Luph67
Apr 6, 10:59 AM
It's ****ing great option while working at night in bed.
eh, I don't see how it's significant for anything other than aesthetic purposes. If you're working in the dark the display itself is going to provide enough illumination as it is. Just seems like a waste.
eh, I don't see how it's significant for anything other than aesthetic purposes. If you're working in the dark the display itself is going to provide enough illumination as it is. Just seems like a waste.
Bigcase
Apr 8, 07:18 AM
I don't know if anyone has explained Best Buy's actions at all and why they would hold back on selling stock the have yet.
I run a branch for a construction supply company and am judged based on daily and monthly goals.
It doesn't matter if I do three times my monthly goal this month if I don't hit goal at all next month. It doesn't make sense but it is the way business works. I have held orders that come in at the end of the month for the beginning of the next if I have already hit this month's goal so that I get a head start on next month's.
For the manager at Best Buy he probably felt that it served him better to the corporate big wigs if he hit his goal every day rather than pass his goal one day and not reach it the next.
Is it best for the COMPANY or for the CONSUMER? No... But in this world of sales and numbers managers tend to do what will make their bosses happy, which is to make sure that when they check the numbers on the spreadsheet every day they hit their numbers and don't get yelled at.
Im not in sales, but I did use to work at Best Buy, and what your saying makes alot of sense.
I run a branch for a construction supply company and am judged based on daily and monthly goals.
It doesn't matter if I do three times my monthly goal this month if I don't hit goal at all next month. It doesn't make sense but it is the way business works. I have held orders that come in at the end of the month for the beginning of the next if I have already hit this month's goal so that I get a head start on next month's.
For the manager at Best Buy he probably felt that it served him better to the corporate big wigs if he hit his goal every day rather than pass his goal one day and not reach it the next.
Is it best for the COMPANY or for the CONSUMER? No... But in this world of sales and numbers managers tend to do what will make their bosses happy, which is to make sure that when they check the numbers on the spreadsheet every day they hit their numbers and don't get yelled at.
Im not in sales, but I did use to work at Best Buy, and what your saying makes alot of sense.
Quahog
Apr 8, 07:53 AM
I work at Best Buy, and I can tell you this "rumor" is not true.
First, we do not have daily quotas on iPad sales, although we do have overall budget goals as any company would. iPads had no impact on this.
iPad 2's have been extremely hard to keep in stock, and at least for my store and all the stores in my region, they would sell out within hours of receiving a pretty good sized shipment. (Although the Verizon ones dont sell as well as others, they still sell out too) We did not hold anything back... do you think we like the hundreds of calls and dozens of people asking us if we have any in stock? We took care of every customer we could. In checking inventory levels at other stores, it was zero's all the way down the list.
We are experiencing inventory issues with the iPad. Be it simple unexpected demand, the earthquake in Japan, or Apple wanting to take care of customers through their website and retail store before big box stores... I dont know. But stores certainly are not sitting on them.
First, we do not have daily quotas on iPad sales, although we do have overall budget goals as any company would. iPads had no impact on this.
iPad 2's have been extremely hard to keep in stock, and at least for my store and all the stores in my region, they would sell out within hours of receiving a pretty good sized shipment. (Although the Verizon ones dont sell as well as others, they still sell out too) We did not hold anything back... do you think we like the hundreds of calls and dozens of people asking us if we have any in stock? We took care of every customer we could. In checking inventory levels at other stores, it was zero's all the way down the list.
We are experiencing inventory issues with the iPad. Be it simple unexpected demand, the earthquake in Japan, or Apple wanting to take care of customers through their website and retail store before big box stores... I dont know. But stores certainly are not sitting on them.
LC475
Apr 11, 06:49 PM
There's nothing to fear about Apple making FCP less than professional.
The thing to understand is that NLEs never change their basic structure of how editing works, i.e moving clips in the timeline, trimming, etc. Look at Avid - it hasn't changed much at all since the 90s because they know if they did, they would lose their base of users. Avid came in the early 90s, and FCP came in the late 90s. FCP is an improvement to the Avid idea of NLE editing, and it's a good improvement. That's one reason why it became popular. Sure, the GUI might change but the basic way of working will not. After Effects is a good example. The GUI looks totally different than it did on version 5, but you can still work basically the same.
I don't understand what people mean by FCP lagging behind Avid and Adobe. In the last couple years, FCP has been making strong gains in Hollywood. WB, 20th Fox, Paramount have all used FCP on major movies. I worked as an AE on one of them. Professionals like FCP, many movie editors I know like FCP, major post houses use it, and I'm sure after tomorrow we will like it even more.
