aug 25, 03:31 PM
Over the years I have bought a lot of computers for my business from a lot of different venders. To be honest Apple hardware support has never impressed me! :mad: I have actually had much better support from Dell than from Apple.
As far as .Mac goes it is one of the most poorly supported systems I have ever used in my life. They have a lousey limited faq sheet, common problems, email support is pitiful, and they don't take voice support. .Mac is a joke for $100.00 a year.
In general Apple's entire help system in OS X sucks. Searchs within the context of an application gives you all kinds of crap from every application on the system. Also there is no depth to the system. If your problem isn't the most elementary problem possible (99% of which you can figure out yourself) then it won't be in any of the help files.
As far as .Mac goes it is one of the most poorly supported systems I have ever used in my life. They have a lousey limited faq sheet, common problems, email support is pitiful, and they don't take voice support. .Mac is a joke for $100.00 a year.
In general Apple's entire help system in OS X sucks. Searchs within the context of an application gives you all kinds of crap from every application on the system. Also there is no depth to the system. If your problem isn't the most elementary problem possible (99% of which you can figure out yourself) then it won't be in any of the help files.
gnasher729
Aug 17, 03:44 AM
1. The video cards are underclocked compared to their PC equivalents on the Mac.
Could you give some evidence for that, except that they are underclocked on the MacBook Pro _when they are idle_?
Could you give some evidence for that, except that they are underclocked on the MacBook Pro _when they are idle_?
maclaptop
Apr 11, 05:42 PM
Do you really think they care? Even if they make a phone that doesn't make calls people will think it's the greatest innovation in the history of mankind.
This is so true it's sickening.
The number one function I'd like to see in the upcoming model is a phone that works as well as every other smartphone I own. Then I'd be able to rely on it, and promote it to my primary phone. Id like nothing better.
This is so true it's sickening.
The number one function I'd like to see in the upcoming model is a phone that works as well as every other smartphone I own. Then I'd be able to rely on it, and promote it to my primary phone. Id like nothing better.
shawnce
Nov 28, 07:05 PM
I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth? Huh?
Apple pays the record labels for every song sold via iTMS, a vast majority of the "99 cents" for a song goes to the record labels (or direct to independent artist). iTMS is providing a new sales channel with effectively zero cost to the record labels (one that avoids manufacturing, shipping and stocking of physical units). This is a totally NEW revenue stream that arguable provides the record labels more bang for their buck then prior revenue streams and it is arguable more secure from copyright violations then prior revenue streams (FairPlay DRM). It also more directly connects customers with music (easy to do impulse purchases, etc.).
Now for the other half of your statement... just why should record companies get money for every iPod sold? This type of thinking is in some ways similar to demanding that paint manufactures should get a cut of the profits of every paint brush sold.
As a side note... I support the record companies/artist going after major copyright violators using legal proceedings.
Apple pays the record labels for every song sold via iTMS, a vast majority of the "99 cents" for a song goes to the record labels (or direct to independent artist). iTMS is providing a new sales channel with effectively zero cost to the record labels (one that avoids manufacturing, shipping and stocking of physical units). This is a totally NEW revenue stream that arguable provides the record labels more bang for their buck then prior revenue streams and it is arguable more secure from copyright violations then prior revenue streams (FairPlay DRM). It also more directly connects customers with music (easy to do impulse purchases, etc.).
Now for the other half of your statement... just why should record companies get money for every iPod sold? This type of thinking is in some ways similar to demanding that paint manufactures should get a cut of the profits of every paint brush sold.
As a side note... I support the record companies/artist going after major copyright violators using legal proceedings.
zelet
Aug 25, 04:02 PM
Another person who can never be satisfied.:rolleyes:
Are you telling me somebody who spent thousands of dollars on "premium" hardware doesn't have a right to be pissed when both systems he bought were DOA? That is stupid! Apple should have kissed his ass and gave him a new computer after the second major repair. He was nicer than I would have ever been. I would have gone to the Apple store and caused a HUGE scene in the middle of a busy Saturday about it.
Apple computers are expensive. They are worth it when they work (and they usually do) but when Apple makes a mistake they should correct it better than anybody.
Are you telling me somebody who spent thousands of dollars on "premium" hardware doesn't have a right to be pissed when both systems he bought were DOA? That is stupid! Apple should have kissed his ass and gave him a new computer after the second major repair. He was nicer than I would have ever been. I would have gone to the Apple store and caused a HUGE scene in the middle of a busy Saturday about it.
