Slashdot Mirror


Apple Updates iMac, iLife, .Mac

Apple just announced new iMacs. They are aluminum and come in 20" (two models) and 24". There's a new view called "Events" in iPhoto that should make it easier to deal with large photo libraries. Apple's .Mac service is enhanced with .Mac Web Gallery, which integrates with the new iTunes and also the iPhone. It's a Web 2.0 app now. And iMovie is being replaced by a completely new app of the same name. Steve Jobs claimed that with it you can put together a 5-minute movie in 30 minutes, and he demo'ed that from the stage. iWeb, iDVD, and GarageBand get new features too. And .Mac subscribers get 10 GB of storage. Here is Engadget's blow-by-blow coverage, and Wired's.

528 comments

  1. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by ben0207 · · Score: 1

    So gushingly glad you made the effort to post that.

    New iMac looks pretty sweet, though not yet convinced by that keyboard.

    --
    cmd-q.co.uk - some sort of stupid fucking internet bullshit
  2. Why is this here now? by 0racle · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    The event is going on for another hour still. They just added that they're updating iWork too. Damn, talk about jumping the gun.

    --
    "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    1. Re:Why is this here now? by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      Why not? That way we can put updates on for an hour. Sounds like rumors of he Mac Mini's demise were premature. They just announced an update for it.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    2. Re:Why is this here now? by TrentC · · Score: 1

      The Mac Mini is getting Core 2 Duo processors! Sweet! But the store page still says 802.11g, not 802.11n. Is this a "you need our 'enabler' to get 802.11n" thing or are they not going to 802.11n for the Mini?

      The answer to this will determine if I snap one up or save a couple of months for an iMac.

    3. Re:Why is this here now? by Trillan · · Score: 1

      Probably doesn't support -N. I don't see anything in the new Mini that implies any motherboard improvements.

    4. Re:Why is this here now? by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      iirc, the 802.11x and bluetooth card was a daughter cared, so no need for a MB redesign. Looks like it still has the 950 graphics, though. Oh, well.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    5. Re:Why is this here now? by Trillan · · Score: 1

      Hmm. I don't really know. I know it was on a daughtercard at one point, but I'm not sure that was still true of the latest model. There's been a couple updates to the Mini since any of the wireless was optional. I guess we'll have to see.

    6. Re:Why is this here now? by YU5333021 · · Score: 1

      On Apple's spec page for mac-mini, the operational limit is listed at 10,000 ft. What the hell? The thing is made out of laptop parts. If I modded a mini into some kind of a Russian looking laptop (an LCD screen glued on top of it, and a whole thing bolted to a car battery) would this thing explode as soon as we reached the cruising altitude (provided they'd let me on a plane in the first place)?

      If laptops are rated at least 15,000 ft, what happened to the other 5,oooft? Does this mean I can go deep diving, or at least snorkeling with a mini?

      The answer to THAT will determine if I snap one up or save a couple of months for an iMac.

    7. Re:Why is this here now? by HUADPE · · Score: 1

      It could be a heat thing. High up air is less dense and doesn't conduct heat as well. So if you ran your mac mini at 100% processor usage at 12k feet, it might overheat, even though the same usage at 2000 ft wouldn't cause an overheat. Mac mini doesn't have an external vent fan so it can be more sensitive.

      --
      This sig has not been evaluated by the FDA. It is not designed to diagnose, treat, prevent, or cure any disease.
    8. Re:Why is this here now? by flosofl · · Score: 1

      The version prior to this announcement is a daughter card for both 802.11x and Bluetooth (they're in opposite corners). I know because I opened mine up to add more memory and a larger hard drive.

      --
      "This calls for a very special blend of psychology and extreme violence" - Vyvyan "The Young Ones"
    9. Re:Why is this here now? by Trillan · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the info. :)

    10. Re:Why is this here now? by doh123 · · Score: 1

      you do realize that they are talking about really being at that altitude, pressure wise and everything. Being in an Airplane at 10,000 feet and being on a mountain top thats 10,000 feet you think is the same? You do realize that airplanes are pressurized with an inside atmosphere thats maintained to be a ALOT less than the planes real altitude. Try flying a plane at 10,000 feet with the door open and see how good you feel, let alone your laptop usage.

  3. Apple's website not updated? by Jon+Abbott · · Score: 1

    I checked apple.com and haven't seen any updates yet. I think this is the first time in years where a product announcement has been made and their website wasn't updated at the same exact moment. :^)

    1. Re:Apple's website not updated? by Rebelgecko · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They're probably waiting until Steve Jobs is done announcing new products so there are no "spoilers."

      --
      CATS/Diebold '08- All your vote are belong to us!
    2. Re:Apple's website not updated? by 0racle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The store went offline just before it started, this is exactly how things are usually handled.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    3. Re:Apple's website not updated? by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      They're probably waiting until Steve Jobs is done announcing new products

      They may be waiting a while. Sometimes it seems thats all Steve Jobs ever *does*.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
  4. Finally by Lockejaw · · Score: 4, Funny

    And .Mac subscribers get 10 GB of storage.
    Yay, now there's enough space to actually put something there!
    --
    (IANAL)
    1. Re:Finally by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Yay, now there's enough space to actually put something there!

      They stillmissed it by an order of magnitude. Maybe next year.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Finally by coren2000 · · Score: 1

      Agreed, Xdrive will give you 50G of storage space for $120/year.

      http://www.xdrive.com/additional_storage.jsp

    3. Re:Finally by coren2000 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Idrive will give you 150G of storage for $49.95/year

      http://www.idrive.com/pricing.htm

    4. Re:Finally by RocketScientist · · Score: 1

      Is it just me or is Apple still trying to sell me something that I can get from other sources at no cost? .Mac is nothing more than google's web apps, all bundled. It's gmail + picasa + YouTube + bookmark sync. For $99/year. Oh, and it does backup (slowly). Yay.

      I'd pay $15/year for it if it wasn't ad supported. I won't pay $99/year for it, that's just silly. I don't object to paying for online services, but I think Apple's pricepoint is way to high for users who know about alternatives.

    5. Re:Finally by pressman · · Score: 1

      My gawd, man?! What the hell are you posting on the your web servers? (I suspect lots of illegal files of one type or another)

      --
      Pooty tweet
    6. Re:Finally by tf23 · · Score: 1

      With the _was_current_yesterday version of iWeb, when you added graphics to a webpage, it copied the original file in entirety to the webpage. When someone viewed it, it's resized. So all those photos you took in raw that were 6-12MB were going up there fairly large.

      I hope they've changed this with the new version of the suite.

      The best option that I found was to export the images you want from iPhoto/Aperture, to a directory, re-sized (and renamed if that's what you want) then drag and drop them into iWeb. But that's a pita.

    7. Re:Finally by tf23 · · Score: 1

      Show me where you can get all the syncing of all the app's data from one or more machines, and all the application's data integration, for free. I'm sure many people would drop .mac very quickly once you point where that's available.

      Until then, I find the convenience of .mac worthy of it's cost to me. And if you search around you can find .Mac packages for-sale on amazon, ebay, etc, for cheaper then what it'll cost you directly from Apple. But like everything else, your time is money. Some people just don't bother trying to save the $10 to $20 on it and set it to auto-renew, figuring that the time you spend deal-searching is more well-spent doing something else. YMMV.

    8. Re:Finally by battery111 · · Score: 1

      Indeed, this is one place where I felt apple was really lagging. While I am a .Mac subscriber, for the ease of collaboration it offers, I never felt the iDisk very useful, since it was so small. I only used it to back up my user preferences and backed up my actual files to another, larger harddrive on an old computer I now use as a server. Finally, it is actually a useful amount of space, not as large as I would like, and I feel perhaps it should be for the $100 a year I pay, but still not too bad. My gripe with the new keyboard is this: The wired version is a full size keyboard, while the wireless version removes everything to the right of the return key. I HATE not having a 10-key pad, and I use the keys directly above the arrow keys alot too, so this instantly made me decide not to get it. I don't really get the reasoning for this other than to fit in with a media center type configuration, but then that sorta steps on the apple TV's toes, so I really don't know what they were going for there.

    9. Re:Finally by NatasRevol · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't think you're putting one and one together there.

      The wireless keyboard IS FOR the Apple TV. They just haven't announced it yet.

      The wired keyboard is for when you're sitting right in front of your iMac.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    10. Re:Finally by battery111 · · Score: 1

      ah, my mistake. Rather confusing, as my current bluetooth keyboard is nearly identical to the old wired keyboard. It does make sense, but I would like it if they made a wireless version of the full keyboard in the new style. It contributes to my uncluttered look on my desktop, and when I watch a movie on my mac, gives me control from the couch, as I am too cheap to buy an apple TV. Rather I spend my money on frivolous upgrades to my already fine system:)

    11. Re:Finally by NoNickNameForMe · · Score: 1

      For a Media PC type environment, the wireless keyboard should really be a built in trackball or touchpad so that you won't need to use a separate (and easy to lose) wireless mouse. That's my pet peeve with current wireless keyboards available in the market. Bluetooth seems to be a logical choice though. Hopefully it's more robust than the existing IRDA and RF links which are pretty flakey.

    12. Re:Finally by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Seriously first time I read thru it I read it like 10GB/month or so, 10GB isn't much, even less so with videos, why can't Apple help people set up their own .mac service? Yeah I know, because they want to make money of it, but anyway.

      Also .mac should have a free version for everyone with a mac.

    13. Re:Finally by dwightk · · Score: 1

      you also get a surprise "your HD has 10GB less space on it" if you have iDisk Syncing on... The local mirror doesn't grow as you add info, it just carves out 10GB...

      --
      Like anyone can even know that
  5. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by radicalskeptic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    not yet convinced by that keyboard.

    You know, I was thinking the same thing.

    A lot of people dislike the MacBook keyboards. They look nice, but the keys don't travel far enough for some people, which messes up the tactile feedback. And these new keyboards look very similar to the MacBook keyboards, plus they're extremely thin, which would also suggest a short travel distance for the keys.

    But of course, until I check them out next week at the Apple store, it's all speculation.

    --
    WARNING: If accidentally read, induce vomiting.
  6. I'll wait for an updated mini by mgabrys_sf · · Score: 0

    I'm not really into all-in-ones at present since all I do is plug my screen into my tower, laptop, or mini at present.

    HOWever - if Apple did manage to introduce something along the lines of this bit of fan-fic (with OS interface extensions to match), I'd be drooling, barking at the moon and standing in line:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vxa3zHdRxxA

    Still, it's a nice update.

    1. Re:I'll wait for an updated mini by dal20402 · · Score: 1

      I'm not really into all-in-ones either, but you can plug your screen into an iMac and use both at once (up to 1920x1200).

    2. Re:I'll wait for an updated mini by jimstapleton · · Score: 1

      I think the point may be more along the lines of having only one screen.

      Ex: he only has the desk space of one monitor taken up, even with 3 computers. (or in my case, four - I wouldn't buy an iMac if I were to buy a Mac, for the same reasons). The fix would be to have teh iMac screen allowed to switch to external input rather than just the mac that it is part of. I.E. use with a KVM.

      --
      34486853790
      Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
    3. Re:I'll wait for an updated mini by kris_lang · · Score: 1, Informative

      There is also a new updated mini also with Core 2 duo processor, however it seems to only have firewire 400, not firewire 800.

      http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html

      I'm waiting for Leopard in october, so I hope to see if the Core-2-Duo processor bugs will be problematic with the updated mini before I buy it.

      'stuck with a g4' kl

    4. Re:I'll wait for an updated mini by jcr · · Score: 3, Informative

      They did update the Mini. As of today, the only 32-bit computer that Apple's selling is the iPhone.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    5. Re:I'll wait for an updated mini by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      the imacs look lovely for those who only have one machine on thier desk but for those that have more than one machine and dont have space for a monitor per machine they are totally unsuitable. All of apples midrange machines have built in monitors :(.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    6. Re:I'll wait for an updated mini by mgabrys_sf · · Score: 1

      Looks the same to me. This iMac update seems more substantial somehow even if it's just a new color scheme, glass front and size.

      Would be nice if the Mini got a cosmetic facelift as well eh?

    7. Re:I'll wait for an updated mini by tf23 · · Score: 1

      Yes, f/w 800 and 802N would've been nice. Those changes, along with a bump in the video would've had me ordering one. Ah well, maybe next round.

    8. Re:I'll wait for an updated mini by rthille · · Score: 1

      I like the idea of having colored ones like the shuffle.

      Of course what I really want is a 'maxi' or 'medium', which is like a Mini, but has (room for) two 3.5" drives (and can boot from a RAID mirror), and FW-800 and/or eSATA for fast external storage... Ideally, it looks like a Mini but is twice as tall or something...

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    9. Re:I'll wait for an updated mini by toddestan · · Score: 3, Informative

      They did update the Mini. As of today, the only 32-bit computer that Apple's selling is the iPhone.

      *COUGH*AppleTV*COUGH*

    10. Re:I'll wait for an updated mini by jcr · · Score: 1

      Ah, right.. I forgot about the TV, and the iPod, too. At any rate, there are no more 32-bit or single-processor Macs in the lineup now.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    11. Re:I'll wait for an updated mini by Synonymous+Cowherd · · Score: 1

      I have been using a Mini for development for about a year and a half, but I am at the point where it has become so frustrating that I need to upgrade. Not only has my build time grown longer, IDE responsiveness slower, but I also bought a bigger monitor and therefore lost some available memory due to the need for more "video ram". Currently the Mini is hooked up to a four way KVM, along with my Windows development machine and my server.

      I really wish there was a Mac that was in between the Pro and the iMac. What I want is the guts of the high end iMac, with a dedicated video card, in a regular case with no monitor. Does anyone else feel the same?

      I know it is possible to piddle around and make a decent approximation of a MacPro with a hacked version of OS X for half the price. But I would rather have a legitimate version of OS X on a machine that I didn't have to spend a day putting together and patching kexts on.

  7. That time of the year again by hcdejong · · Score: 4, Funny

    "On the morning of Steve Jobs's keynote presentation, the online Apple store grinds to a halt as Mac-heads set their browsers to refresh every 15 seconds."

    (from the Apple Product Life Cycle)

    1. Re:That time of the year again by Bootle · · Score: 1

      Hmm, that explains why they just take it down beforehand with a "We'll be back soon" soon

      They've given up

    2. Re:That time of the year again by roaddemon · · Score: 1

      You think Mac-heads could do that?

  8. New iMac keyboard by Rebelgecko · · Score: 1

    The iMac will also come with a new Bluetooth keyboard that will look like this prototype./a

    --
    CATS/Diebold '08- All your vote are belong to us!
    1. Re:New iMac keyboard by hcdejong · · Score: 1

      Almost. They've announced two keyboards: a small (laptop layout, more or less) BT keyboard, and a full-size wired keyboard that looks like the Engadget photos.

    2. Re:New iMac keyboard by mzs · · Score: 1

      Why can't the BT one have some kind of pointing device built-in? Then it would have been perfect for using from the couch. I guess since the iMac does not have any typical (VGA/DVI/HDMI) video in it is not really intended to be used that way.

    3. Re:New iMac keyboard by rthille · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just switch to emacs. Pointing devices, we have no need of pointing devices...

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    4. Re:New iMac keyboard by Glytch · · Score: 1

      Just switch to emacs. Pointing devices, we have no need of pointing devices...

      I'm not sure that OSX has been ported to the Emacs OS yet. We might have to wait for 23.0 for that.

    5. Re:New iMac keyboard by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1
      Emacs does graphics now?

      I knew it was powerful but I'm impressed. Maybe I don't need Photoshop after all.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    6. Re:New iMac keyboard by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      I guess since the iMac does not have any typical (VGA/DVI/HDMI) video in it is not really intended to be used that way. Not sure what you mean exactly, but the iMac supports a second monitor for viewing, either mirroring or extending. The monitor can be DVI, VGA, or S-video. HDMI, probably not yet.
      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    7. Re:New iMac keyboard by Bluesman · · Score: 1

      Obviously you've never used Postscript as God intended.

      Photoshop is for losers who need to constantly "see" the image that they're working on.

      --
      If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
    8. Re:New iMac keyboard by Lockejaw · · Score: 1

      You mean these?

      --
      (IANAL)
    9. Re:New iMac keyboard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is unfortunate that they chose to make the Bluetooth keyboard so small.

      I want a wireless keyboard for my desktop to avoid the wire, but I don't want the crippled layout they force on you with that tiny keyboard.