If anything, FCP has become less of a consumer app and more of a professional one. Hollywood wouldn't have thought of using FCP in 1999 on version 1, but they're using it now. It's become more professional over the last ten years.
With the new technology of thunderbolt, 64bit support, and multithreading support, in addition to iPad support, we should see an awesome upgrade tomorrow.
The thing to understand is that NLEs never change their basic structure of how editing works, i.e moving clips in the timeline, trimming, etc. Look at Avid - it hasn't changed much at all since the 90s because they know if they did, they would lose their base of users. Avid came in the early 90s, and FCP came in the late 90s. FCP is an improvement to the Avid idea of NLE editing, and it's a good improvement. That's one reason why it became popular. Sure, the GUI might change but the basic way of working will not. After Effects is a good example. The GUI looks totally different than it did on version 5, but you can still work basically the same.
I don't understand what people mean by FCP lagging behind Avid and Adobe. In the last couple years, FCP has been making strong gains in Hollywood. WB, 20th Fox, Paramount have all used FCP on major movies. I worked as an AE on one of them. Professionals like FCP, many movie editors I know like FCP, major post houses use it, and I'm sure after tomorrow we will like it even more.
If anything, FCP has become less of a consumer app and more of a professional one. Hollywood wouldn't have thought of using FCP in 1999 on version 1, but they're using it now. It's become more professional over the last ten years.
With the new technology of thunderbolt, 64bit support, and multithreading support, in addition to iPad support, we should see an awesome upgrade tomorrow.
iPaf
Apr 27, 10:02 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; fr-fr) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Your location is nothing compared to what Facebook collects about you :P
Your location is nothing compared to what Facebook collects about you :P
G4DP
Mar 26, 02:13 AM
Some of the comments on this board are inane.
1) Launchpad is the selling point...Really? You think Versions, Resume, Mission Control, OS wide Full Screen App support are not selling points?
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
3) When has Apple released an OS, and not shown new features on the final release keynote?
You thing the additional GUI enabled features in the Server version is worth $500? Others are more expensive because they are actual server class. Not a cheap bolt on.
All the "NEW" features are things that should have been preset since 10.2 at least.
Your clearly Apples ideal customer.
1) Launchpad is the selling point...Really? You think Versions, Resume, Mission Control, OS wide Full Screen App support are not selling points?
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
3) When has Apple released an OS, and not shown new features on the final release keynote?
You thing the additional GUI enabled features in the Server version is worth $500? Others are more expensive because they are actual server class. Not a cheap bolt on.
All the "NEW" features are things that should have been preset since 10.2 at least.
Your clearly Apples ideal customer.
Popeye206
Mar 22, 08:01 PM
My take...
Competition is good.
It will be interesting to see if the Playbook sticks. RIM is losing ground in so many areas and from what my daughter says (who works for one of the cell phone companies) that even with all the nice new goodies in BB's, that they are the smart phone that makes them all grimace. She says it's by far the worst phone to activate to trouble shoot. So, will the Playbook be any different?
Samsung... could they have rushed that one out any quicker? They seem desperate to get a tablet to sell. So much for quality control I'm sure.
Is the new Xoom about ready to be run over two minutes out the gate by other Android devices?
From what I can see, the most damage is not going to come in the Apple arena... the iPad is different with iOS, it's proven (15 million sold and growing fast)... it's going to be the other Android devices. Each of them fighting for a small share of customers who don't want Apple.
I honestly believe most consumers care less about the specs. The geeks on this site do.... but the average person does not care. They care about what they hear and see. They see iPads flying out the door. They know the iPad is slick and works.
I'll go with the Analysts on this one... by the end of Apple will own 70-80% market share and the rest will be a mixed bag of struggling tablet makers.
Competition is good.
It will be interesting to see if the Playbook sticks. RIM is losing ground in so many areas and from what my daughter says (who works for one of the cell phone companies) that even with all the nice new goodies in BB's, that they are the smart phone that makes them all grimace. She says it's by far the worst phone to activate to trouble shoot. So, will the Playbook be any different?
Samsung... could they have rushed that one out any quicker? They seem desperate to get a tablet to sell. So much for quality control I'm sure.
Is the new Xoom about ready to be run over two minutes out the gate by other Android devices?