Apple computers are expensive. They are worth it when they work (and they usually do) but when Apple makes a mistake they should correct it better than anybody.
tyroja00
Sep 19, 11:05 AM
My demanding you to give me a reason has about the same weight as all the people in this thread (and many others) demanding Apple provide them with the machine they think they needed yesterday.
Except we are going to pay Apple a lot of money. What are you paying me?
Except we are going to pay Apple a lot of money. What are you paying me?
Multimedia
Jul 15, 05:02 AM
Here's Link To NTI Dragon Burn for Mac OS X (http://www.ntius.com/default.asp?p=dragonburn/dburn4_main).
Dragon Burn enables Mac desktop and PowerBook notebook computer users to quickly and easily begin producing audio, data, mixed-mode CDs, and DVDs. Dragon Burn's Multi-Burning engine allows users to simultaneously write multiple CDs or DVDs. It also fully supports the newest internal and external drives, including 16x DVD-R drives.Thanks ksz. I checked it out and the multi burning capability is great. But Dragon Burn will not let you write Images which I find incredibly lame. I use Toast 7 a lot and I use it most of the time to write images not to physically burn discs. I would love to be able to write multiple Images with something. But, alas, Dragon Burn is not it. :(http://www.creativemac.com/2001/04_apr/news/toast53.htm
Still, from what I've read you need multiple instances of Toast open. I'll try Disk Utility for burning two images at once when I get a new image that I need to burn.Wow. I had no idea I could have multiple copies of Toast 7 open. Just made a dupe and it works! Thanks Eldorian. I can really push my Quad to further limits now that I know this. Mucho Gracias.
Dragon Burn enables Mac desktop and PowerBook notebook computer users to quickly and easily begin producing audio, data, mixed-mode CDs, and DVDs. Dragon Burn's Multi-Burning engine allows users to simultaneously write multiple CDs or DVDs. It also fully supports the newest internal and external drives, including 16x DVD-R drives.Thanks ksz. I checked it out and the multi burning capability is great. But Dragon Burn will not let you write Images which I find incredibly lame. I use Toast 7 a lot and I use it most of the time to write images not to physically burn discs. I would love to be able to write multiple Images with something. But, alas, Dragon Burn is not it. :(http://www.creativemac.com/2001/04_apr/news/toast53.htm
Still, from what I've read you need multiple instances of Toast open. I'll try Disk Utility for burning two images at once when I get a new image that I need to burn.Wow. I had no idea I could have multiple copies of Toast 7 open. Just made a dupe and it works! Thanks Eldorian. I can really push my Quad to further limits now that I know this. Mucho Gracias.
MacSawdust
Aug 26, 10:40 AM
This nows explains why mine is not valid.
.jpg "wellesley college boston")
Cory Bauer
Apr 12, 07:24 PM
The Final Cut page has already been updated.
No, it hasn't.
No, it hasn't.
.jpg "wellesley college boston")
supremedesigner
Jul 14, 03:31 PM
A new Mac Pro for $1799? Not bad people!!!! In essence Apple is cutting the price of the current Dual Core 2 GHz G5 PowerMac by $200..... The same price as it is on the EDU store.
If you want something cheaper, buy an iMac for Christ's sake! That's why Apple has made them as powerful as they are now. They are meant as a bridge between the "Con-sumer" and the "Pro-sumer". PowerMacs have been and always will be for PROFESSIONALS!!!! Not the weekend warrior who "dabbles" in Photoshop. That's what the iMac is for people!!!
In my opinion and thoughts there will be no difference between these and the current G5 PowerMacs in performance.
As for Dual Optical Drives? AMEN! It is a hassle and waste of HD space when you need to copy a disc, especially Application Discs that you might want to keep in a safe place but have a copy always handy. I'm contemplating buying an external DVD Burner to hook up to my Dual Core G5 PM for these very reasons. I might wait though for a Blu Ray Disc Burner first though.
The thing that perplexes me is the relocation of the Power Supply to the top. This is either bogus info or they know something they aren't letting on about all the Liquid Cooling problems that have been arising lately in the repair world.
Plus would this not put a strain on the power cord since the cord would have its own weight hanging down on it instead of how it currently comes out of the back of the tower and immediately lays on the floor or desk surface? Something's fishy about this.
LOL! It hadn't come out yet and people are still complainin'? That cracked me up :)
If you want something cheaper, buy an iMac for Christ's sake! That's why Apple has made them as powerful as they are now. They are meant as a bridge between the "Con-sumer" and the "Pro-sumer". PowerMacs have been and always will be for PROFESSIONALS!!!! Not the weekend warrior who "dabbles" in Photoshop. That's what the iMac is for people!!!
In my opinion and thoughts there will be no difference between these and the current G5 PowerMacs in performance.