      No separate page up, page down, home and end keys? WTF? How am I supposed to code?

  9. Geez by iamdrscience · · Score: 4, Funny

    Can we wait until the press event is over before an article is posted about it? At present isn't there still a product on stage under black cloth? Have you ever known something hidden underneath a cloak of black cloth to not be important?

    1. Re:Geez by Jeek+Elemental · · Score: 1

      bet its the stone tablet someone handed to Steve while he was out climbing. sorry, iTablet.

    2. Re:Geez by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Have you ever known something hidden underneath a cloak of black cloth to not be important?
      Windows Vista.
    3. Re:Geez by phalse+phace · · Score: 2, Informative

      The new iMacs are underneath the black cloth. Steve just covered them up after he showed them off.

    4. Re:Geez by iamdrscience · · Score: 1

      That's what I would have thought based on the pictures on Engadget, but prior to this article being posted, I caught a report on CNBC where they were talking about the new iMacs and also mentioned that there was an item under a black cloth that had yet to be revealed.

      It's possible that CNBC made a mistake though, but I believe they had a correspondant at the press event. In any case, at the time this article was posted the event wasn't over, so it's still a little strange that it got posted.

    5. Re:Geez by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Have you ever known something hidden underneath a cloak of black cloth to not be important?" Not sure I agree with your logic here.

    6. Re:Geez by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Oh, great. I can see it now.

      Thou shall covet they neighbors iPhone.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    7. Re:Geez by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      It could be a tray of cookies for all the guests afterwards. How else do you think they get people to come to these things? Seriously, have you ever seen a shot of the audience at WWDC? You can see it on the faces of all the programmers. They're all waiting for Steve to finish to there will be cake and punch.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    8. Re:Geez by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever watched a daytime game show?

    9. Re:Geez by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 5, Funny

      Have you ever known something hidden underneath a cloak of black cloth to not be important?

      Goths.

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    10. Re:Geez by n3tcat · · Score: 2, Funny

      /me roles 1D20 to see if your insult has any effect

  10. Software's the name of the game by solar_blitz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    With their spreadsheet application and upgrade to Pages to include a word processor, it looks like Apple wants to establish an entire office productivity suite. I wonder if it will be a successor to WriteNow in the near future?

    1. Re:Software's the name of the game by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 1

      Allow me to suggest that they improve their graph making software.

      It pains me to see a company so concerned with aesthetics put together a graph like the one Engadget has a photo of. I'd think the Apple Corporation could afford a Tufte book.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
  11. It's a Web 2.0 app now... by Biff+Stu · · Score: 5, Funny

    But is it backwards compatible with Web 1.0?

    Some of us Luddites are a bit slow to upgrade.

    1. Re:It's a Web 2.0 app now... by RockoTDF · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I smell a new meme....

      --
      There is more to science than physics!

      www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com
    2. Re:It's a Web 2.0 app now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "But is it backwards compatible with Web 1.0?"

      You mean: Does it "degrade gracefully" -- i.e., still work sort-of -- if you haven't got good JavaScript support?

      Anyone's guess. Wait for an example to be posted and visit it with whatever it is you're browsing with. To be frank, there's a lot of AJAX stuff that doesn't work with Safari 2: Apple have been late to this game even if they are leapfrogging ahead now.

    3. Re:It's a Web 2.0 app now... by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 1

      But is it backwards compatible with Web 1.0?

      Yes, but I've heard that it does it via software emulation, so you may want to avoid it.

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    4. Re:It's a Web 2.0 app now... by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Screw that! I'm still using Lynx, so it better be backward compatible with Web 0.2!

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  12. Re:I know I say this every time, but... by coren2000 · · Score: 1

    D-nyd.

  13. Seriously. by radicalskeptic · · Score: 1

    They also updated the Mac Mini.

    "Didn't mention Mac mini today, how is it doing?"

    Tim: "We're refreshing the Mac mini today."

    --
    WARNING: If accidentally read, induce vomiting.
  14. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by dal20402 · · Score: 1

    Personally, I think short key travel is more ergonomic, although I'd prefer to see contoured keys (as on MBP and most other laptops) rather than the flat MacBook-style keys. After typing mostly on laptops for the last couple years, the long travel on desktop keyboards makes my hands hurt.

  15. Re:I know I say this every time, but... by Jethro · · Score: 1

    And I'll keep asking for it!

    --


    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
  16. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    They look nice, but...
    This seems to be a common phrase wherever Apple products are concerned.
  17. iphone update? by venicebeach · · Score: 1

    "Out with your iPhone, we've added "Send to Web Gallery" on your iPhone. Pick one, emails to special address, that photo will show up on your web gallery. Can tell friends about it, View others' web galleries right on your iPhone, great iPhone experience, fully integrated."
    Does this mean we're getting an iPhone update?
    1. Re:iphone update? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope the option is already there.. is you are a .mac subscriber. wasn't there during lunch time.

    2. Re:iphone update? by illumin8 · · Score: 1

      "Out with your iPhone, we've added "Send to Web Gallery" on your iPhone. Pick one, emails to special address, that photo will show up on your web gallery. Can tell friends about it, View others' web galleries right on your iPhone, great iPhone experience, fully integrated."
      Does this mean we're getting an iPhone update?

      No you dummy, he just said "Pick one, emails to special address, that photo will show up on your web gallery." You can already email pictures right from the iPhone. For all kinds of fun, figure out your friends and family members "special email address" and start uploading their old spring break photos from college to the "grandkids first memories" gallery.
      --
      "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
    3. Re:iphone update? by venicebeach · · Score: 1

      I know you can email them. But he actually said "we've added "Send to Web Gallery" on your iPhone". That to me sounds like it is going to actually say that as on option for the photo. And, according to the other reply to my post, it does for those with .mac subs.

    4. Re:iphone update? by rollthelosindice · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually its a new feature that just automatically showed up on my iphone when looking thru the photos library. So I'm not sure who the "dummy" is here in this thread. in summation, no new iphone update, but OP is not dumb for asking.

  18. I got a small chuckle from.... by Schnoogs · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...this quote. "There are some people who still want to make DVDs" I guess these's a fringe movement of people who want to cater to the 100 million or so DVD players out there! ;) Someone tell these people that DVD is soooooooooooo last year! Other than that everything looked pretty solid.

    1. Re:I got a small chuckle from.... by Otter+Escaping+North · · Score: 1

      "There are some people who still want to make DVDs" I guess these's a fringe movement of people who want to cater to the 100 million or so DVD players out there! ;) Someone tell these people that DVD is soooooooooooo last year! Other than that everything looked pretty solid.

      Earlier this year I wanted to get an iMovie of the littlest Otter sent to my grandmother...since they thoughtlessly did not include iVHS to their media suite, I was forced to hook it up myself. Thank goodness for the analog hole!

      Yeah, I think there'll be a market for iDVD for a while. Hell, there's a market for GarageBand. ;P

      --
      Running Windows^H^H^H^H^H^H^H OSX and Linux in the home. (I don't have time for Solitaire any more.)
    2. Re:I got a small chuckle from.... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Well, DVD is kind of constraining. If you have a device that you can just plug into any TV, then you don't have to deal with any sort of format limitations. As long as your transport device can play the file and feed it through a suitable video output, you don't need to know what format it's in.

      DVD's are just will dealing with the old foggies you know that haven't moved on to ipods or MythTV.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    3. Re:I got a small chuckle from.... by metamatic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      People still want to make DVDs? Go figure.

      I've yet to see a better way to get widescreen standard definition video to my family. If there's one I'm missing, I hope Steve Jobs will enlighten us.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    4. Re:I got a small chuckle from.... by Professor_UNIX · · Score: 1

      I'm sure someone would say AppleTV, but that's the stupidest device I've ever seen. It doesn't have SVIDEO or Composite outputs, only HDMI, yet it's not powerful enough to play HDTV resolution video! Why Steve? Why? Throw an SVIDEO output on the god damn thing and I'd probably buy one for a MythTV frontend, but I'm not going to go out and replace my 32" CRT with an HDTV just to play standard definition television!

    5. Re:I got a small chuckle from.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AppleTV has composite output. I use it with my TV.

    6. Re:I got a small chuckle from.... by Reaperducer · · Score: 1

      No SVideo? Maybe because AppleTV isn't a Sony device from the early 90's.

      No composite? Maybe because the AppleTV isn't a Commodore 64.

      As he's stated before, Apple skates to where the puck WILL BE, not where it has been.
      Do they even sell TVs without HDMI or DVI anymore?

      --
      -- I'm old enough to have lived through six different meanings of the word "hacker."
    7. Re:I got a small chuckle from.... by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      I think the comment was made either ironically, idealistically, or both. Apple likes to think of itself as pushing the world past "what is" and towards "what can and should be", and when Jobs makes remarks like that, he's just trying to subtly tell everyone that using physical media to move videos around is a very 20th century idea and we should be past it by now. That said, they're still supporting DVD, which means they aren't forcing the issue so much as putting a subtle "Apple way of doing things" subtext to their presentation.

      During the iPhone presentation, he made a similar remark about how the iPhone lets you tap people to call them, but there's still a keypad for people who want to do things the old-fashioned way. Of course, keypads weren't really old-fashioned yet, but the point is that the iPhone is so advanced that even the keypad is a silly anachronism.

      I should note that, while I do agree with some of Apple's (and Jobs') vision on these things, my point isn't that "Apple is a visionary company that lives in a better future and wants to bring us along" so much as "Jobs is an expert salesman who likes to position Apple as a visionary company that lives in a better future and wants to bring us along".

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    8. Re:I got a small chuckle from.... by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      Save that crap for when AppleTV supports 1080p, and when all the movies and TV shows I download from iTunes are in 1080p too. Apple skated straight into a body check on this one.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    9. Re:I got a small chuckle from.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As he's stated before, Apple skates to where the puck WILL BE, not where it has been.
      And a number of times, they've been where they thought the puck would be, and it wasn't there.
    10. Re:I got a small chuckle from.... by Schnoogs · · Score: 0

      I just wish Apple would focus on what people want and need not what looks cool. Physical media is here to stay for a while. Until everyone has fiber optic connections and terrabytes of storage space we're gonna continue investing in DVDs or in my case HDDVDs and BluRay because theres no way I can stream 1080p and I certainly can't store that many on my 300 gig hard drive. Thats like 6 BluRay movies and I already own more than that.

    11. Re:I got a small chuckle from.... by tf23 · · Score: 1

      Wow, how much bandwidth do you have?

      If all the movies Apple has available where the full 1080p wouldn't that eat up a lot of bandwidth to xfer each one? If you have a 2 hour 1080p movie, what's the smallest you can compress that to that it won't look like shit?

      If I'm not mistaken, most "HD" broadcasts by television stations in the US are mostly 720p.

    12. Re:I got a small chuckle from.... by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      Yeah, yeah. Well, guess what, most people don't have HDTV's yet, either. The post I was originally replying to tried to say "it's okay that AppleTV only has HDMI, because it's from THE FUTURE!". I was calling bullshit on that, not actually suggesting that storage and bandwidth were viable for HD video downloads by now.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    13. Re:I got a small chuckle from.... by toddestan · · Score: 1

      A lot of people might want to put together a DVD, put it on a shelf so that they can look at it again in 15 years or whatever. It would be rather silly to carry around your collection home movies on your iPod all the time.

    14. Re:I got a small chuckle from.... by Lars+T. · · Score: 1
      http://www.apple.com/appletv/connect.html

      "or if your TV doesn't have an HDMI port, you can connect to Apple TV via component video and audio."

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  19. Video Coverage? by bunburyist · · Score: 2

    Anyone got some video of the keynote?

  20. Slashdot Updates Story, Adds iWork, Mac Mini, iPod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From the mysterious future

  21. Mac mini refreshed today too by phalse+phace · · Score: 3, Informative

    In case someone's wondering, the Mac mini will be refreshed today. This was mentioned during their Q & A. But there was no mention of any specs.

    1. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by phalse+phace · · Score: 5, Informative

      Specs on Apple's site now:

      1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
      1GB memory
      80GB hard drive1

      Ships: Within 24 hours
      Free Shipping
      $599.00

      ---------

      2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
      1GB memory
      120GB hard drive1

      Ships: Within 24 hours
      Free Shipping
      $799.00

    2. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Strange, I'm not seeing any changes in the spec on http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html

    3. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by forkazoo · · Score: 1

      Specs on Apple's site now:

      1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
      1GB memory
      80GB hard drive1

      Ships: Within 24 hours
      Free Shipping
      $599.00


      Ugh. I was really hoping that the Mini would return to $499. Oh well.
    4. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by strredwolf · · Score: 1

      Gha!!! I was going to go out and buy the old origional Core Duo Mini, and now they're bumping the speed, chip, memory, and HD space for the same price!!! AAAAIIIIEEEE don't know what to do on Wednesday...

      --

      --
      # Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
      $Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
    5. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by Winckle · · Score: 0, Troll

      Don't forget to order iLife 08 as well for $9.99, since it isn't preloaded, but you have bought a new mac.

    6. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, same shitty GAM950 graphics. Also, the upper limit of 2 GB of memory is way to low. I'm not buying it and will wait until Apple delivers something better that doesn't bear the price tag of a Mac Pro.

    7. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by vigmeister · · Score: 1

      1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
      1GB memory
      80GB hard drive1

      Ships: Within 24 hours
      Free Shipping
      $599.00 Is there a law that all 80GB devices from companies that compete with Microsoft have to be sold at $599?

      Cheers!

      --
      Atheist: Buddhist in a Prius
    8. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by phalse+phace · · Score: 1

      Ugh. I was really hoping that the Mini would return to $499. Oh well.


      Same here.... especially when it still comes with a stinkin' comobo drive. Want a SuperDrive? You're gonna have to pony up for the $799 model.
    9. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by Digital+Pizza · · Score: 1

      Having paid extra for the superdrive in my Mac Mini, I'd say don't bother; just get an external 5.25" drive in an enclosure.

      The Superdrive is a crappy Matsushita that craps out after a year or so and can't handle ripping other regions anyway. I swapped in a Pioneer KR06 (a slim, slot-loading drive) and it's also crapped out - can't handle CD's anymore (though it still does DVD's fine - go figure; turns out it's a common problem with this model - crappy CD laser).

      I did what those who are savvy have been recommending and got an external Pioneer 112 drive in a Firewire enclosure, and it's working fine.

      I've come to the conclusion that slim DVD burners are just too unreliable.

      --
      We apologize for the inconvenience.
    10. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by 2ms · · Score: 1

      Put an HD DVD compatible drive in there for $100-200 bucks more, or if someone would make an add-on hd-dvd drive that matches in appearance/dimensions so you can mate them much like the external hard drives such as this one, then you'd have something extra interesting.

    11. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by adrew · · Score: 1

      They need to lower the Mini's price. A lot. I'm a long-time Mac user but I ordered a Dell a few months ago since I needed Vista for the built-in speech recognition due to an arm injury. I really wanted to get a Mini and dual-boot Vista, but...

      I ended up getting a Dell Dimension E521 with a dual-core AMD processor (2x 1.9 GHz), 2 GB of RAM, real graphics card (128MB ATI), 160 GB hard drive, DVD burner, modem, keyboard, mouse, built-in card reader and a 22" Dell LCD for $688 including tax and shipping. A Mac Mini with similar specs (but with a smaller monitor, and no card reader or no graphics card) is $1645 +tax.

    12. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Do you get the same small form factor... That actually takes a large amount of the cost. Not just in production but a higher R&D. The Mac Mini is basically a laptop technology in a desktop. I doubt that Apple is willing to invest going into the budget PCs because then their quality will drop rapidly like dell has.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    13. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by riker1384 · · Score: 1

      But why? They don't have to drop in quality just to lower costs or build "budget PCs." All they have to do is stop putting so much money into building them like laptops. Just do that, and reduce the prices by that much. There's no reason in the world why that would make the quality suffer.

      It's like, someone builds a car that costs $250,000, with 125 horsepower and bench seats for 4.

      "This car is overpriced."
      "No, it isn't. It takes a lot of money to build a car like it's an airplane, you know. Airplanes are expensive. Everything's different: engineering, certification and all. You skimp on that, and you'll fall right out of the sky."

      Well, who the hell told you to build a car like it was an airplane?

    14. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by emphatic · · Score: 0

      I'm confused by your perspective. Either you prefer cheap commodity with lower quality and price (keep your Dell!) or you value Quality, design and aesthetics and are willing to pay for them. How is this strange?