From what I can see, the most damage is not going to come in the Apple arena... the iPad is different with iOS, it's proven (15 million sold and growing fast)... it's going to be the other Android devices. Each of them fighting for a small share of customers who don't want Apple.
I honestly believe most consumers care less about the specs. The geeks on this site do.... but the average person does not care. They care about what they hear and see. They see iPads flying out the door. They know the iPad is slick and works.
I'll go with the Analysts on this one... by the end of Apple will own 70-80% market share and the rest will be a mixed bag of struggling tablet makers.
lsvtecjohn3
Apr 19, 02:40 PM
wow @ post 2.
apple will have a hard time fighting this in court.
watch this video then
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJZBpumb0B8&feature=related
apple will have a hard time fighting this in court.
watch this video then
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJZBpumb0B8&feature=related
WhySoSerious
Apr 11, 11:40 AM
Hi
With all the Android phones coming out and manufacturers having no specific cycle, the iPhone is really out of date already!
iPhone 1 - 2G
iPhone 2 - adds 3G
iPhone 3 - adds 3GS
Therefore the above three phones are all 'old' regarding what was released around the same time.
iPhone 4 - will be about 18 months old by the time the iPhone 5 comes out.
People will loose interest in Apple iPhones with so many other new releases coming out on a regular basis.
QFT
Apple may innovate and capture an audience at the start of the race, but boy do they sure tapper off in the long stretch and lose market share over time. They should really be pumping out multiple iPhone versions in 6 month increments...same for the iPad. Upgrades don't need to be major, but enough to keep people on the hook for their products.
With all the Android phones coming out and manufacturers having no specific cycle, the iPhone is really out of date already!
iPhone 1 - 2G
iPhone 2 - adds 3G
iPhone 3 - adds 3GS
Therefore the above three phones are all 'old' regarding what was released around the same time.
iPhone 4 - will be about 18 months old by the time the iPhone 5 comes out.
People will loose interest in Apple iPhones with so many other new releases coming out on a regular basis.
QFT
Apple may innovate and capture an audience at the start of the race, but boy do they sure tapper off in the long stretch and lose market share over time. They should really be pumping out multiple iPhone versions in 6 month increments...same for the iPad. Upgrades don't need to be major, but enough to keep people on the hook for their products.
aegisdesign
Sep 13, 11:40 AM
Most people run more than one app at once.
Yes, that's true.
It's also true that most of the time, most people aren't even maxing out ONE core never mind eight.
And when they do, their program won't get any faster unless it's multithreaded and able to run on multiple cores at once.
Yes, that's true.
It's also true that most of the time, most people aren't even maxing out ONE core never mind eight.
And when they do, their program won't get any faster unless it's multithreaded and able to run on multiple cores at once.
Mr. Savage
Apr 7, 10:46 PM
That's nothin'. I remember shortly after the new MacBook Air was released at BB I was playin' around with the demos and was listening to an older man with his teenage daughter talking to the salesman about getting one. Then I noticed they ONLY had the more expensive versions (bigger SSDs) on the price cards. The old guy was oblivious about the different versions and the daughter was spoiled so he agreed to buy her one. When the sales-twerp went into the back to find one I pulled up the inventory right there on the demo model and showed the guy the cheaper model. When the sales-kid came back out the old guy asked him if they had the cheaper model in stock. The kid played dumb and pretended he didn't even know there was such a thing. I helpfully pointed out the one on the inventory screen and its "In Stock" status.
Long story short: kid acts surprised and confused, goes gets one and old guy buys his daughter a $1350 (instead of $1650) computer to update her facebook status with and thanks me for not minding my own business ;)
Long story short: kid acts surprised and confused, goes gets one and old guy buys his daughter a $1350 (instead of $1650) computer to update her facebook status with and thanks me for not minding my own business ;)
jicon
Aug 17, 02:11 AM
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
Does anyone seriously believe games today will show any significant improvement on a Mac Pro?
1. The video cards are underclocked compared to their PC equivalents on the Mac.
2. Generally, you are limited to a framerate of 60Hz anyway.
3. Most games are old ports, and need to run thru Rosetta.
When playing a game on a PC, you have DirectX to take full advantage of the hardware, and your processor is usually tagged consuming any and all cycles it can for the game. On a Mac, multithreading, and sharing the processor among apps seems to be the flow of the computing experience.
I'd predict a single Core2 Duo Extreme would still outdo a dual processor 3.0 Ghz Xeon Mac Pro when memory timings are nearly half of the Xeon on the Core2.