As for Dual Optical Drives? AMEN! It is a hassle and waste of HD space when you need to copy a disc, especially Application Discs that you might want to keep in a safe place but have a copy always handy. I'm contemplating buying an external DVD Burner to hook up to my Dual Core G5 PM for these very reasons. I might wait though for a Blu Ray Disc Burner first though.
The thing that perplexes me is the relocation of the Power Supply to the top. This is either bogus info or they know something they aren't letting on about all the Liquid Cooling problems that have been arising lately in the repair world.
Plus would this not put a strain on the power cord since the cord would have its own weight hanging down on it instead of how it currently comes out of the back of the tower and immediately lays on the floor or desk surface? Something's fishy about this.
LOL! It hadn't come out yet and people are still complainin'? That cracked me up :)
samcraig
Apr 5, 05:48 PM
Nobody's using Blu-Ray, in my experience. It's just another way of sucking money out of home consumers. Everything's done online in terms of delivery...
A very ignorant post. Especially if you value quality. I hardly call providing the best quality video "sucking money out of home consumers"
Or are you one of those that want to insist that streaming "hd" video is just as good as blu-ray. Because if you are - you shouldn't have even weighed in here.
No need to school you on the difference here though unless you come back and tell me you still think there's no difference.
A very ignorant post. Especially if you value quality. I hardly call providing the best quality video "sucking money out of home consumers"
Or are you one of those that want to insist that streaming "hd" video is just as good as blu-ray. Because if you are - you shouldn't have even weighed in here.
No need to school you on the difference here though unless you come back and tell me you still think there's no difference.
matttrick
Sep 19, 12:45 AM
im glad i bought just the other day, itll be within the 14 day return period. i know some people have said they are able to get the restocking fee waived. any tips on this?
iliketyla
Mar 31, 02:39 PM
I've been wanting to say this for a very long time. Google's OS has no advantage over iOS. You could even say it has a disadvantage. Having to create a vanilla code base that needs to function on multiple pieces of hardware is complex, more complexity creates weaker system.
But here's my point. The ONLY ONLY reason why Android market share is anywhere near what it is today is because of the Buy One Get One options at most phone retailers. iOS has NEVER done that and hopefully never will. If you didn't care about the phone or service but needed two "Newer Smart Phones" one for you and one for your wife, why not go with the "Blah Blah" model from Verizon where if I buy one today I get the second for free (two year agreement and activation fees required).
Market share means nothing. This platform is doomed unless Google reins it in and get control over it. If they do, providers will be less willing to work with them, if they don't, by by Android.
My Two Cents.
-LanPhantom
From my own personal experience, I know very few people that have Android phones that took advantage of the BOGO deal.
I personally bought this Android phone because I read reviews, and it was the best lower end phone, and I can't justify spending an enormous amount of money on something I'll upgrade in a year.
I used an iPhone 3GS for a year, and I don't miss it.
It's a very nice phone, but the features that I can use on Android more than make up for any advantages the iPhone had.
Once again, this is just MY opinion, but I figured I'd throw it out there.
But here's my point. The ONLY ONLY reason why Android market share is anywhere near what it is today is because of the Buy One Get One options at most phone retailers. iOS has NEVER done that and hopefully never will. If you didn't care about the phone or service but needed two "Newer Smart Phones" one for you and one for your wife, why not go with the "Blah Blah" model from Verizon where if I buy one today I get the second for free (two year agreement and activation fees required).
Market share means nothing. This platform is doomed unless Google reins it in and get control over it. If they do, providers will be less willing to work with them, if they don't, by by Android.
My Two Cents.
-LanPhantom
From my own personal experience, I know very few people that have Android phones that took advantage of the BOGO deal.
I personally bought this Android phone because I read reviews, and it was the best lower end phone, and I can't justify spending an enormous amount of money on something I'll upgrade in a year.
I used an iPhone 3GS for a year, and I don't miss it.
It's a very nice phone, but the features that I can use on Android more than make up for any advantages the iPhone had.
Once again, this is just MY opinion, but I figured I'd throw it out there.
johnnyturbouk
Apr 7, 10:22 PM
Obviously you know little about retail and accounting.
i know even less - enlighten me pls .........;)
i know even less - enlighten me pls .........;)
daver969
Sep 13, 11:05 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
LarryB08
Apr 8, 08:24 AM
Reminds me of a true story - went into one of those pre-made sandwich shops because I need to feed a horde unexpectedly, and quickly. I asked for all their stock of three different kinds of sandwich. The woman behind the counter said "but sir what will we sell to other people!".