      "Well, who the hell told you to build a car like it was an airplane?" you asked. Quality values will always differ, but your idea that it's strange someone would prefer those things seems very sad to me. "What will they want next, better Quality life? psssshh... I had to walk to school barefoot, uphill both..." you get the point.

      While I'm not capitalist, you could at least say that you can rely on the market to balance out these value needs.

    15. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Companies are in it to make money. They are not going to buy $500 in parts and sell the computer for $500.00 because they will loose money (labor, R&D, Building expenses, and the other bills....) Apple is also not going to sell it at a rate below market price Becasue they spend all this money for R&D and sell their computer cheaper then what Dell would sell it without the R&D just by copying Apples design. Means apple is loosing out (leaving cash on the table).

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    16. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by riker1384 · · Score: 1

      "Quality" does not equal making a desktop computer really, really small and building it like a laptop. They could make a tower computer with good build quality and they could even make it pretty if they wanted. If they did this, they would not have the costs of using laptop parts such as mobile processors and 2.5" hard drives, or of the fancy engineering required to make it all fit together in a tiny case, and possibly to manage heat in such tight packages. Just remove those factors, and you save some amount of money. That's all I'm asking.

      There's expense put into quality, and expense put into making the computers small, and they aren't the same thing at all. I'm suggesting that they build a normal, quality deskop computer, at a price point less than a used car.

      Don't you consider the Mac Pro to be "quality" like the rest of the Apple computers? It's a normal tower format, not a tiny novelty computer, but from what I hear it's well-built. All I want is that same approch in a computer closer to the Mini price point.

    17. Re:Mac mini refreshed today too by Winckle · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      A troll? wtf, I was giving him a tip, not trolling, the new macs might only have iLife 06 on them, so I didn't want him to be left out.

  22. Wow, does he really talk like that? by Sax+Maniac · · Score: 4, Funny

    Talk short. No long sentence. Simple words. Over soon. Screw verbs. Noun adjective. Adjective noun. Noun, noun, noun. And, articles! So, no prepositions. Adverbs bad. Baaaad adverbs, no-no-no. See Dick run. Run, Dick run!

    --
    I can explanate how to administrate your network. You must configurate and segmentate it, so it can computate.
    1. Re:Wow, does he really talk like that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. Journalists will mis-report anything in a sentence longer than four words.

    2. Re:Wow, does he really talk like that? by e4g4 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Jobs talks fast. Much info to convey, little time. Drop most possible words w/o losing meaning. Called "liveblogging".

      Unless, of course, you can read/write stenographer's shorthand. Otherwise, I see no other way of of relaying the Stevenote, given that live audio and video wasn't an option.

      --
      The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. - Albert Einstein
    3. Re:Wow, does he really talk like that? by schiefaw · · Score: 2, Funny

      Screw verbs

      But "screw" IS a verb!

      --
      Angleyne: You can't bend that girder - it's unbendable! Bender: Well I don't know anything about lifting, so that ju
    4. Re:Wow, does he really talk like that? by BorgCopyeditor · · Score: 1

      There is a verb called "screw," but don't let that deceive you. "Screw" is a noun.

      --
      Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
    5. Re:Wow, does he really talk like that? by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

      There are many "screw verbs" in the English language: screw, unscrew, tighten, loosen, etc.

    6. Re:Wow, does he really talk like that? by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      Sadly, in our media-rich environment, a person has to speak in "sound bites". Remember Al Gore's "lockbox" phrase that got so much play? Any long sentence is just asking for disaster due to how many ways it can be misinterpreted or misreported.

      Keep it short, keep it simple. Reporters don't have the time to air an essay. Which, IMHO, is a bad thing.

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
  23. "Blow-by-blow" coverage? by goldspider · · Score: 1, Funny

    (apologies in advance)

    Do we really need that kind of visual, considering fanbois' well-documented oral fixation with everything Apple?

    *ducks*

    --
    "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    1. Re:"Blow-by-blow" coverage? by Applekid · · Score: 1

      Do we really need that kind of visual, considering fanbois' well-documented oral fixation with everything Apple? Oral fixation? What else does one do with an apple other than eat it?
      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    2. Re:"Blow-by-blow" coverage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about eating a peach then?

    3. Re:"Blow-by-blow" coverage? by coren2000 · · Score: 1

      drink the juice.

    4. Re:"Blow-by-blow" coverage? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      "What's your preference? Apple, Pear, Wang?"

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    5. Re:"Blow-by-blow" coverage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was painful. Goddamn the 80s. Goddamn them and the computers that came with them.:)

    6. Re:"Blow-by-blow" coverage? by Applekid · · Score: 1

      Drinking juice is still pretty oral an activity.

      Unless you inhale it or can diffuse it through the skin. :D

      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    7. Re:"Blow-by-blow" coverage? by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      I dunno. Lick the button?

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    8. Re:"Blow-by-blow" coverage? by coren2000 · · Score: 1

      Yup, we are sucking the juice out of steves apple.

  24. Re:I know I say this every time, but... by coren2000 · · Score: 1

    Like the unpopular kid at the elementary school dance asking for a date.

    The key is to keep asking until they feel sorry for you.

  25. Aluminum Colour Cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it just me or is the whole industrial brushed aluminum appearance of "modern" devices go against the entire concept of aesethics? I would have preferred that Apple keep the white and added black as a colour for the iMacs.

  26. Re:I know I say this every time, but... by Jethro · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Nah. I'm more going "Hey Apple, I have $2000 for you if you make a laptop I want."

    So it's more like trying to get a high-class prostitute.

    --


    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
  27. A few thoughts by JamesRose · · Score: 4, Interesting

    first quote: "What about AMD chips?"

    Steve: "We use Intel chips"

    hehehe, sounded a li'l like the intel chip implanted into his head kicked in there.

    second, why is the imac so underpowered in the RAM department, I mean the specs in one of the pictures showed the iMacs, all the way up to the biggest $1800 version only has 1gig- with all the RAM you get in normal PCs now days (4gigabytes not unusual) is this not a little strange?

    Finally, is it just me, or have they slighyl repackaged everything, made no huge advances, like for example, why did they bother to minimize a keyboard, which for someone like me, would just be annoying. iLife? It's had nothing added, they just repackaged every single feature, and when asked why .mac doesn't support HD Jobs goes- Well, we do support HD, well actually slightly less than HD- you know what I call not quite HD- NOT HD! Everything just seemed a little small fry.

    1. Re:A few thoughts by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      with all the RAM you get in normal PCs now days (4gigabytes not unusual) is this not a little strange?


      Where are you buying your computers? Even the $6000 gaming system from dell comes with 2GB by default.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    2. Re:A few thoughts by JamesRose · · Score: 1

      Take a look at newegg.com and places like it, 2gigabytes isn't that unusual. I'm not saying I'd expect them all to have it, but they are high end machines, they should be high end specs in all respects otherwise you're limiting the other aspects.

    3. Re:A few thoughts by sketchydave · · Score: 1, Insightful

      This launch is a case of "if it ain't broke don't fix it." Improvements on the iMac with a thinner design and using glass and aluminum. Cool. A few updates to iLife and a new spreadsheet program in iWorks, very cool. The keyboard does bother me. Personally I like a nice heavy keyboard that can withstand blunt force trauma...or inflict it on others. But its a keyboard and easily replaced just as the original mice were when Apple insisted on the one-button approach.

    4. Re:A few thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >second, why is the imac so underpowered in the RAM department

      Buying RAM through Apple is very expensive. Most people go through a third party.

    5. Re:A few thoughts by jstomel · · Score: 0

      OSX isn't the memory hog that windows is. You don't need as much RAM

    6. Re:A few thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are not Apple's high-end machines. For those you want to see the Mac Pro. I do agree, however, that the 24" model really should come with 2gb. It's not going to add that much to the cost.

    7. Re:A few thoughts by reidconti · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My 2.66Ghz quad-core Mac Pro only has 1GB RAM. It's not really intentional, I just didn't want to pay $300 for another gig of FB-DIMMs when I bought it last August; figured I'd skip the Apple Tax and buy it third-party.

      Then I found out third-party companies were selling it for the same absurd price.

      So I told myself I'd wait a few months for the price to drop, since it would inevitably fall like a rock when more companies started shipping the Core 2 Extreme with chipsets requiring FB-DIMMs. Then it was announced that the FB-DIMM wasn't going to be on Intel's future roadmap.. d'oh!

      Prices haven't dropped like a rock, but slowly declined instead.. now I can get 4GB for around $300.

      But the thing is, the system doesn't really need it. I admit that it's already total overkill for what I use it for, but I was rewarding myself for using my 600Mhz iBook G3 for 5 years, including all thru college, and that maxed out at 640MB. With Tiger, and a bunch of widgets running, yeah, I can feel when it starts swapping -- usually at about the 15th Safari window or so. However, the system is so damn fast -- and I'm running RAID 0 on my main volume -- that the swapping is really just a minor annoyance. I keep finding better things to spend money on than more memory for my already blazing fast computer.

      So, to make a long story short, 1GB is plenty for a "desktop" Mac. Most users would be much better served by 2GB, but most users would ALSO be much better served by Apple bundling as little possible so that the buyer can choose whether they want to install the RAM themselves, or have Apple do it.

    8. Re:A few thoughts by mgabrys_sf · · Score: 1

      I like the new macbook keyboards and my current keyboard - while nice - is also very efficient at displaying a terrarium of crud with no easy way (short of getting an industrial air compressor up the stairs) of removing the back to clean it out. Damn these custom hex bolts. And in an industrial style loft with no soft surfaces, dust blows and accumulates in the wierdest spaces.

      I also suppose I could try this:

      http://xkcd.com/237/

      But even with glasses....ew.

    9. Re:A few thoughts by adisakp · · Score: 4, Informative

      with all the RAM you get in normal PCs now days (4gigabytes not unusual) is this not a little strange?

      AFAIK, Window's PC manaufacturers usually put in 1 GB now with an option to get 2 GB or more. Usually 2GB costs you an extra $100-200 and 4GB cost you an extra arm, leg, and testicle.

      Even if you give up a 'nad for the 4GB, Windows PC's will only use 3 GB when 4 GB is installed unless you're willing to do a lot of extra configuration and you buy the correct hardware. We got a bunch of new Dells at work a couple months ago. All of them came with 4 GB. But when you boot into Windows XP Pro, only 3 GB is visible. I tried all the hacks to get more -- with certain MB and hardware configs, it is possible to get up to 3.5GB with a bit of hacking your OS configuration but 3GB is the most you can get unless you know all your hardware components will memory map into the top 0.5 GB (and unfortunately the Dells we got only do 3GB on 32-bit Windows). There is no way to get an ACTUAL USABLE 4GB in Windows without going to one of the 64-bit versions of Windows and with all the memory and driver issues there, you're not gaining anything on a consumer machine.

    10. Re:A few thoughts by tsa · · Score: 1

      I'm also surprised that extra memory is still outrageously expensive when you buy it from Apple. Will the iMac have easy to reach memory slots, so I can buy my memory elsewhere? I guess not...

      --

      -- Cheers!

    11. Re:A few thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You apparently haven't ever tried to add memory to an Intel iMac. It's ridiculously simple. You remove one screw, take off a cover, and pop in a SO-DIMM (laptop-style memory, which while a little pricier, isn't absolutely ridiculous). Not sure why Apple charges so much, though; maybe it's to discourage people from buying memory from them, so they won't have to keep a big excess stock. DRAM price volatility being what it is.

    12. Re:A few thoughts by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Then explain why I just upgraded 25 macbook pros to 2GB ram. The upgrade stopped all the complaints about the laptop being slow. These were the 2.1 gig core 2 duo machines. 1 gig of RAM should be enough, but people like having 2 GB.

    13. Re:A few thoughts by truesaer · · Score: 1
      Every mac is always stupidly low on memory. Of course you can upgrade, for absolutely outrageous costs. For example, lets say I want a Mac Pro. This is a high end workstation with 2 CPUs. Its like $2500 and each socket has only 512MB of memory! 512MB, what??


      The Apple Store is down right now but as I recall upgrading to 1GB per socket was like $300. I sometimes wonder how many people balk at the huge upgrade costs for memory and are then unhappy with the performance of their machines with a tiny bit of memory in them. Upgrading after purchase is a pain, and many Apple customers aren't interested in hassles with their computer.

    14. Re:A few thoughts by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Apple is continuing to use Intel for 2 reasons. 1) Intel has better mobile processors than AMD. 2) Apple has been burned by chip supply issues in the past. Intel is capable of delivering the millions of processors it needs every year.

      The display models start at 1GB. I suspect that you can add more memory through Apple or third parties. The Apple store is down right now but the iMac specs say "support up to 4GB".

      I do have to agree that it doesn't seem that much has changed from the previous models. The one thing I did like was that there was no more Intel video chipset and that they went with a better video chipset.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    15. Re:A few thoughts by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

      Damn these custom hex bolts. Are you sure they're not just Torx screws? Apple has traditionally used Torx almost everywhere. (I guess it's easy to automate, plus it's just difficult enough to keep clueless idiots with screwdrivers from prying around inside and zapping things by mistake.)

      I'd be a little surprised if it was actually anything custom, since that would mean all the Apple Authorized Service centers have to get new tools; anyone worth his salt who works on Macs already has a full Torx driver set.

      I'm just waiting for Apple to make a wireless Extended Keyboard II ... so I can get rid of my ADB cable and ADB-to-USB adapter. (It's the only keyboard ever made that comes close to the IBM Model M, but quieter; all the goodness of a buckling spring but without waking the neighbors.)
      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    16. Re:A few thoughts by tsa · · Score: 1

      Cool, thanks! I have upgraded my old G3 iMac a few times, and that was complicated, but times have changed I see!

      --

      -- Cheers!

    17. Re:A few thoughts by nine-times · · Score: 1

      iLife? It's had nothing added, they just repackaged every single feature?

      You know, sometimes software companies release a new version of software, including many of the same features, but with some smaller new features and general refinement in the software. This is a pretty common practice, and it even is appreciated by the customers of the software developers. Legend has it that there was even some developer near Seattle that would release newer versions which were worse than prior versions of their software, and for some reason people would still buy these "upgrades".

    18. Re:A few thoughts by opkool · · Score: 1
    19. Re:A few thoughts by Mononoke · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Will the iMac have easy to reach memory slots, so I can buy my memory elsewhere? I guess not...
      Always have, likely always will.

      The previous iMac generation even had the instructions for adding memory printed on the bottom of the 'foot' the computer is standing on.

      --
      NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
    20. Re:A few thoughts by porcupine8 · · Score: 1
      Finally, is it just me, or have they slighyl repackaged everything, made no huge advances

      ... And then they announced Numbers, their brand-new spreadsheet. But that didn't make it into *this* /. post, because someone had to jump the gun and get it on the front page OMGNOW.

      --
      Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
    21. Re:A few thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure why Apple charges so much, though; maybe it's to discourage people from buying memory from them, so they won't have to keep a big excess stock. DRAM price volatility being what it is. Maybe they are trying to make a lot of fucking money off of it. Your average mactard is going to buy it from Apple. They don't know better.
    22. Re:A few thoughts by jafac · · Score: 1

      Um - consumer-level Windows OS doesn't even support more than 3GB. So like, what are you smokin, dude?

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    23. Re:A few thoughts by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      a terrarium of crud with no easy way (short of getting an industrial air compressor up the stairs) of removing the back to clean it out. That really cracked me up. I've been suffering from this problem after moving from a 15" Ti to a 12" Al. I'm a messy eater, I roll my own cigarettes from loose tobacco, I've got pets, and I've got a long bushy beard. On those rare occasions when I have opened up the computer (installed a larger HD about a month ago), it's completely sickening looking at all the crap that gets in there. Or it would be if I was easily sickened. Let's just say embarrassing.

      Anyway, sometimes something gets stuck behind one of the keys, and just blowing it out doesn't work. I hate having to shit down my computer, but I don't want to risk it when I need to really give it some whacks on the side to loosen the crumbs.

      Yeah, I know. I should get one of those keyboard condoms and wrap it up. It would save me a lot of grief when I eat cous cous.
      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    24. Re:A few thoughts by jafac · · Score: 1

      Personally, I think that Apple has given up on the "free market" thing, and is just hoping AMD will go away, so the govt. can step in and regulate Intel like the monopoly that it is, without the token "competition" that AMD represents.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    25. Re:A few thoughts by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      You know, sometimes software companies release a new version of software, including many of the same features, but with some smaller new features and general refinement in the software. This is a pretty common practice, and it even is appreciated by the customers of the software developers. Legend has it that there was even some developer near Seattle that would release newer versions which were worse than prior versions of their software, and for some reason people would still buy these "upgrades".