Does anyone seriously believe games today will show any significant improvement on a Mac Pro?
1. The video cards are underclocked compared to their PC equivalents on the Mac.
2. Generally, you are limited to a framerate of 60Hz anyway.
3. Most games are old ports, and need to run thru Rosetta.
When playing a game on a PC, you have DirectX to take full advantage of the hardware, and your processor is usually tagged consuming any and all cycles it can for the game. On a Mac, multithreading, and sharing the processor among apps seems to be the flow of the computing experience.
I'd predict a single Core2 Duo Extreme would still outdo a dual processor 3.0 Ghz Xeon Mac Pro when memory timings are nearly half of the Xeon on the Core2.
greenstork
Jul 14, 04:14 PM
I'm salivating for a new desktop as I have been limping along with my dual 1GHz mirrored drive door (wind tunnel) for the past few years. I'll likely buy a middle to top end Mac Pro as soon as they are released and although I'd love a dual woodcrest, I'll be happy too with a single conroe.
On a related note (rant)...
I think Apple is shooting themselves in the foot not coming out with some sort of digital media center / DVR. Along with a computer and television, it's the one electronic appliance that I cannot live without. The playing field is so ripe too -- TiVo is just establishing itself with cable companies and moving out of satellite, cable company DVR's suck, there is no easy ability to rip a DVD to your computer and put it in a library, there is no easy to use set top box option to buy movies.
Think about DAPs when the iPod came out, it's the same landscape. Sure, there were digital audio players that all paled in comparison to the iPod. I think Apple has that same opportunity with a media center/DVR.
The problem, I presume, is that the MPAA & broadcast association would never let it happen. Apple will never be granted permissions to sell movies if they come up with a device to rip DVD's or record television.
One can always hope. I know Apple could make a device that absolutely blows away everything that's out there right now, and it seems short sighted to not develop a product that begins to merge computers and television, this merger is inevitable. So while everyone's going off about FW800 ports in front and the location of the power supply, I'm wondering where the TV tuner and CableCard slots are.
On a related note (rant)...
I think Apple is shooting themselves in the foot not coming out with some sort of digital media center / DVR. Along with a computer and television, it's the one electronic appliance that I cannot live without. The playing field is so ripe too -- TiVo is just establishing itself with cable companies and moving out of satellite, cable company DVR's suck, there is no easy ability to rip a DVD to your computer and put it in a library, there is no easy to use set top box option to buy movies.
Think about DAPs when the iPod came out, it's the same landscape. Sure, there were digital audio players that all paled in comparison to the iPod. I think Apple has that same opportunity with a media center/DVR.
The problem, I presume, is that the MPAA & broadcast association would never let it happen. Apple will never be granted permissions to sell movies if they come up with a device to rip DVD's or record television.
One can always hope. I know Apple could make a device that absolutely blows away everything that's out there right now, and it seems short sighted to not develop a product that begins to merge computers and television, this merger is inevitable. So while everyone's going off about FW800 ports in front and the location of the power supply, I'm wondering where the TV tuner and CableCard slots are.
KnightWRX
Apr 7, 10:46 AM
but to say that intel forced apple to use the IGP is not correct imo.
No indeed, it's not. Intel forced the whole OEM industry to use their IGP, not just Apple. ;)
No matter how you slice it, for some applications, IGPs make sense. Intel cut out the competence from that market with their shenanigans. And now the consumers pays for it with sub-par graphics processors.
No indeed, it's not. Intel forced the whole OEM industry to use their IGP, not just Apple. ;)
No matter how you slice it, for some applications, IGPs make sense. Intel cut out the competence from that market with their shenanigans. And now the consumers pays for it with sub-par graphics processors.
FasterQuieter
Mar 22, 08:53 PM
This seems to me to be good news in 2 ways:
1. It makes a few foolish people think twice about purchasing an iPad 2, so I can get mine a little sooner.
2. It puts the wind up Apple's behind and they work that little bit harder to get us the iPad 3 with the ultra HD display or iPad 2 Retina Christmas Special or whatever else they might call it.
The iPhone 4 display "changed everything" as Apple like to say, and the sooner they get that thing on the iPad, the better. Then my humdrum life will finally be complete.
1. It makes a few foolish people think twice about purchasing an iPad 2, so I can get mine a little sooner.
2. It puts the wind up Apple's behind and they work that little bit harder to get us the iPad 3 with the ultra HD display or iPad 2 Retina Christmas Special or whatever else they might call it.