Bizarre way to run a business.
Scenario 1: Store expects 1000 customers. Customer 15 walks in and buys all the store's stock. The remaining 985 customer walk in through the day and are told we have nothing to sell you. These 98.5% of the daily customers never return to the store in the future.
Scenario 2: Store expects 1000 customers and rations stock to serve the needs of the greatest percentage of their daily customers as possible. The great majority of customers are happy and continue to patronize the store in the future.
Scenario 2 above does not seem so bizarre to me.
We are talking business here, business that needs to function over time and not just over one day. All I know is there are a lot of people here who are taking great pleasure trashing a store for their own personal reasons. But the store must serve their overall client base as best as possible and sometimes that may mean being unable to satisfy every specific request every day.
Bizarre way to run a business.
Scenario 1: Store expects 1000 customers. Customer 15 walks in and buys all the store's stock. The remaining 985 customer walk in through the day and are told we have nothing to sell you. These 98.5% of the daily customers never return to the store in the future.
Scenario 2: Store expects 1000 customers and rations stock to serve the needs of the greatest percentage of their daily customers as possible. The great majority of customers are happy and continue to patronize the store in the future.
Scenario 2 above does not seem so bizarre to me.
We are talking business here, business that needs to function over time and not just over one day. All I know is there are a lot of people here who are taking great pleasure trashing a store for their own personal reasons. But the store must serve their overall client base as best as possible and sometimes that may mean being unable to satisfy every specific request every day.
heisetax
Jul 14, 08:27 PM
[QUOTE=bigandy]the size and weight of the power supply makes it damn stupid to put in the top.
top heavy is just idiotic.
i'd love to see dual optical drive bays and the same basic design as the G5. it's a great design, so why the need for change in the first place... :rolleyes:[/QUOTE
I always thought that the power supply was on top because of the heat generated by it. Since heat rises, it wouldn't pass over the rest of the computer on its way out. I still agree with you about the weight part though.
Bill the TaxMan
top heavy is just idiotic.
i'd love to see dual optical drive bays and the same basic design as the G5. it's a great design, so why the need for change in the first place... :rolleyes:[/QUOTE
I always thought that the power supply was on top because of the heat generated by it. Since heat rises, it wouldn't pass over the rest of the computer on its way out. I still agree with you about the weight part though.
Bill the TaxMan
JackSYi
Aug 27, 01:02 PM
Bring on the 13.3 inch MacBook Pro.
moochermaulucci
Apr 6, 05:05 PM
Or...
It could be considered being close minded and afraid of new things.
Just saying, you know?
Yes, it could...
...and then again, maybe not. Brilliant deduction. Great, now we're no further along than we were three posts ago.
It could be considered being close minded and afraid of new things.
Just saying, you know?
Yes, it could...
...and then again, maybe not. Brilliant deduction. Great, now we're no further along than we were three posts ago.
basesloaded190
Apr 6, 11:03 AM
I am shocked that anyone finds this as a positive.
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
You obviously don't know how powerful SB actually is compared to C2D
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
You obviously don't know how powerful SB actually is compared to C2D
hadleydb
Aug 17, 01:15 PM
I need one... or is it more of a want? Need.:eek:
deputy_doofy
Mar 31, 02:47 PM
Smartphone OS, yes (iPhone vs. Android phones).
iOS as whole (iPads + iPods + iPhones + Apple TV) kills Android numbers though. By LARGE margins.
Fixed that! :D
If Apple FAD goes away, where will Google copy from next?
You are delusional if you think Google is not building upon the Apple FAD.
If there's any truth to the Google Android prototype phone being Blackberry-like, then Google is merely pulling a Microsoft by copying Apple's success. Otherwise, why wouldn't Google have continued down that path?
iOS as whole (iPads + iPods + iPhones + Apple TV) kills Android numbers though. By LARGE margins.
Fixed that! :D
If Apple FAD goes away, where will Google copy from next?
You are delusional if you think Google is not building upon the Apple FAD.
If there's any truth to the Google Android prototype phone being Blackberry-like, then Google is merely pulling a Microsoft by copying Apple's success. Otherwise, why wouldn't Google have continued down that path?
lazyrighteye
Aug 11, 10:50 AM
Using TimeMachine, Steve is going to release it two years ago.
That made my Friday... which may actually be a sad comment on things in my world. :D
That made my Friday... which may actually be a sad comment on things in my world. :D
generik
Sep 19, 05:04 AM
I wish this board would block automatically "************" and replace it with "************" so this tired so-called-joke would end someday.
Huh? :confused:
Huh? :confused:
No comments:
Post a Comment