      But it sounds like they have added a completely new photo management application. Presumably iPhoto will now become a standard part of the OS like iTunes, since it is needed for downloading your iPhone pictures.
    26. Re:A few thoughts by justo · · Score: 1

      i think it's because people don't know how to properly close applications on a mac -- they close the window, but don't quit the application.

    27. Re:A few thoughts by Silly+Burrito · · Score: 1

      I hate having to shit down my computer, but I don't want to risk it when I need to really give it some whacks on the side to loosen the crumbs. Man, did THAT ever give me a wrong mental picture, especially when you describe your situation above....yuck.
    28. Re:A few thoughts by Knara · · Score: 1

      Now if they could only make upgrading the RAM in a Mac Mini that easy.

      RAM upgrades shouldn't require putty knives and/or spatulas

    29. Re:A few thoughts by nvrrobx · · Score: 1

      The highest iMac - the 2.8 Ghz, has 2gb of RAM standard with 4gb as an option.

    30. Re:A few thoughts by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Freudian Slip? You can probably guess why I consider wireless to be such a great thing.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    31. Re:A few thoughts by Constantine+XVI · · Score: 1

      Actually, iMovie is 100% new. And iLife comes with every new Mac (which you will buy every year, or course :)

      --
      "I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
    32. Re:A few thoughts by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      They don't take special Apple Proprietary RAM. So, you're always better off with the minimum config and buying third party. Also, the 2 GB option Apple offers is a matched set of 512s. What you'd really want anyway is a matched pair of 1 GBs, which you can buy 3rd party for around $200. So know you'd have 3 GB (2 x 512, 2 x 1 GB). (A matched set of 512s should set you back around $130).

      However, this is all piker bullshit. You really want RAM, you want to load it up with a matched set of 4 GB sticks for 32 GB of RAM. That'll only set you back $5500, but it's worth it. Firefox screams with 32 GB of RAM.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    33. Re:A few thoughts by tf23 · · Score: 1

      second, why is the imac so underpowered in the RAM department, I mean the specs in one of the pictures showed the iMacs, all the way up to the biggest $1800 version only has 1gig- with all the RAM you get in normal PCs now days (4gigabytes not unusual) is this not a little strange? Because _most_ people only need the minimum. They just don't do enough on their machines to push it to need much more then that. And, realistically, 1GB for an Intel OSX machine is just that. Apple seems to configure everything for the "most people" segment, not the geek segment that wants to put 3-4gigabytes into the likes of a Mac Mini. Oh wait, you can't :(
    34. Re:A few thoughts by niktemadur · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have upgraded my old G3 iMac a few times, and that was complicated...

      Complicated as in disassembling the shell, depending on the model, but not complicated as in having to use special equipment, as all you need are a screwdriver (preferably magnetic), maybe a Leatherman toolkit (specifically the pincers), precautions to avoid static electricity, as well as a visual guide: http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/.

      Going one notch further, when I upgraded the hard disk on my Indigo G3 http://www.faqintosh.com/risorse/en/guides/hw/imac /imacg3dvhd/, it was a nerve-wracking thought to take apart an additional level of parts, but after the job was done, I was amazed at how simple a procedure it actually was, as well as the fact that it took less than an hour. A month later, a friend asked me to help him upgrade the hard disk on his G3. He was very nervous about it, yet I actually did it in half the time and it was even, you know, fun. As a bonus, for my troubles, I was treated to several mugs of draft beer at a local tavern.

      As for RAM chips and the new Macs? I'd guess it takes less than five minutes to do it, just open a little hatch, fit the chip in the slot and you're good to go!

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    35. Re:A few thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every mac is always stupidly low on memory. Of course you can upgrade, for absolutely outrageous costs. To clarify the situation: I just upgraded a MacBook Pro from the stock 2 GB of RAM to 4 GB of RAM for about $200. I do have two spare 1 GB sticks now, which are slated for my wife's Dell.
    36. Re:A few thoughts by billcopc · · Score: 1

      They use the same components as any other computer. You just pop off the cover and add RAM or swap the hard drive like any other.

      I still don't understand why Apple insists on charging completely absurd prices for basic upgrades. I'd be more than happy to pay a premium for the platform, but don't insult me by charging 700$ extra for 3 extra gigs of ram, that I could get for about 120$ from Tigerdirect.

      Their pricing makes me wish I could order a bare-bones iMac without RAM, HDD or even CPU, but that will never happen because I could simply put in my cheap components and resell the thing for a huge profit. And by "me" I mean "every bottom-feeding used-cell-phone-dealer-type scammer on the planet", so that's definitely not something Apple would want. They already danced with OEM way back in the old days and bailed out because their "partners" were making more money than Apple.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    37. Re:A few thoughts by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      It's just a minor Apple release. Usually they announce iLife/iWork updates at one of their major conferences along with other things.

    38. Re:A few thoughts by solios · · Score: 1

      That's great and all, except for one thing. He ain't talkin' about WINDOWS. :P

      My OS X workstation has 4.5 gigs of ram. The rest of the OS X boxes at work have either 4 or 4.5 and the OS sees all of it. Some of the apps don't, but the idea was to be able to multitask, not have After Effects eat ALL THE RAM, so the fact it can only see 3 out of 4.5 gigs is a good thing.

    39. Re:A few thoughts by lucas+teh+geek · · Score: 1

      Are you sure they're not just Torx screws?
      I cant say it's true for all apple products, but the externally visible screws on my powerbook are all allen screws (the hexagon ones), which are very common. a whole set of allen keys would be expensive if it costs you $5, the things are common as mud. my xbox was held together with torx screws (the star ones), they're less common, but not hard to find the keys for them either.
      --
      TIAEAE!
    40. Re:A few thoughts by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Because _most_ people only need the minimum. They just don't do enough on their machines to push it to need much more then that. And, realistically, 1GB for an Intel OSX machine is just that. Apple seems to configure everything for the "most people" segment, not the geek segment that wants to put 3-4gigabytes into the likes of a Mac Mini. Oh wait, you can't :(

      Most people would get by just fine with a PC that literally costs a fraction of that $1800 iMac. The iMac is priced as a premium computer, and if I'm going to pay premium prices, I don't want cut-rate specs.

    41. Re:A few thoughts by tf23 · · Score: 1

      Most people would get by just fine with a PC that literally costs a fraction of that $1800 iMac. True.

      The iMac is priced as a premium computer, and if I'm going to pay premium prices, I don't want cut-rate specs. No, I don't think it is. The 20" iMac is $1,199 (The original parent complained that the baseline 24" version at $1,799 only has 1GB of ram). If you take a Dell Inspiron 530 w/ 22" screen (Core 2 Duo 2.0GHz, 2GB Ram, 320GB drive) it's $1,099. (in the Dell-Home there's a rebate for $150 off, knocking it to $949). So yes, you get a little improvement on the price, twice the ram, 70GB more space and a bigger screan. But you're not getting OSX, and all the "iApps" that come w/ OSX. Total price difference $250. If not for the rebate, price difference is $100.00. The way I see it, Apple's iMac is their middle-tier computer. You're right, most people don't need it. Infact, I'd wager most people could get by with one of these $150 linux laptops or Mac mini. But given the iMac's all-in-one simple approach, it's packaging, and "ooohh it's Apple" most consumers are going to buy it. At-least, the ones that want a Mac :) There will always be those that want a $349 Dell.

    42. Re:A few thoughts by Weedlekin · · Score: 1

      "The one thing I did like was that there was no more Intel video chipset and that they went with a better video chipset."

      iMacs never had Intel video. The Mac Mini has it, and so does the MacBook, but the "tablet" iMacs (iMac G5 variants and Intel-based ones) all had nVidia or ATI graphics (depending on model).

      --
      I'm not going to change your sheets again, Mr. Hastings.
    43. Re:A few thoughts by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      There lowest base 17" model did have Intel GMA950 video. Here's one on MacMall. If you were getting the cheapest iMac you had to settle for Intel video.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    44. Re:A few thoughts by Weedlekin · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected. Blech! The old rev.1 iMac G5 had pretty anaemic graphics, but they were at least provided by an nVidia chipset with its own video RAM that would have been a better choice for a cheap machine than those dreadful Intel things that use system memory. This is the sort of crap I'd have expected to see in a bottom end $299 desktop system, not something they were expecting people to shell out the best part of $1000 for.

      --
      I'm not going to change your sheets again, Mr. Hastings.
    45. Re:A few thoughts by default+luser · · Score: 1

      This problem has many causes. I will now lay blame on the appropriate parties.

      1. Intel. Yes, Intel, our savior. Intel did a very bad thing for the future of computing when they refused to add 64-bit support to the Pentium M line. They then continued the disservice by shipping the CoreDuo, continuing their legacy of 32-bit only for the notebook platform. Only now in 2007 are we seeing the last 32-bit only mobile chips come off the mainstream market (they're used for embedded devces only, where they belong).

      2. Microsoft, for not having the balls to push the 64-bit Vista as the "standard" platform. The OEM versions of Vista are actually 32-bit only. You can understand this decision when you consider that Intel was still shipping 32-bit mobile chips at the time, but it would have been refreshing to see Microsoft push the market rather than follow.

      3. PC vendors. What the hell are they doing? Why the hell are they shipping motherboards that can't handle PAE device remapping? Why the hell aren't they configuring PCs for PAE out-of-the-box? They've got tons of cheap memory, and can't do shit with it. They've known about the messy 32 to 64-bit transistion for a long time now, and have done nothing to help ease it.

      The PC vendors can make most of the troubles of 32-bit Vista go away, but they don't seem all that driven to bridge the gap.

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

    46. Re:A few thoughts by 3choTh1s · · Score: 1

      Hell no 1GB isn't enough for a Mac. I got a shiny new Black Macbook last Christmas and as soon as I started getting programs that I would use everyday I noticed immediately that OS X is a RAM hog. I figure I'd use it like any Mac user would. I do use widgets but I don't think that it's that bad. Once I open a fresh Firefox session + OpenOffice + Adium + Thunderbird, I'm well within striking distance of filling up all my RAM. I wouldn't consider this to be very difficult as I do a similar thing with my Windows desktop with 512MB of RAM

    47. Re:A few thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intel. Yes, Intel, our savior. Intel did a very bad thing for the future of computing when they refused to add 64-bit support to the Pentium M line ... continued the disservice by shipping the CoreDuo, continuing their legacy of 32-bit only for the notebook platform


      The least interesting thing about LP64 or ILP64 architectures for most applications is the 64-bit pointer.

      Sure, it's nice to have single data sets which can occupy more than ~2^30-2^32 bytes (depending on alignment and bit robbing for tags) without having to window them, but such applications are rare -- most processes that use pointers will never come anywhere close to the limits of a 32-bit pointer.

      The PowerPC has had an ISA-native (but not bus-native) 64-bit datatype since the beginning, much as the 68000 family had 32-bit data types from the beginning. These were slow instructions initially, but as the chips and busses supported 64-bit data types natively, 64-bit longs became very fast. Even the PPC970 and its 64-bit relatives have generally been used only in modes which mix 32-bit pointers and integers with 64-bit longs, and practical experience shows that using 64-bit datatypes for pointers and integers are a drag on performance when the higher order 32 bits are not actually used. Shuffling those not-really-used bits in and out of various memories (main memory, CPU cache, disk...) imposes an unnecessary cost even if the CPU does arithmetic on 64 bit datatypes just as fast as on 32 bit ones.

      Although PPC970 supports full LP64, as of 10.4.10, 64-bit pointers are not used within the OS itself despite the presence of a 64-bit libSystem dynamic library (but no LP64 utility dynamic libraries like, for example, libtermcap). Although PowerMac G5s existed which supported 8 or more GB of RAM, the individual processes still use 32 bit pointers within their own address space; the kernel uses 32 bit pointers in its address spaces, and the MMU is used to map between physical memory and these spaces. That has been standard in UNIX-like operating systems for many years.

      The major weakness of IA32 is that the ISA has no native 64-bit datatype, so any manipulations of 64 bit datatypes require lots of extra instructions which are superfluous in an architecture where chip internals handle 64 bit words as quickly as 32 bit ones.

      Extensions to IA32 focused on wider-than-32-bit datatypes and SIMD, which was pretty reasonable, since applications which did 64 bit integer arithmetic (and even more likely, single-precision floating point) tended to do processing across rows or columns in a table (i.e., a vector). This is still often the case.

      The major advantage of x86-64 is therefore not in pointers, nor in integers, being 32-bits-only, because on other architectures LP64 tends to outperform ILP64 for most integer-heavy tasks, and 32 bit pointer heavy tasks tend to outperform the same tasks done with 64 bit pointers, for similar reasons.

      A minor advantage of x86-64 is in the promotion into the main ISA of a native 64-bit datatype, to reduce the number of instructions needed to manipulate a 64-bit integer.

      The major improvement in x86-64 is the addition of new registers and the regularization of how they are used. This reduces the instruction count to call a subroutine, since arguments and return values can be passed in registers rather than on the stack. The new ISA also creates many more register-to-register comparisons and manipulations, eliminating instructions and pressure on cache memories (including the renaming file) for many common operations (nested loops, for example). These improvements are useful even if only 32 bit quantities are being used.

      So, EMT64T (x86-64) is very nice, but less because of the "-64" part and more because the ISA is more modern.

    48. Re:A few thoughts by adisakp · · Score: 1

      That's great and all, except for one thing. He ain't talkin' about WINDOWS. :P

      Yes he was. He was lamenting why the new iMacs didn't come with 4GB like most "normal PCs" which I assumed to mean Windows. My post was correcting his assumption that Windows machines come with 4GB standard. The quote to which I replied:

      the specs in one of the pictures showed the iMacs, all the way up to the biggest $1800 version only has 1gig- with all the RAM you get in normal PCs now days (4gigabytes not unusual) is this not a little strange

    49. Re:A few thoughts by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      Just to clear something up...

      The 3.5GB limit oringinates from Intel - the early CoreDuo and Core2Duo chipsets were physically limited to that memory limit. This has been removed in the newest chipsets from Intel.

      And yes, the initial CoreDuo and Core2Duo Macs were restricted in this way as well.

    50. Re:A few thoughts by default+luser · · Score: 1

      Sure, it's nice to have single data sets which can occupy more than ~2^30-2^32 bytes (depending on alignment and bit robbing for tags) without having to window them, but such applications are rare -- most processes that use pointers will never come anywhere close to the limits of a 32-bit pointer.

      No, not for the near future. But multiple applications + OS memory + hardware address mapping can quite easily use up the space of one 32-bit pointer, and that is the reason for my post. If Intel had made more of an effort to standardize the industry on 64-bit architecture, or alternatively made a stronger push to support PAE at the motherboard level (full 32-bit pointer space for every application), we wouldn't be having this conversation.

      This makes requiring x86-64 more important than you imagine it is, because there's nothing optional in the standard (unlike PAE hardware address remapping and 36-bit address extension in IA32). If the OS requires it, then OEMs are forced to offer complete support, which means no more address space games.

      The major weakness of IA32 is that the ISA has no native 64-bit datatype, so any manipulations of 64 bit datatypes require lots of extra instructions which are superfluous in an architecture where chip internals handle 64 bit words as quickly as 32 bit ones.

      No, it's not really. You just stated that there's no need (for the moment) of 64-bit ints if you can break the 4GB barrier with clever paging, and virtual address spaces beyond 2^32...and because of this, once again I have to point back to the poor implementation of PAE as one of the biggest downfalls in modern systems.

      The major advantage of x86-64 is therefore not in pointers, nor in integers, being 32-bits-only, because on other architectures LP64 tends to outperform ILP64 for most integer-heavy tasks, and 32 bit pointer heavy tasks tend to outperform the same tasks done with 64 bit pointers, for similar reasons.

      The major advantage of x86-64 is that support for large memory spaces is not optional. In the industry, everyone is trying to shave a buck, and it's tempting to not include support for an "enterprise-level" feature in mainstream motherboards and chipsets. It's unfortunate, but because PAE started in the server world, much like PCI-X it will live and die in the server world.

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

  28. Re:I know I say this every time, but... by coren2000 · · Score: 1

    So no matter how much cash your throwing at this whore, she is still denying you... I think thats sadder than the kid at the high school dance:P

    Just kidding with that bud:)

  29. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by jimstapleton · · Score: 2, Informative

    While I don't disagree with you for the most part, they have opened up lately.