The iPhone 4 display "changed everything" as Apple like to say, and the sooner they get that thing on the iPad, the better. Then my humdrum life will finally be complete.
appleguy123
Feb 28, 08:43 PM
No because heterosexuality is the default way the brain works
Isn't it all hormonal mishaps in the womb? Does your God control that? If so, he is predisposing people to sin, and isn't that unfair that not all are exposed to that disposition?
Isn't it all hormonal mishaps in the womb? Does your God control that? If so, he is predisposing people to sin, and isn't that unfair that not all are exposed to that disposition?
epitaphic
Aug 19, 05:53 PM
And I'm not convinced this is only an application problem. When I run Handbrake on the Quad G5 alone it uses just over two cores 203%
So what happened to:
Both Toast and Handbrake can use 4 cores EACH
Looking at the handbrake forums, speeds seem to vary drastically between users with the same machine. Definitely seems to be affected by whatever else you have running or configured in the OS or otherwise. I suppose the "cleanest" install to test is in the Apple store (I'm just assuming they do a clean ghost copy at shutdown or end of day?)
When I ran tests on the Mac Pro at the Apple Store last Saturday between Toast and/or Handbrake, their use of more cores alone and together was much better.
So your benchmarks show the Mac Pro using 15-33% less CPU than the G5? There's no doubt that Woodcrest is a superior chip architecture to the G5 (one would hope after 3 years) and so that's why you're seeing more FPS inspite of less CPU use. But why does it use less cores though? Seems like either its a software problem OR some hardware is being maxed (I/O or FSB perhaps?)
So would it be correct to say that the only app that is even remotely "Quadcore aware" is Toast? It seems like by the time professional apps are made to take advantage of 4 cores we'll probably be on more than 8! :eek:
If only they could build something in the CPU itself that delegates tasks to n cores, we'd all be sorted. :)
So what happened to:
Both Toast and Handbrake can use 4 cores EACH
Looking at the handbrake forums, speeds seem to vary drastically between users with the same machine. Definitely seems to be affected by whatever else you have running or configured in the OS or otherwise. I suppose the "cleanest" install to test is in the Apple store (I'm just assuming they do a clean ghost copy at shutdown or end of day?)
When I ran tests on the Mac Pro at the Apple Store last Saturday between Toast and/or Handbrake, their use of more cores alone and together was much better.
So your benchmarks show the Mac Pro using 15-33% less CPU than the G5? There's no doubt that Woodcrest is a superior chip architecture to the G5 (one would hope after 3 years) and so that's why you're seeing more FPS inspite of less CPU use. But why does it use less cores though? Seems like either its a software problem OR some hardware is being maxed (I/O or FSB perhaps?)
So would it be correct to say that the only app that is even remotely "Quadcore aware" is Toast? It seems like by the time professional apps are made to take advantage of 4 cores we'll probably be on more than 8! :eek:
If only they could build something in the CPU itself that delegates tasks to n cores, we'd all be sorted. :)
Multimedia
Jul 15, 05:15 AM
I prefer the Simpsons' parody of that cartoon:
"...and I'll make Ted Kennedy pay, if he fights back I'll say that he's gay."
But seriously, the $1799 price point is a step in the right direction. If we could get it down to $1599 or <gasp> $1499, then that would be the de facto mini tower so many have clamored for. I would like a redesigned case, but that'll come eventually.
Sometimes the right price can make a person forget about what might have been.We have that already on the Refurbished page. :) Dual Core 2GHz G5 is only $1699 there. Quad only $2799. So your dream of $1499 will come when the 2GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Pro hits the refurb page - which, according to recent history, should happen before Christmas.I believe that the MacBook was on the refurb page in around 3-4 weeks. The iMac Core Duo took AGES though.Yes MacBook broke the speed record for shift to the refurb page in record time. Right now everything is up there except the 17" MacBook Pros. My Quad made it there in only 3 months last Winter.
"...and I'll make Ted Kennedy pay, if he fights back I'll say that he's gay."
But seriously, the $1799 price point is a step in the right direction. If we could get it down to $1599 or <gasp> $1499, then that would be the de facto mini tower so many have clamored for. I would like a redesigned case, but that'll come eventually.