    Check out Newegg and Microcenter. You can buy Macs at both places. Dunno if there are others, I don't go looking to buy Macs typically.

    --
    34486853790
    Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
  30. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by fyngyrz · · Score: 2, Informative
    A lot of people dislike the MacBook keyboards.

    Yeah. I have a Macbook pro, almost a $3000 computer; and the keyboard is terrible. As is the one-button trackpad. I love OSX, but I'm afraid the physical design of the Mac keyboards is just pitiful, totally focused on looks and not usability. I've got a full-size Mac keyboard at my desktop on my Mac Mini, that's a much better keyboard — full numeric keypad, better key travel — but it still isn't even close to the best keyboards out there which have positive tactile feedback, illumination (though my MBP has KB illumination, which I appreciate), and ergonomic curves. Hey, but my Mac keyboard is white. [cough].

    This is compounded by the OS's taking over all the function keys. For a *nix-based OS, this is a pretty inconvenient and poorly thought-out choice. And it isn't all that easy to get the FKeys to behave properly in a terminal; I'm not sure why, but some keys just don't want to come "unstuck" from the OS.

    Oh well. There are some third-party Mac keyboards out there already; hopefully this latest back-to-the-chiclet-past effort from Apple will encourage others to make some really good Mac keyboards.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  31. Come to the PC side! by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1, Informative

    If you want the same security, stability, and lack of choice in software you had on your Mac, you can run Linux!

    But here's the best part...

    We don't have to beg for anything! In fact, they beg us to buy their products, because PC manufacturers actually have something called "competition"! What a novel concept!

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    1. Re:Come to the PC side! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      We don't have to beg for anything!

      Well, the pretty-pleases to Adobe haven't been working well. And begging is for the lupine pest at my feet.

      It's Applications.
      Applications.
      Applications.

      And GIMP does not count.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Come to the PC side! by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Of course Gimp doesn't count. You want a spreadsheet program for that, or at least a calculator. There's plenty of calculators for Linux. If you're really really into counting and arithmetic, there's that program from Wolfram that will run on Linux.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    3. Re:Come to the PC side! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Wow, you sig is correct. Mathmatica is pretty orthogonal to the Adobe Creative Suite.... Although I've been told by Mathematica wizards that it can do pretty much anything.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    4. Re:Come to the PC side! by omninull · · Score: 1

      Are there any good all-in-one PCs out there? I've been considering getting an iMac to run Linux on because I'm so fed up with all the cables and the space needed for the tower. A PC version would be nicer though, less hardware worries and EFI.

    5. Re:Come to the PC side! by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      I've heard that too. In fact, I've heard it called emacs for smart people.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    6. Re:Come to the PC side! by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

      There is gimp and krita, among others. Most of the harshest critics of Gimp haven't used it for any significant amount of time.

      But Photoshop does work well under Wine, or even Windows (which doesn't force you to buy a specific piece of hardware from a specific manufacturer.)

      Let me put it this way: You beg and whine about not getting the laptop you want. I just buy the laptop I want and put Linux and Gimp on it. You beg and whine for Adobe to port Photoshop, or to support this one feature... I just go implement the feature I need.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    7. Re:Come to the PC side! by jdray · · Score: 1

      If you do, I suggest trying out OSX for a couple weeks after your purchase. I ran SUSE for two years before buying my iMac, and am much happier on OSX than I was on Linux. Sure, there are some issues with OSX that frustrate me (like having to reboot every time there's a minor update, like Windows circa 2003), but the net result is one of happiness. Sure, Ubuntu has pushed Linux a long way in the last couple of years, I'm just saying try a taste of the Kool-Aid if you're going to buy the cup anyhow.

      --
      The Spoon
      Updated 6/28/2011
    8. Re:Come to the PC side! by Stamen · · Score: 1

      No, VI is emacs for smart people.

    9. Re:Come to the PC side! by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      That's just if you want a text editor, or so I am told.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  32. Brushed metal by Arathon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Am I the only one who thinks it's ironic that they've only recently completely done away with brushed metal in their user interfaces, in favor of a more plastic-y, smooth feel, but are now introducing brushed metal iMacs to replace their plastic-y, smooth-looking old ones?

    I like the change, but...how? Some auto-negation bug in the intra-office memo software? "!brushed_metal = brushed_metal....SENT"

    1. Re:Brushed metal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you look at the Leopard screenshots on the Apple site, the windows look brushed metal enough to jive with brushed metal enclosures.

    2. Re:Brushed metal by SSonnentag · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't recall brushed metal ever going out of vogue. I think it looks great. Brushed aluminum doesn't show fingerprints, cools well, and looks so much more upclass than some old cheapy plastic. Plastic laptops degrade where your hand is constantly resting on them when typing. My Dell looks like acid was spilled on it. I'm betting aluminum wouldn't have this problem.

    3. Re:Brushed metal by tsa · · Score: 1

      I think my MBP will look like your Dell when I spill acid on it, but since I haven't done that in the year that I own it, it still looks brand new. Very nice machine, the MBP.

      --

      -- Cheers!

    4. Re:Brushed metal by cerelib · · Score: 1

      The difference is; people like the feel of brushed metal, but you can't "feel" a GUI. Brushed metal GUIs just look tacky. I prefer metals to plastics for devices. I recently bought a laptop and I only considered ones with magnesium shells because I don't trust the cheap plastic that a lot of manufacturers use.

    5. Re:Brushed metal by MattPat · · Score: 1

      I agree with the person who commented on "feel" vs. UI, but I think there's another aspect to it: the aluminum isn't brushed. It's flat, solid, sleek and smooth. It actually matches quite well with the new interface ideas.

      Personally, while brushed metal wasn't bad, I'm a fan of the move away from it-- it looked too coarse. To me, the newer styles in varying shades of metal ("platinum" I've heard the style called by a few) feel much smoother and cleaner. Just my 2 cents worth though.

    6. Re:Brushed metal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My MacBook Pro has some tiny black pits on the handrest area. They're about the size of the dot you'd get from a pencil or pen. They're clearly pits because a fine point will catch in them if dragged across the surface.

      I suspect they are caused by the acid in tiny drops of soda (diet pepsi, to be precise) possibly sprayed by the carbonation. That's why there are only a few of them, though I've had it for almost a year and a half. If it was my hands, it would be far more widespread.

  33. Re:I know I say this every time, but... by Jethro · · Score: 1

    That's just THEIR loss (;

    I'm waiting till the next OS X comes out, and then I'll probably get a new laptop. I might end up with a MacBook, but I'm really hoping there'll be a 13.3" MacBookPro. Cause I /hate/ the keyboard on the MacBook.

    --


    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
  34. Can we please kill off "Web X.Y"? by SuperBanana · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's a Web 2.0 app now

    No it's not, because there's no such thing as a "version" of the Internet OR the World Wide Web.

    Just because O'Reilly and a bunch of bloggers like it, doesn't mean you should use it.

    1. Re:Can we please kill off "Web X.Y"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Hopefully your issue will be resolved by the time Web 2.1 is released.

    2. Re:Can we please kill off "Web X.Y"? by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      I don't use the Web. I'm waiting for Web for Workgroups 3.11.

    3. Re:Can we please kill off "Web X.Y"? by Tatsh · · Score: 1

      I completely agree. This web 2.0 nonsense is getting out of hand. Web has no version number. When was there web 1.0? Is it now? It's not an application last time I check.

      What is the complete definition of web 2.0? Sounds to me like some people think it's flash which I totally disagree with. And others think it's conformance to W3C standards, completely separating content from formatting (HTML and CSS, and of course PHP) (which I would mostly agree with).

    4. Re:Can we please kill off "Web X.Y"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they could rename it: Web ][+ ?

    5. Re:Can we please kill off "Web X.Y"? by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

      Yes there is. Hardware has versions, and so can collections of hardware, and so can collections of hardware/software combinations. You've never heard of Internet 2? If you don't like the term, don't use it. But don't claim that things can't have versions. "Second wife" == "Wife 2.0" - unless it's polygamy.

      Internet 2.0: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet2

      F-16, -> F-16A - F-16B ....
      M1 tank -> M1A1 tank.

      Also, World Wide Web != "Web".

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
  35. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by iamdrscience · · Score: 3, Informative

    they shut down any store which dared to sell Apple stuff.
    Overall, I agree with your post, but there are still a few stores which sell Macs besides Apple stores. There's a store around here, Yes Computers that sells and services Apple systems and accessories. It is true though that they seem to have done a pretty good job of keeping stores from carrying their products (besides the iPod).
  36. BUMMER! "You can't be to thin ... by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    ... Or to powerfull."

    But your integrated screen can still be to high!

    This is what annoys me the most about the iMac and they didn't fix it. I'm using a 20" iMac at my current client and the screen is about 8-10cm to high for my tast. And you can only pivot it on the iMacs, not raise or lower it. I'd've thought they'd've fixed that with this release. Shame they didn't.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:BUMMER! "You can't be to thin ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mac users are above all that, I suggest you buy yourself a booster seat!

    2. Re:BUMMER! "You can't be to thin ... by metamatic · · Score: 1

      Exactly why I didn't buy an iMac to replace my old "Luxo Jr" iMac.

      Would it really be so hard to make the iMac height adjustable?

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    3. Re:BUMMER! "You can't be to thin ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > But your integrated screen can still be to high!

      The screen isn't too high. Your desk is too low.

    4. Re:BUMMER! "You can't be to thin ... by noewun · · Score: 1

      Funnily enough, I have the opposite problem: Apple's monitors are set too low for me, which means I am always looking down at them. One of the reasons I bought Viewsonic for home: it sits higher than Apple's monitors.

      --
      I am a believer of momentum and curves.
  37. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by MoneyT · · Score: 1

    There is humor in the fact that as I read your post, there is an ad at the top of the page for smalldog.com, a retailer which sells more than just ipods.

    --
    T Money
    World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
  38. iWork - Numbers! by 2starr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But the more important announcement (IMHO) is iWork which now includes Numbers: http://www.apple.com/iwork/ Finally, I can get rid of Office.

    --

    "Let your heart soar as high as it will. Refuse to be average." - A. W. Tozer

    1. Re:iWork - Numbers! by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 5, Interesting

      But the more important announcement (IMHO) is iWork which now includes Numbers

      Agreed. The feature list and Excel compatibility are a big win for some of us. I'm tired of using MS Office for the Mac, because it is slow and bloated, and prone to crash. A lighter, more nimble competitor is very welcome for my light spreadsheet needs. I avoid OpenOffice on the Mac as well, since it is likewise not really there yet.

      The improvements to Pages also seem significant, with some real layout power (and separate layout and word processing modes). Hopefully this will make for a lightweight Framemaker/InDesign replacement for smaller jobs. In fact, the main thing missing from iWork for my needs is ODF support.

    2. Re:iWork - Numbers! by elysian1 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Don't forget, you can download a free trial here: http://www.apple.com/iwork/trial/

    3. Re:iWork - Numbers! by mblase · · Score: 1

      Finally, I can get rid of Office.

      Unless everyone you work for and with does the same, I doubt it. There are a few things a file-translator just can't quite nail when you're importing someone else's stuff. (I know Apple's got built-in exporters to Office, but I've learned not to put 100% faith in those either.)

    4. Re:iWork - Numbers! by massysett · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Any support for OpenDocument in that new iWork? Website doesn't mention it at all.

    5. Re:iWork - Numbers! by aristotle-dude · · Score: 3, Informative

      Finally, I can get rid of Office.

      Unless everyone you work for and with does the same, I doubt it. There are a few things a file-translator just can't quite nail when you're importing someone else's stuff. (I know Apple's got built-in exporters to Office, but I've learned not to put 100% faith in those either.) Come on now. Office 2008 for Mac will be dropping VBA macro support so even the mac version of Office will not be compatible with Office for Windows. Your best bet for compatibility in a macro heavy environment would be Neo Office or Open Office as they support Office 2007 formats and VBA macros. Macros aside, previous versions of Office for Mac were not 100% compatible with their windows counterparts.

      If iWork provide higher compatibility (outside of macros), then that should be good enough for most people.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    6. Re:iWork - Numbers! by fermion · · Score: 1
      I have a couple versions of iWork, and generally find it a good alternative to MS Office. I don't really like the fact that Pages is more a page layout program than a word processor, but that is a minor quibble.

      Here is my concern. If I save in the funky MS format, then I have hope of opening the file on MS Windows machines and for the time being Mac. If I save the file in ODF or even the old sw*, then I can open the file on any modern OS, as they all have version of OO.org or Star Office or the like that will run. OTOH, if I use and save in iWork formats, I am back to vendor lockin. It makes little sense for apple to be playing this game. I find iWork to be superior to OO.org in many ways that MS Office is not. The only reason not to use it the random format.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    7. Re:iWork - Numbers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm tired of using MS Office for the Mac, because it is slow and bloated


      Too bad iWork is also slow and bloated.
    8. Re:iWork - Numbers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I wonder how well it will do against InDesign because, both previous versions of Pages have produced horrendous PDFs that only print well on newer local printers from within Preview when using transparency. Transparency lets you fade things in and out and do drop shadows. Previous versions would befuddle some printers (not to mention RIPS or DocuTech machines) because of the way Pages (and Apple PDF subsystem?) poorly embeds fonts so that a font can be embedded multiple times, or is missing some critical information. Previous version would even show all these problems in this simple test: use several OpenType Adobe fonts in various sizes--fonts not installed by default--a drop shadow, and transparency somewhere, then have Staples print your document. Making the same document in InDesign--even with incorrect PDF settings on export--would yield a much more predictable, and usually accurate printout.

      This isn't much of a problem because, well, Pages is for those who want to print at home. But, this becomes problematic in situations where you need to print documents in other places. One must find what the target printer and program (Adobe Reader vs. Preview) can handle, and one can even forget submitting such documents to most boutique online presses because most reject PDFs made with the Apple subsystem.

      If the PDF export is much improved, I will be very happy because I love the simplicity of Pages. (For promo documents, I often create mockups in Pages, then finalize the work in InDesign.)

    9. Re:iWork - Numbers! by flimflam · · Score: 1

      Thank you! For some reason I couldn't find a download link anywhere.
       

      --
      -- It only takes 20 minutes for a liberal to become a conservative thanks to our new outpatient surgical procedure!
    10. Re:iWork - Numbers! by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 2, Informative

      Too bad iWork is also slow and bloated.

      In my experience Pages loads faster than Word and is much more responsive and uses a lot fewer resources than Word. I just opened a .doc file in both programs and it took Word approximately 50% more time to open it and it is consuming twice as much RAM. When opening a native file for each program, Pages loads about 300% faster than Word.

      You can claim both are bloated, but one is clearly better than the other. What word processor would you consider to be not bloated?

    11. Re:iWork - Numbers! by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I haven't noticed any problems with the very few PDFs I've generated from Pages. We test out PDFs with Preview, Acrobat, and XPDF, but we don't always print them on different printers. I've never had any problem printing to anything we tried using.

      ...and one can even forget submitting such documents to most boutique online presses because most reject PDFs made with the Apple subsystem.

      Hmm, we've only changed printers twice, but a lot of our files are from the Apple PDF subsystem and none of the three had any problem processing our PDFs. Maybe we got lucky.

      If the PDF export is much improved, I will be very happy because I love the simplicity of Pages.

      I wouldn't count on it. The PDF generation is built into OS X, so I'd bet on fixes in Leopard, not iWork 08.

    12. Re:iWork - Numbers! by earthbound+kid · · Score: 1

      Perhaps. Then again, apparently Apple back-ported Leopard's ImageKit API to 10.4 just for iWorks. So, that might effect PDF creation.

    13. Re:iWork - Numbers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks!

      I'm going to buy it anyway, but this way I don't have to wait, um, well not wait quite as long (darn 3 hour download time).

    14. Re:iWork - Numbers! by Cerebus · · Score: 1

      Then again, MS Office is not (yet) a universal binary, so it's still running under Rosetta on new Macs, so the comparison isn't fair.

      --
      -- Cerebus
    15. Re:iWork - Numbers! by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Then again, MS Office is not (yet) a universal binary, so it's still running under Rosetta on new Macs, so the comparison isn't fair.

      Fair?!? It is a comparison of the available options. I don't care if one company is slow to release new version, I just care about what is available. Currently, Word is slow, unresponsive, and resource intensive. I'd rather use something that is the opposite of that. I don't care if it is a new version of MS Office or iWork, although I also care about usability and feature set.

  39. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by happyemoticon · · Score: 4, Informative

    And a lot of people, on the other hand, love laptop keyboards in general for the very reasons you listed. Furthermore, a lot of people spend much of their young life with a laptop as their primary rig, so they're actually more used to it than a traditional keyboard. It's kind of a moot point. Some people will be excited by the keyboards. Some people will hate them. And for many, the keyboard will not have a large net effect on their purchasing decisions.

    I do give them props for doing something different (or, if it's been done already, making it standard). I just wish they'd also have an option which brings ergonomics into play, even if it might end up looking like Gaudi made it.

  40. Balloons by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 1, Funny

    "Here are photos of girls with balloons. I don't want to throw them away, just hide them."
    That is a direct quote of Steve Jobs from the Engadget article. Apparently he accidentally revealed his women popping balloons porn on stage, and then tried to hide it.
    1. Re:Balloons by SpudNYC · · Score: 2, Funny
  41. Glossy screens OUCH!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Glossy screens have been scientifically proven to cause eyestrain, headaches and premature need for glasses because the eye keeps trying to focus between the two images.

    Steve Jobs says "Customers prefer glossy screens" But this is a in Store poll or results from some sales from the ignorant young of the dangers of glossy screens.

    Us OLDER longtime computer and CRT users know glossy screens cause eyestrain. In FACT a MacPoll Survey shows overwhelmingly that people choose MATTE SCREENS OVER GLOSSY.

    So is Apple ripe for a lawsuit?

    1. Re:Glossy screens OUCH!!! by mabinogi · · Score: 1

      It's so scientifically proven that you won't put your name to the claim or provide a link.

      --
      Advanced users are users too!
  42. Not offtopic because of parent's sig by 75th+Trombone · · Score: 1

    Polite mistake pointing-out: every instance of "to" in your above post should be "too." When you can replace the word with "overly", it has two Os.

    --
    The United States of America: We do what we must because we can.
    1. Re:Not offtopic because of parent's sig by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Also, let's hope that tast is a misspelling of taste, and not some obscure medical name for a sexual organ.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    2. Re:Not offtopic because of parent's sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, according to the dictionary that shipped with my Mac, the word 'taste' has its origins in Old French where the the noun form of the word was 'tast'. So perhaps he's just a really old French guy (osteoporosis might explain why the monitor is too high for his 'tast').

  43. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    50% more expensive? It's higher than that $700 for an additional 2GB of RAM (When I specced out the 24" version)? Maybe they need to use 'special' heatsinks like the Mac Pro. Considering this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8 2E16820145177 is only $156, I'm guessing it must be something else.

  44. They could make the iMac more expandable by Burz · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Even laptops have drive bays and PC Card slots ya know, and there's no reason (not even looks) why iMacs couldn't have these features.

    1. Re:They could make the iMac more expandable by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      I think you have to consider form factor and complexity. Adding drive bays and PC Card slots would make it bigger and make the manufacturing a lot more complex. The iMac is barely thicker than an LCD monitor. Plus Apple's market is not the DIY crowd. They are for people who don't care to know the difference between PCMCIA and PCI. If you want to add more functionality to an iMac you have just two options: USB or FireWire.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    2. Re:They could make the iMac more expandable by illumin8 · · Score: 1
      Off topic I know:

      ---- "We need the computer power you're not using. [climateprediction.net]
      Does anybody else find it ironic that people are using idle computers, who by definition, are wasting power, to predict how the climate will be affected by global warming? Does this thing predict how much carbon is emitted by all of the computers it is borrowing idle cycles from? Because that would be uber!
      --
      "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
    3. Re:They could make the iMac more expandable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's hard to carry an external device with a laptop. Just try toting even one extra USB peripherals on your next trip. It ends up a tangle of wires in your laptop bag. USB and FireWire are basically meant to take care of the expansion problem on the desktop, and are frankly much easier for people to use than swapping internal components. Just think about all the work you have to do in copying your files over when you have an internal drive... and maybe only one computer to do it with.

      Not that it wouldn't be unwelcome, but if you've ever seen an iMac dissected, there isn't very much space in there. Removable drive bays (while disrupting some of the clean lines) would probably be doable, but even adding something like an ExpressCard slot (Apple's dropped CardBus) would probably be tricky. And again, USB/FireWire are meant to be the expansion mechanism for drives. External drives are very natural for Mac people to work with. Replacing the internal drive is more of a foreign concept to them.

      You need to be able to expand RAM, though. There's no way around that. But the iMac makes it as simple as sliding in a new stick.

    4. Re:They could make the iMac more expandable by eclectic4 · · Score: 1

      "Even laptops have drive bays and PC Card slots ya know, and there's no reason (not even looks) why iMacs couldn't have these features."

      Actually, that is the reason. It would definitely have to be much bigger, and with more "holes" in it. Have you ever seen the inside of one of these? There isn't any room for an ant to crawl in them... A couple of drive bays and expansion slots would make the thing twice as big. The iMac's core buyer does not care for these features anyway, and the sleek design is a huge part of their appeal. Period. For those that want those other features, Apple offers the Mac Pro. It's that simple...

      --

      "The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel Boorstin
    5. Re:They could make the iMac more expandable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree - just make them a bit thicker to make more room for stuff.
      But them people wouldn't have to upgrade to a new machine as often and Apple would make less money...

    6. Re:They could make the iMac more expandable by failedlogic · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I wholeheartedly agree. I am an iMac G5 owner and would love one of the Intel Macs. I sold a practically brand new PC at the time to go with an iMac. I love OS X.

      I begrudge buying the iMac for a few reasons though. What to do if the monitor stops working and its outside Applecare warranty? I hate to think of repair costs. If I change systems I also cannot keep the screen. Upgrade of the video card, CPU or motherboard is impossible (no surprise there). Ditto the sound card. I'd love to hook up a Klipsch 5.1 system but incompatible. But mostly its storage space. I hate having to use an external caddy for the HDD drives. Firewire doesn't work as well as would SATA and I can't really take advantage with an External system of powersaving features whereas it would be on the mobo on new PCs. I also think the "Superdrive" is a piece-o-junk and had to buy an extra caddy for a real DVD-RW.

      I really cannot justify buying a Mac Pro for personal use. The iMac though is not in contrast under powered ... it is not upgradeable. For nearly $2000, I want more flexibility. I was really hoping Apple would see that some 'non-pro' users would spring $1500 to $1800 for a Core-2 or Quad core tower system. Instead we're stuck with the Xeons. Apple doesn't want to drive away Pro sales or iMac sales. And they're sticking with mobile and Xenon chips to keep development costs lower. There are more than a few 'power users' I've spoken to who are PC users and current Mac users on the web like myself that would love to buy another Mac, but the hardware choices are frustrating.

      Sigh. Keeping my iMac (it makes a really nice desktop for surfing web, e-mail and such) but for gaming and SOHO use I think I'm going back to a PC. XP 64 was really nice and fast when I last tried it 2 years ago and no problems with software. Come on Apple!

    7. Re:They could make the iMac more expandable by juniorbird · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind that adding components adds cost, complexity, and, perhaps, size. The trick of product design is to make the right trade-offs in cost, complexity, size, functionality, and other features. A good way to take a first stab at product design is to look at the intersection of people who use feature A and those who use feature B. If the two groups have a lot of overlap, then it's probably a good idea to include both of those features in your product. If the two groups don't have a lot of overlap, then you won't be able to charge group A a premium to get the features that group B would like, and group B won't buy your product at all because they don't want any of the features that you put in to make group A happy. So, in this case, you get the same number of units sold, but you make less money on each unit, because of the cost of the extra hardware for the extra features.

      In this case, I think you've identified two groups without much overlap -- iMacs appeal to home users and PC Card slots and drive bays to power users. People who really want things like that probably don't value the small form factor of the iMac -- they want a lot of expandability, with multiple drive bays and expansion slots, like you get in the Mac Pro, or they really want portability, in which case they go for the MacBook Pro, which has both of the features you want.

      Draw a few Venn diagrams. See what you end up thinking.

    8. Re:They could make the iMac more expandable by Mistah+Blue · · Score: 1

      They could stick an Express/34 slot in and we could then use eSATA off it. I've got a CardBus eSATA card on my PBG4 so it is doing server duty as well. On my ThinkPad T60p (work machine) I have an Express/54 eSATA card hooked to a pair of drives when I'm home (for VMware and BESR).

    9. Re:They could make the iMac more expandable by eclectic4 · · Score: 1

      You just said 10 things that an iMac buyer wouldn't even know what they meant. Point is made. BTW, you are using a Pro machine (POWERBook, not an iBook, just like MacBook is to the MacBook PRO). The iMac is not a pro machine. Just like you can't, and never could, do those things with the consumer line of notebooks from Apple. It's always been this way.

      --

      "The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel Boorstin
    10. Re:They could make the iMac more expandable by Trumpet+of+Doom · · Score: 1

      If you're doing something to your Macs that makes you upgrade, you're supposed to buy a $350 Windows machine anyway. The iMac G4 I'm posting from has lasted 4 years, doesn't show signs of slowing down, and is running Tiger on 256MB of memory. I don't think it's slow; on the other hand, I don't do much with it, and my only comparison is with one of HP's desktops that's 18 months old, has twice the RAM, two 3GHz Pentium 4s as opposed to a solo 1GHz G4, and generally, newer components.

      (For anyone who really cares, here are the tech specs for the HP, and here they are for the iMac. Compare them as you will.)

  45. Re:I know I say this every time, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's really not that bad. I'm using it right now. I like it more than my dell laptop keyboard. The thing I find is people think the keys are that much more spread out and it in turn messes up their typing. The reality is if you look at the very top of the keys on a typical keyboard, even a laptop (though the keys are much shorter profile), the "hat" of the key has as much of a gap as there are on macbook keyboards. The keys are much quieter, and offer me much more feedback than a regular laptop key. They also don't feel like they're going to pop right off like my dell laptop's keys.

  46. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Fry's Electronics, located all over Dallas and other regions of Texas sells macs and ipods of every type and variety. I believe the agreement here is that they stick with prices which are dictated by apple. No more, no less than exactly what Apple dictates. And I don't believe they can be serviced in the stores PC service department, but do offer the Apple Care program.

  47. Re:I know I say this every time, but... by Jethro · · Score: 1

    Have you compared them to the keys on a MacBookPro, though? Same keyboard I have on my current PB12. I love this thing's keyboard. Better than any laptop keyboard I've ever had.

    Now if only it was ergonomic...

    --


    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
  48. iMac and VMWare by SpottedKuh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've been considering a Mac desktop for a while, and now that a new one is out, perhaps I'll buy it.

    One thing I need, though, is to be able to run Linux and OpenBSD in virtual machines on my desktop. Does anyone have any experience with how the new VMWare Fusion compares to VMWare Workstation? Is there any difference between the two (aside from the price, and that unity view for Windows, which does not affect me)? I mean, in terms of features and running other OSes?

    1. Re:iMac and VMWare by bot24 · · Score: 1

      Parallels supports automatically grabbing and releasing the mouse as you enter and leave the window, and has support for automatically changing the resolution of your VM when you change the size of the window. There is no coherence mode or 3D acceleration, but I doubt VMWare offers those features with a Linux guest either. You can hack something together with X11, ssh, and VMGL if you need it. Compiling VMGL may take a little work because the glext header on Mac OS X is too old and the linking system is different, but it is running on my computer.

    2. Re:iMac and VMWare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm in a similar boat. I'm a web developer who has a Mac laptop to test in Safari. I'm strongly considering getting a Mac for my next desktop, but I've got no interest in abandoning Linux/KDE for OS X. I want to run OS X in a virtual machine when I need to test, same as I currently do with Windows. Does anybody have any experience with this? I know plenty of people are doing it the other way around, but I prefer Linux/KDE to OS X.

    3. Re:iMac and VMWare by rsborg · · Score: 1

      Does anyone have any experience with how the new VMWare Fusion compares to VMWare Workstation?
      I think Fusion is basically the only VMWare software that runs on a mac (Workstation does not support OSX as a host, and currently aside from hacked binaries, OSX is not supported as a guest on any virtualized system). I use Fusion and Parallels, and the experience is similar. You want to use Fusion over Parallels if you need access to VMWare's virtual appliances (instant downloadable VM images of Linux/etc), or if you already have an image from a different system (I've personally never tried this).

      I like Parallels better, but the thought of being able to move my VM to a non-Mac (using VMWare Workstation, etc) is very compelling.

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    4. Re:iMac and VMWare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tried Parallels (beta) late last year & ran into some stability issues. The host system locked up unexpectedly a few times. This was a beta version, so I wasn't surprised it happened. I cannot comment on the actual release.


      Earlier this year I started using VMWare Fusion (also a beta). It works great. There were some network issues in the early beta, but those have been ironed out. I purchased a non-trial key for the software (and the non-beta version was recently released).


      I don't have experience with VMWare Workstation, but I've had no problems running: {Solaris, Linux, FreeBSD, W2K}. If I can get {Minix, QNX, FreeDOS} to run (haven't tried 'em), I'll be even happier.

    5. Re:iMac and VMWare by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      I'm strongly considering getting a Mac for my next desktop, but I've got no interest in abandoning Linux/KDE for OS X. I want to run OS X in a virtual machine when I need to test, same as I currently do with Windows. Does anybody have any experience with this? I know plenty of people are doing it the other way around, but I prefer Linux/KDE to OS X.

      It can be done, but you will not be getting any support from the major VM players, since running OS X in a VM is only obeying the license if it is on Mac hardware, and the market for people willing to shell out for a Mac, but who don't want to use OS X as their base OS, is really, really small.

      Personally, I run Windows and Kubuntu on top of OS X and it works just fine. I'm not sure what you lose over the setup you propose and I know what you gain, support for system services for native applications. If you're intent upon running Linux not in an emulation environment, I recommend waiting for Leopard and using Bootcamp. The rapid suspend will let you quickly switch between OS X and Linux, both running natively (with one suspended and one running). You can run Windows on top of your Linux install.

      Something to consider is that Linux is quite a ways behind OS X when it comes to automatically moving to new hardware. One of the nicest things I've found with OS X is that when I get new hardware, I simply select the upgrade from and old machine option and all my files, applications, passwords, user accounts, etc. are migrated to the new machine over a firewire connection. When using OS X as the base OS, this includes my Linux and Windows VMs, but I don't know if it would include a Linux partition and if it did I don't know how much a mess the drivers would be if that partition was cloned on the new hardware. Until Linux catches up in this area, it will stay in a VM so I can more easily migrate it. Besides, I don't know of any disadvantages to running Linux in a VM versus natively.

    6. Re:iMac and VMWare by dick+johnson · · Score: 1

      Actually, VM does offer a similar feature to coherance mode. It is called Unity.

      It hides windows like coherance... but even better, the application shows up on my dock.

      I've added a few windows apps to my doc and now I can launch them directly by clicking on the dock icon and typing in my admin password to launch fusion.

      --
      - dj
    7. Re:iMac and VMWare by gibbsjoh · · Score: 1

      I tried moving a VM from Fusion to VMWare server on Linux (1.0.2) and no dice - it said that the VM was created with a version of VMWare that had too many more features! FYI. It might work with ESX or something but we don't have that to test on.

      JG

      --
      -- "...I'm a bad guy because I, well, I sing some rock-and-roll songs." M. Manson
    8. Re:iMac and VMWare by SpottedKuh · · Score: 1

      I think Fusion is basically the only VMWare software that runs on a mac (Workstation does not support OSX as a host [...]

      Indeed, Workstation is for non-OS X hosts, whereas Fusion is for OS X hosts. So, what I'm curious about is how my experience in Linux would differ between:

      • Running Linux as a guest OS of VMWare Workstation, running on a Windows XP host; and,
      • Running Linux as a guest OS of VMWare Fusion, running on an OS X host

      Why is it that Workstation is so much more expensive than Fusion? Are there additional features I'd be missing out on if I used Fusion on a Mac instead of Workstation on Windows?

      Thanks for all the feedback! I really appreciate everyone's insight.

    9. Re:iMac and VMWare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally, I run Windows and Kubuntu on top of OS X and it works just fine.

      There's a difference between "works" and "runs well". Do you use either of those as your main environment?

      I'm not sure what you lose over the setup you propose and I know what you gain, support for system services for native applications.

      I'm not sure what you mean by that, but it doesn't sound like it has any relevance to a web developer who just wants to run Safari for testing purposes.