Sometimes the right price can make a person forget about what might have been.We have that already on the Refurbished page. :) Dual Core 2GHz G5 is only $1699 there. Quad only $2799. So your dream of $1499 will come when the 2GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Pro hits the refurb page - which, according to recent history, should happen before Christmas.I believe that the MacBook was on the refurb page in around 3-4 weeks. The iMac Core Duo took AGES though.Yes MacBook broke the speed record for shift to the refurb page in record time. Right now everything is up there except the 17" MacBook Pros. My Quad made it there in only 3 months last Winter.
MacBoobsPro
Jul 20, 08:43 AM
I got it...
Octopros :D
Octopros :D
AndroidfoLife
Apr 6, 04:42 PM
Upper Middle Class FTW!
Poor college student for the win.
I have to be a part time street pharmacist to pay for my tech additions
Poor college student for the win.
I have to be a part time street pharmacist to pay for my tech additions
KnightWRX
Apr 7, 10:46 AM
but to say that intel forced apple to use the IGP is not correct imo.
No indeed, it's not. Intel forced the whole OEM industry to use their IGP, not just Apple. ;)
No matter how you slice it, for some applications, IGPs make sense. Intel cut out the competence from that market with their shenanigans. And now the consumers pays for it with sub-par graphics processors.
No indeed, it's not. Intel forced the whole OEM industry to use their IGP, not just Apple. ;)
No matter how you slice it, for some applications, IGPs make sense. Intel cut out the competence from that market with their shenanigans. And now the consumers pays for it with sub-par graphics processors.
Dagless
Aug 18, 05:36 AM
Sweet Mary and the orphans if that thing gets near to my entertainment centre I'll kill it.
grum
Sep 19, 08:11 AM
It gets annoying. Why? Because it's true and most people don't want to admit it.
In a few cases here and there, the extra processor power/speed is going to help. But for a majority of people buying a MacBook, they're not going to be burning home-made DVD's, doing intense Music compositions, or using it for hard-core gaming. They're going to SURF and WRITE.
As for the "resale" value, again, most people who are buying a used MacBook are NOT going to ask "is it a Merom?" They're going to ask how nice the case is, how much use it's gotten, and how much it is, and that's it.
Everybody likes to play "ooo, I'm the hard-core computing whiz and I need the BEST out there", but I bet you if you took an honest poll out there of everyone who's answered this thread, you'd find at least 75% these Apple fans have no need for for the extra speed, they just want it because it's "cool" and "fast" and it's the latest thing out there.
You may be right to a certain extent, but l i assumed that most people who want a Macbook Pro are going to be using it for intensive stuff - I was under the impressions that Macs are the platform of choice for a lot of graphics professionals etc so the high end line would have a lot of those kind of ppl buying. Granted the difference in speed will probably be fairly minimal, but when you are spending a load of cash on a top-of-the line notebook, why shouldnt you expect to have the latest and greatest technology available? It also seems quite likely they might either make them cheaper, or offer more RAM on the base model etc. so buying now unless you really have to seems foolish.
Im also not sure about your point on the resale value, i would imagine pro users probably would be concerned about which processor it had in it.
In a few cases here and there, the extra processor power/speed is going to help. But for a majority of people buying a MacBook, they're not going to be burning home-made DVD's, doing intense Music compositions, or using it for hard-core gaming. They're going to SURF and WRITE.
As for the "resale" value, again, most people who are buying a used MacBook are NOT going to ask "is it a Merom?" They're going to ask how nice the case is, how much use it's gotten, and how much it is, and that's it.
Everybody likes to play "ooo, I'm the hard-core computing whiz and I need the BEST out there", but I bet you if you took an honest poll out there of everyone who's answered this thread, you'd find at least 75% these Apple fans have no need for for the extra speed, they just want it because it's "cool" and "fast" and it's the latest thing out there.
You may be right to a certain extent, but l i assumed that most people who want a Macbook Pro are going to be using it for intensive stuff - I was under the impressions that Macs are the platform of choice for a lot of graphics professionals etc so the high end line would have a lot of those kind of ppl buying. Granted the difference in speed will probably be fairly minimal, but when you are spending a load of cash on a top-of-the line notebook, why shouldnt you expect to have the latest and greatest technology available? It also seems quite likely they might either make them cheaper, or offer more RAM on the base model etc. so buying now unless you really have to seems foolish.
Im also not sure about your point on the resale value, i would imagine pro users probably would be concerned about which processor it had in it.
mjsanders5uk
Apr 5, 05:02 PM
and Mac Pros!
and entry level MacBook!
and Mac minis!
and ...
Not again..
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
and entry level MacBook!
and Mac minis!
and ...
Not again..
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
No comments:
Post a Comment