      If you're intent upon running Linux not in an emulation environment, I recommend waiting for Leopard and using Bootcamp. The rapid suspend will let you quickly switch between OS X and Linux, both running natively (with one suspended and one running).

      Thanks, but dual-booting isn't an option. I don't want to have to stop what I'm doing in Linux just to load Safari. Example: altering a page in Kate while reloading in Safari to check the changes.

      Something to consider is that Linux is quite a ways behind OS X when it comes to automatically moving to new hardware.

      I don't care. When it comes to new hardware, I just do a clean install. My home directory is loaded from the network.

      Please don't try to convince me to switch. I think OS X is neat and I recommend it to friends and family, but it just isn't for me. The benefits for of the rare occasions where I upgrade a workstation aren't going to outweigh to downsides of having to use the godawful OS X interface all day every day.

      Thanks for the input though. It looks like I'm probably going to do the usual, and build a new machine from parts while sticking with my clunky old Mac laptop for testing.

    10. Re:iMac and VMWare by SpottedKuh · · Score: 1

      The rapid suspend will let you quickly switch between OS X and Linux, both running natively
      I heard that this feature was scrapped, unfortunately. I would have loved it, especially for Windows-OS X rapid switiching, for toggling between playing games and actually accomplishing something :)
    11. Re:iMac and VMWare by tkw954 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've been using Vmware Fusion + Ubuntu for about 2 months and it seems very stable, even with some pretty intensive applications (Matlab number crunching). There was a USB issue, but it was fixed before I even figured out there was a problem. The only thing I haven't been able to get working is getting a folder to sharing folders between OS X and Ubuntu, but I haven't tried very hard.

    12. Re:iMac and VMWare by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      There's a difference between "works" and "runs well". Do you use either of those as your main environment?

      What do you mean by "main environment?" I use both Linux and Windows for specific programs, which I run pretty much constantly and which are critical for my workflow. Things like Adobe Framemaker on Windows and Inkscape on Linux (the OS X port sucks). All things equal, I'd rather run an application in OS X, since OS X allows me to use arbitrary system services functionality while Windows and Linux do not. That said, some applications are only available for one platform or function better on a platform. This is usually more important than the OS's contribution.

      I'm not sure what you mean by that, but it doesn't sound like it has any relevance to a web developer who just wants to run Safari for testing purposes.

      Presumably, when you have multiple platforms running, a user might want to take advantage of programs for that platform. For example, a Web develop might want to take advantage of OmniWeb's in place editing for HTML or a user might just want to run GraphicConverter for batch image processing. Every platform has a few applications that are the best tool for a given job. I suppose a user with multiple OS's running via VMs could ignore those and stick with just the platform they know, but I don't know many users who actually do that.

      Thanks, but dual-booting isn't an option. I don't want to have to stop what I'm doing in Linux just to load Safari. Example: altering a page in Kate while reloading in Safari to check the changes.

      It is supposedly on a few second delay to suspend and switch over, but another poster claims the feature may have been dropped. As I said, the alternative is to try to hack a VM and OS X to get it working as a guest platform, something unsupported by every major VM vendor I know of.

      I don't care. When it comes to new hardware, I just do a clean install. My home directory is loaded from the network.

      Does this hold true for your portable as well? I haven't had to do a clean install for years. What about other user accounts on your machine? What about applications available to all users instead of installed as a given user? What about when you switch chipsets (like 32 to 64 bit) do you reinstall all your applications?

      It sounds like a major pain in the butt to me, especially now that I'm used to one click setup for new machines.

      Please don't try to convince me to switch. I think OS X is neat and I recommend it to friends and family, but it just isn't for me.

      Specifically what is the problem? Almost all the hard core Linux and BSD developers I know have migrated to OS X for their desktop and most seem pretty unwilling to go back. Seriously, the major disadvantage is that you have to run it on Apple hardware, which limits your choices. If you're already doing that, I don't know why you wouldn't run OS X as the base OS.

      ...having to use the godawful OS X interface all day every day.

      I disagree about the interface (and I've done a significant amount of work doing interface design and usability testing) but assuming you don't want to change your habits, what's wrong with X11 and your window manager of choice on OS X?

      Thanks for the input though. It looks like I'm probably going to do the usual, and build a new machine from parts while sticking with my clunky old Mac laptop for testing.

      Good luck. An alternative might be to run Safari on Windows and see if any bugs are platform specific on Safari.

    13. Re:iMac and VMWare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VMware also supports automatically changing the resolution.

    14. Re:iMac and VMWare by LokiSnake · · Score: 1

      Yes, but I doubt either Unity or Coherence works with Linux apps. I think the only way to get that working is some X11 and SSH.

    15. Re:iMac and VMWare by pebs · · Score: 1

      Try VMWare Player 2.0. The server product lags behind apparently.

      --
      #!/
    16. Re:iMac and VMWare by tf23 · · Score: 1

      I've been using the VMWare Fusion beta's for a while now. I love it. I used it to make VMWare IM's of Fedora and CentOS for our software development. We even went so far as to take a CentOS VM that I created on my MacBook Pro, scp it over to the VMWare Server (the free version, running on a CentOS 5 host OS) that we are running and mount it and run it.

      You can also go the opposite direction.

      It's quite handy. If I were you I'd not hesitate to go w/ an OSX machine and run everything you need under VMWare Fusion.

      Now, if only my boss would order the release of Fusion for me...

    17. Re:iMac and VMWare by lakeland · · Score: 1

      You'll want parallels rather than VMWare, way better OSX integration.

      I haven't tried anything except linux or windows in a virtual machine, so I'll leave others to comment on how well OpenBSD goes.

    18. Re:iMac and VMWare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you mean by "main environment?" I use both Linux and Windows for specific programs, which I run pretty much constantly and which are critical for my workflow.

      I mean there's a world of difference between using an environment as your main way of working with the computer, and merely keeping it running for the purpose of using a program on it. There's a lot of concessions I'd make for the latter, but not for the former.

      All things equal, I'd rather run an application in OS X

      Look, this isn't an OS pissing contest. I'm glad that you'd rather use OS X. I'd rather not.

      Presumably, when you have multiple platforms running, a user might want to take advantage of programs for that platform. For example, a Web develop might want to take advantage of OmniWeb's in place editing for HTML or a user might just want to run GraphicConverter for batch image processing.

      No. I have a perfectly suitable workflow using Linux development tools. I have no interest in using OS X software for anything other than testing.

      I suppose a user with multiple OS's running via VMs could ignore those and stick with just the platform they know, but I don't know many users who actually do that.

      I know Windows and OS X, I just don't choose to use them. Do you really think ignorance is the only explanation for not using OS X? You really come across as a zealot.

      It is supposedly on a few second delay to suspend and switch over

      Having to do it every time I change a line or two of code? No thanks.

      I don't care. When it comes to new hardware, I just do a clean install. My home directory is loaded from the network.

      Does this hold true for your portable as well? I haven't had to do a clean install for years. What about other user accounts on your machine? What about applications available to all users instead of installed as a given user? What about when you switch chipsets (like 32 to 64 bit) do you reinstall all your applications?

      I don't keep anything on the portable beyond the default install. Other user accounts are the same as mine. All the applications I use come with the distribution. Switching chipsets is so rare that I don't give a flying fuck how easy it is. Once more, this is not an OS pissing contest. Stop trying to tell me that OS X is better, especially when everything you mention is insignificant to me.

      Please don't try to convince me to switch. I think OS X is neat and I recommend it to friends and family, but it just isn't for me.

      Specifically what is the problem?

      Does it even matter? Stop trying to convert me! Why should I have to justify my preferences to you? I'm not trying to argue that Linux/KDE is better for anybody other than me, I was just hoping that somebody would care to share their experiences in doing what I would like to do. I didn't expect to be preached to, especially after I already stated that I had no interest in using OS X as my main environment.

      Look, I'm all for a healthy amount of advocacy, but in future, if you see somebody post "I've got no interest in abandoning Linux/KDE for OS X", please just take it as a hint that advocacy is not welcome and will be ineffective at best, and probably counter-productive. You really think that it never occurred to me that if I need to run an OS X application that virtualising the other way around might be an option? It's something I've already considered and rejected, and I made that perfectly clear in my first comment.

      An alternative might be to run Safari on Windows and see if any bugs are platform specific on Safari.

      Like I said, I want to run Safari for the purpose of testing. Running the Windows port is not adequate for testing compatibility with Safari running on OS X.

    19. Re:iMac and VMWare by pmadden · · Score: 1

      I'm running VMware Fusion (beta) on a low-end MacBook. The final release of Fusion just came out, and I'll probably upgrade tonight. Debian Etch and Windoze XP both run without trouble; no issues getting the networking to happen, and I can drag-and-drop files from the Mac to a VM desktop and back. I had 1gig of RAM; it was a bit slow (especially XP); this morning I upgraded to 2gig, and now it's very fast and smooth.

      In general, I'm very happy with the setup. OSX has lots of Unix goodness, and the productivity stuff is nice (Pages and Keynote are slick, and I'm really glad they put out Numbers). I'm a huge fan of GarageBand; beats the daylights out of Cakewalk. My research group machines are all Debian, so having that as a VM lets me keep connected to what the students are up to; having XP supported is handy too. The Macbook is my main machine now; I use it with an external monitor and keyboard at home/office, and only use the laptop screen when I'm on the road.

      I've heard good things about Parallels as well; one of my friends is running that, and has no complaints. The only thing I'd caution you on is to get a bunch of RAM; with only one gig, my laptop was swapping constantly. For the Macbook, it was really easy to drop in RAM and a big disk (good deals on both from Newegg).

    20. Re:iMac and VMWare by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      I mean there's a world of difference between using an environment as your main way of working with the computer, and merely keeping it running for the purpose of using a program on it.

      I use all my OS's as a way to run programs. Whether an OS is hosted in a VM or hosts other OS's is something I determine by what combination provides me the most functionality, not which one is my "favorite."

      Look, this isn't an OS pissing contest. I'm glad that you'd rather use OS X. I'd rather not.

      That wasn't an attack on your favorite OS, it was attempting to answer your question as to what my "main" OS is, although the question seems flawed to me.

      No. I have a perfectly suitable workflow using Linux development tools. I have no interest in using OS X software for anything other than testing. know Windows and OS X, I just don't choose to use them. Do you really think ignorance is the only explanation for not using OS X? You really come across as a zealot.

      I see it exactly the opposite. I use whatever tools work the best,on the best OS they run on for my purpose. You are not interested in any tools that are different from what you already use on Linux. That makes you a lot more of a "zealot" than I am, don't you think?

      Having to do it every time I change a line or two of code? No thanks.

      You asked for the best option to run Linux, Windows, and OS X on a new Mac. I was just letting you know my opinions based upon experience. If that isn't good enough, that's fine.

      Stop trying to tell me that OS X is better, especially when everything you mention is insignificant to me.

      I'm mentioning reasons why it is better that pertain to choosing which OS is a client OS and which is a host OS for VMs. It doesn't matter to me what you pick and I'm not trying to convince you to make a given choice, just providing info.

      Look, I'm all for a healthy amount of advocacy, but in future, if you see somebody post "I've got no interest in abandoning Linux/KDE for OS X"

      Who's talking about abandoning Linux and KDE. I was talking about running Linux on top of OS X. I mentioned running KDE on top of OS X. I'm not emotionally committed to any OS since I use three OS's daily for the things they are best suited. In my opinion, OS X is best suited as a host OS, largely due to the limitations of using it as a client OS. I don't care if you have decided that is not for you, that's fine, but the remaining options are all poor.

      Like I said, I want to run Safari for the purpose of testing. Running the Windows port is not adequate for testing compatibility with Safari running on OS X.

      That's too bad. I haven't seen a lot of discrepancy between the two versions and using just one for smoke testing works works for the developers where I work, although QA does a more formal testing with both platforms at a later time. In smaller shops where QA and development are the same guy, I can see where someone with strict quality rules might need both.

    21. Re:iMac and VMWare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I mean there's a world of difference between using an environment as your main way of working with the computer, and merely keeping it running for the purpose of using a program on it.

      I use all my OS's as a way to run programs.

      Don't be facetious, you know what I mean. Having a particular operating system running on a VM just to give you access to a particular program is not the same thing as having an operating system installed to let you actually run your computer.

      I use whatever tools work the best,on the best OS they run on for my purpose. You are not interested in any tools that are different from what you already use on Linux. That makes you a lot more of a "zealot" than I am, don't you think?

      No, for a few reasons.

      Firstly, you were offering ignorance as the explanation for people using a single platform rather than spreading out to include OS X, where the most obvious and straightforward answer is that it's just simpler. The fact that you eschewed the obvious and started talking about ignorance of other platforms implies that you think OS X can't lose on its own merits.

      Secondly, I'm not interested in any tools that run on a different platform because a) it adds complexity (e.g. why switch from VM to VM to get access to your basic tools when you can house them all in one environment?), b) reduces utility (e.g. I don't have any KIOslaves available under OS X applications), and c) offers no benefits (all my existing applications do what I need them to already).

      Thirdly, I stated up-front that I wasn't interested in switching platforms, and you still tried to push an OS X solution. The fact that you are backpedalling now that I've pointed it out changes nothing.

      You asked for the best option to run Linux, Windows, and OS X on a new Mac.

      The specific point you were responding to there was that I already told you that suspending and switching wasn't good enough, and you were still trying to persuade me that it was "just a few seconds". If I point out that an option is unsuitable, don't try to persuade me that it is. This is the primary thing that makes you look like a zealot: you won't take no for an answer, you keep trying to push your solution despite me saying over and over again that it's not suitable.

    22. Re:iMac and VMWare by eMilkshake · · Score: 1

      Way better only for Windows guests. Paravirtualization support for Ubuntu with Fusion is amazing.

    23. Re:iMac and VMWare by lakeland · · Score: 1

      Interesting, thanks.

      I guess I'm a little old fashoned in that I have one OS per computer (except for windows which doesn't get its own computer) so after an initial play to see it worked, I don't bother virtualising linux at all - just sit down at the console.

  49. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by metamatic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yeah. I have a Macbook pro, almost a $3000 computer; and the keyboard is terrible.


    Funny, I love mine, and previously I was a diehard Model M user.

    As is the one-button trackpad.


    Switch on right-click support in the System Preferences or use the Ctrl key.

    Personally, I use Ctrl for right-click even when I'm using Linux on a system with a 4-button trackball.
    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  50. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by BluMeNe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    honestly the keyboard isn't the seller for me. I'll be ordering my first ever Mac computer tonight when i get home. I've been waiting since about April for them to update the iMac and now i will put my money where my mouth is...i sure hope the Apple tastes sweet.

  51. VESA mount... by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I assume you'll be able to get something like this for the new iMacs...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:VESA mount... by norminator · · Score: 1

      Apparently you will:

      (See the line for "Other", and look all the way to the right)

      Of course, the store is still down, so I'm not 100% sure if they're offering to bundle a VESA mount with your 34" iMac, but they call it optional, so it sounds like they will.

    2. Re:VESA mount... by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Interesting, I knew the older G5 iMacs could use VESA mounts directly but I thought that was dropped with the Intel line, perhaps they are bringing that back.

      ---> Kendall

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    3. Re:VESA mount... by rthille · · Score: 1

      the 24" has always supported VESA mounting. The last G5 iMac (the one I have) doesn't support VESA mounting... it's random, like a lot of stuff Apple does :-(

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
  52. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well, first, Apple isn't a monopoly. They have viable competitors in every market in which they compete, and insofar as that is the case, the behaviors you describe (which are called "vertical integration", or "anti-competitive practices" if and only if you already have a monopoly) aren't "brutal" so much as "a business and design choice".

    They destroyed the Mac clone market and reseller market because those things were destroying Apple. At that time (the late 90's), Linux wasn't nearly as mature or widely-adopted as it is today and the destruction of Apple would have, as far as almost everyone could predict, led to a total Microsoft monopoly. Microsoft was already starting to displace commercial UNIX in some segments. Other companies had licenses to manufacture Apple hardware designs with Apple software, including the Apple ROM that (at the time) was necessary for the OS to run. Those license payments weren't enough to allow Apple to continue existing and developing their OS, so Apple refused to extend those licenses to future technology (the CHRP common hardware platform, Mac OS 8) and purchased back the licenses it had already granted.

    The real question is whether it's acceptable to sell integrated systems that are capable of working together above and beyond the interoperability offered by open standards. When I look across the fence at the hardware support issues Linux and Windows are struggling with, I'm pretty happy with how green the grass is over here. And if I wasn't, I'm still perfectly able to get a new OS and new hardware. That's the difference between a monopoly and a competitor who offers a significantly different solution.

    --
    In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
  53. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by reidconti · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Simple. You're assuming Slashdotters are FOSSies, rather than just adamant about not using crappy products.

    I don't like Microsoft because they make shit products and force them down our throats. I use them regularly, as I now have an XP laptop at my current job as a Unix SA. I am willing to pay for Microsoft products when I think they are worthwhile -- I have an XBox 360 Elite -- but usually they are not worth paying for. The XBox is the first Microsoft product I have bought .. well, ever.

    For my own computer, I am happy to pay the extra few bucks for an Apple product that does exactly what it is designed to do, and does it extremely well. It's just not worth hassling with a Linux desktop machine anymore. OS X has the Windows advantages of being "mainstream" and playing all that fancy DVD and audio content with no fuss, no muss, but without the disadvantages of being utter crap. I definitely spent more money on my Mac Pro than I needed to spend on a computer, but mostly that was me buying an overkill machine, and very little of it was the Apple tax. Of course, if they had a mid-range headless system, maybe I would have bought that instead... But the low-end laptops are very competitive with PC offerings, and to some of us it is worth paying money for stuff that works.

    By the way, I register all of the shareware I use and enjoy in OS X, something that is far more true of the Mac community than the Windows community. Why? Because we feel the products are worth paying for, rather than Windows users who feel that they use what they use out of necessity, not choice.

    I like the idea of free software, but I'm not devoting my life to the cause. If it works best, I'll use it. If not, I'll pay to use whatever works best. Unfortunately for Microsoft, it is almost never their product.

  54. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Apple shut down third party hardware. Non-Apple Mac stores are still around - heck Best Buy is starting to sell Macs now!
    iWork uses XML to save files. The whole OS is laden with OSS sofware, including Bash and Apache and Ruby and Python and Perl. Chages to Webkit are published and synced back into other browsers. iPods can be used with all sorts of software, not just iTunes - why do you demand iTunes be able to work out of the box with other players?

    I'm not sure I understand where the whole "brutal monopoly" idea comes from.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  55. Attack of the clones. by MaWeiTao · · Score: 3, Insightful

    One thing that bothers me is the decision to go with a glass screen. These screens, to me, are nothing more than a fad that help make the display look more impressive on the showroom floor. Once someone has to actually use them day-to-day glass screens are a huge distraction because of all the reflections and glare. This iMac is going to inspire a deluge of crappy glass-covered displays.

    Seeing these new Macs, however, I can't help but wonder why in the hell PC makers don't actually start putting some damn effort into the manufacture and design of their machines. Instead they go for quick, cheap gimmicks like Dell and the goofy interchangeable color covers for their laptops. Even worse are the third party case manufacturers.

    There are a million ideas out there for very elegant designs that could be just as impressive, if not more so, than anything Apple has designed. But instead what are we going to see? Dozens of crappy clones of the Apple design. Either that or half-hearted attempts that scream of cost-cutting over thoughtful design. Even Nintendo couldn't help but cloning the MacBook design with the DS and to a lesser extent the Wii.

    Apple has nice design, but they are far from being the pinnacle of high design. If only other companies weren't cheap and unimaginative.

    1. Re:Attack of the clones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The glossy screen works better for me than the matte, but I've set up my working space for it.

    2. Re:Attack of the clones. by Frumious+Wombat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because the market basically has three segments:

      (1) I need this to get work done and it has to run forever: Lenovo (formerly IBM) and high-end HP. Ugly is fine, as long as it's bullet-proof ugly

      (2) I'm cheap and have no taste: Dell. Absolutely rock-bottom prices, and it has to match my velvet Elvis or corporate posters from Inspiration.com.

      (3) It's a lifestyle choice, and I'm willing to pay for polish: Apple. They're not that much more expensive (especially the laptops), but getting people to overlook the price on the quad-core monsters is going to take better marketing. Tasteful, unobtrusive, and just let you get whatever it is you do done. Should be offered in Latte.

      Besides, 94%, give or take a Linux box or two run Windows of some flavor. Why shouldn't the look of the machine remind you of the experience you're about to have?

      --
      the more accurate the calculations became, the more the concepts tended to vanish into thin air. R. S. Mulliken
    3. Re:Attack of the clones. by balbeir · · Score: 1

      It's very logical. Now you can also use your iMAC as an iWhiteboard.

    4. Re:Attack of the clones. by necro2607 · · Score: 1

      All our monitors here in my office have clear glass over the screen (they're 19" LCD monitors). This prevents screens from being damaged when coworkers point at elements on the screen and physically touch the surface. One coworker has a disgustingly fingerprint-laden set of monitors. If we didn't use these monitors with the built-in glass covering, I can only imagine how damaged the LCD surface would be on his monitors. Also, there's no more glare experienced with these monitors than what I experience on my non-glass-surface LCD monitor at home... Of course we have such modern inventions as window blinds and so on, so that helps reduce direct sunlight from hitting the monitors. ;)

      BTW to make this more relevant to the iMacs, I imagine they are very popular in the family setting, considering their total applicability for watching movies etc. "with the family" and I would guess playing games and stuff (iMacs seem to be the usual casual/family/fun model I see being bought by people). Anyways, of course when you think about that you can just picture the kids going "look at that!" and poking the screen and, well, I'm already cringing thinking of how easily an LCD monitor could be damaged in such a situation.. ;) So of course a glass surface keeps it safe and still looks nice and sleek. Of course everything I'm saying is speculation since I'm not a designer for Apple, but it definitely makes sense regardless... OK, enough rambling. ;)

    5. Re:Attack of the clones. by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 1

      Option two might be better expressed as "I want something that does what I need at a reasonable price because I'm buying a computer not a fashion accessory" and it probably represents most of the home PC market.

    6. Re:Attack of the clones. by argent · · Score: 1

      (1) I need this to get work done and it has to run forever: Lenovo (formerly IBM) and high-end HP. Ugly is fine, as long as it's bullet-proof ugly

      That's me, now if I could get that running an OS that (a) doesn't suck and (b) has an actual application base.

      (a) rules out any version of Windows (certainly anything post Windows 2000) and half the Linux distros.

      (b) rules out the rest of the Linux distros, as well as things like BSD and Solaris (and oddballs like whatever-the-latest-BeOS-clone-is).

    7. Re:Attack of the clones. by argent · · Score: 1

      "I want something that does what I need at a reasonable price because I'm buying a computer not a fashion accessory"

      That's option 1 as well, except that "does what I need" includes "not fall apart if I don't treat it like it's made of explosive eggshells".

    8. Re:Attack of the clones. by mr_matticus · · Score: 1

      No, it represents most of the economy PC market. It's a huge market segment and Apple doesn't care about them. It's a business decision that works just fine for them.

      People are, by and large, more than happy to pay for something attractive if they can afford it. Design details and a presentable appearance are highly sought-after. Look how well the "pretty" Samsung HDTVs sell. They're unabashedly more expensive than even Samsung's own "basic" designs, let alone budget manufacturers, and yet they're among the best sellers of their classes. People DO care what something looks like if they're going to spend a lot of time looking at it. The trend for richer materials in the home isn't slowing down (granite, stone tile, stainless steel appliances, faux finishes, crafted light fixtures, etc.).

      Most people are not practical by nature. Many are forced to be by budget constraints, but design is worth something. Simplicity/elegance is worth something. An enjoyable experience with all facets of a product is worth something. People will pay for it. Yes, you're shutting out bottom-dollar customers. They can buy something else.

    9. Re:Attack of the clones. by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Even Nintendo couldn't help but cloning the MacBook design with the DS and to a lesser extent the Wii.

      You might want to check the dates on those. The DS predates the Macbook by atleast a year.

    10. Re:Attack of the clones. by Gentlewhisper · · Score: 1

      You might want to check the dates on those. The DS predates the Macbook by atleast a year.


      The iBook G4 predates the DS by YEARS.
    11. Re:Attack of the clones. by TheNetAvenger · · Score: 1

      Once someone has to actually use them day-to-day glass screens are a huge distraction because of all the reflections and glare.

      A lot of glass and 'gloss' displays have anti-glare coatings, obviously the cheaper ones don't. So we will have to wait and see if Apple provides a good quality coating or not.

      As an example we have a couple of 'gloss' screen laptops with comperable LCDs, one brand has a great finish and the gloss actually works well, the other is a reflection nightmare for most lighting environments.

    12. Re:Attack of the clones. by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

      Abso-goddamn-loutely!

      I'm absoloutely convinced it's one of those stupid fads that some dipshit buys a screen with it, forces himself to get used to it and then proclaims how good it is, if he / she went back to a 'normal' screen they'd see just how bad the glossy ones are.

      It is by far, one of the most stupid thing the industry has moved towards in recent years, the least you can offer is a choice (shakes fist at dell)

      Seriously, SO glary, I configured a Sony Vaio for someone a while back and it was horrible, a woman could comfortably do their makeup in the screen.

      Yes, please respond with 'but the colours, but the blacks, but the whites!' here's something for you, I don't give a fuck and anyone who uses their PC in a room with any light in it does NOT want to damn well see themselves in the screen

      Ugh ugh and ugh! - I honestly don't know what to do when I need to replace my laptop in about 18 months, I'll return the damn thing as faulty if it comes with one of those (some damn places like dell have gone ahead and not actually made it clear on their website the laptop you're ordering is glossy)

      in conclusion... die glossy DIE.

    13. Re:Attack of the clones. by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 1

      No, it represents most of the economy PC market. It's a huge market segment and Apple doesn't care about them. What an odd thing to say. It represents the entirety of the economy PC market by definition. As you admit, it's huge portion of the PC market as a whole, which is not far off from saying that it's probably most of the market. So you've basically added the word "No" and repeated what I said back to me. I don't see how you think that contradicts anything I've said.

      Quite obviously Apple is targeting people who care more about appearance than price and I don't have any problem with that. My point was only to rephrase the GP's spin to counter this notion that who buy non-Apple PCs are hillbilly troglodytes who want something to "match my velvet Elvis poster."
    14. Re:Attack of the clones. by mr_matticus · · Score: 1

      No, it does not represent the entirety of the economy PC market. There are people with no money who care about appearance as well. They, like most people, desire more than an ugly box. They are forced by their means to sacrifice that. It's not that all poor people have no taste. Paying for aesthetics is a luxury they're not able to do, whether it's furniture, cars, dinnerware, artwork, or computers.

      It is also quite far from saying it's most of the market overall. Given the choice, the overwhelming majority of people would select the more attractive, better designed product over an identical one with no redeeming features. As I said, most people DO care about appearance. That second group in the OP, it seems to me, targets the Slashdot demographic of people with no or poor taste or no regard for design. People who do not place any value on aesthetics tend to dominate the anti-Apple comparisons here, because they are unable or unwilling to see beyond the specs.

      They do not reflect the world at large. A Lexus ES is more or less a fancy Camry. An Audi A4 is an upmarket VW Passat, trimmed down in size a bit. These models sell exceedingly well despite having performance features that fall far below justifying their price tags. People are interested in and willing to pay for a combination of the two, something you're trying to dismiss. Apple doesn't "quite obviously" target people care "more about appearance than price"--they target people who care about appearance, period. Apple prices are highly competitive with matching systems. They don't offer the flexibility of choice, so if your ideal system differs from Apple's offerings, you're going to find a better deal or a closer match from someone else. That's the way it works and the way it's meant to work.

    15. Re:Attack of the clones. by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 1

      Again I see you're taking issue with things I didn't say. Did I say that economy PC users don't care at all about aesthetics? They simply care more about getting a product that has the functionality they want at a price they can afford. That's how I define the "economy PC market". If you still don't get what I mean, look up the word "economical".

      As for nit-picking the difference between "huge" and "probably most", I really don't care. It suffices it to say that it's a significant portion of the market. You are simply manufacturing a debate where none exists.

    16. Re:Attack of the clones. by mr_matticus · · Score: 1

      They simply care more about getting a product that has the functionality they want at a price they can afford. That's how I define the "economy PC market". If you still don't get what I mean, look up the word "economical". Again, you're disregarding the monetary value of design. You are psychologically prone to a continuing failure to see the distinction.

      An economical person does not necessarily value any particular performance functionality over design. An economical person will simply strive to get his or her required features for the lowest possible price. The design of the product may indeed be a feature and could be the most important feature. Economics doesn't have anything to do with performance. It has to do with money, period.

      You are attempting to impose an innate superiority to specifications over design. No such distinction exists. The "economy PC" market is just cheap computers. That's it. It happens, for obvious reasons, to comprise systems that favor performance over design. That does not say anything about preference--i.e. what customers "care more" about. You gave it away when you said "a computer, not a fashion accessory," as if there should be a distinction between the two--and now you're trying to backpedal from it. There's little difference between appliances and fashion accessories. They all do the job; people will generally choose the most aesthetically pleasing product that meets their needs.
    17. Re:Attack of the clones. by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 1

      Again, you're disregarding the monetary value of design. You are psychologically prone to a continuing failure to see the distinction. And you are psychologically prone not to read the sentence you've quoted back to me. Here, I'll repeat it for you: They simply care more about getting a product that has the functionality they want at a price they can afford. Did you notice that I said they cared more about functionality than aesthetics, rather than not at all?

      You gave it away when you said "a computer, not a fashion accessory," as if there should be a distinction between the two--and now you're trying to backpedal from it. There's little difference between appliances and fashion accessories. There is a distinction. A computer in a cardboard box is still a computer. If you wanted to cut costs to make the cheapest computer you can, you could completely eliminate aesthetic design for the sake of lowering the price. On the other hand, if you strip away all the functionality and leave only the design, what you are left with is a fashion accessory, not a computer. If you are buying a computer and the most important feature for you is the design, then you buying a fashion accessory that happens to be a computer as well.
    18. Re:Attack of the clones. by mr_matticus · · Score: 1

      They simply care more about getting a product that has the functionality they want at a price they can afford. This was addressed, which is all the more delicious given that you're talking about not reading: "The 'economy PC' market is just cheap computers. That's it. It happens, for obvious reasons, to comprise systems that favor performance over design. That does not say anything about preference--i.e. what customers "care more" about."

      If you are buying a computer and the most important feature for you is the design, then you buying a fashion accessory that happens to be a computer as well. Which is a clever but unsuccessful attempt at an end-run around this issue. Neither extreme actually exists. If you're buying a computer for your home, it is not up to you to specify what is categorically more important. For the overwhelming majority of the market, the most basic computer is more than adequate. The only real reason to spend more is for prestige--whether that's beefier components or a stylish, elegant design is dependent on personal preference. Both meet any basic set of needs, but people in general are more likely to buy the "pretty" one than the "absolute fastest" one. It's pretty logical--paying leading-edge premiums for components is a rapidly depreciating asset. Paying premiums for sophisticated design is a longer-lasting investment. Resale value speaks to that, as does the popularity of second-hand Macs with "budget" shoppers.

      Stop trying to force a binary where none exists. It is neither impossible nor counterintuitive to buy a computer based on its design. You can't eliminate aesthetic design from anything tangible, and you can't eliminate the computer from a computer to prove your point. (Il)logical extremes are not your friend.
    19. Re:Attack of the clones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seeing these new Macs, however, I can't help but wonder why in the hell PC makers don't actually start putting some damn effort into the manufacture and design of their machines. Nobody copied the look of the white iMacs because they were they ugliest and stupidest looking computers on the market. The new iMacs look much better, but they're just catching up to old all-in-ones from companies like IBM, Sony, and MPC.
  56. Free leopard upgrade? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, if I buy one of these now, does Apple do the right thing and give me the upgrade to 10.5 for free, since it's only a month or so away, or do they burn me hard and make me pay another $129 when it comes out (especially since iWork/iLife08 are supposed to be heavily drawing upon the 10.5 features)?

    1. Re:Free leopard upgrade? by ItsLenny · · Score: 1

      I don't know about now... but I got a free upgrade to 10.4 about 8 months later... when I bought my mac they sent a thing with the book that said I get free upgrades for a year

      don't know if they still do this but they did last year

      --
      ----------
      Trying to fix or change something only guarantees and perpetuates it's existence
  57. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by fyngyrz · · Score: 1
    Switch on right-click support in the System Preferences or use the Ctrl key.

    I'm familiar with the double tap and various prefs options for the trackpad, as well as the ctrl key. You still can't get the same functionality you can out of a proper two-button system. For instance, you can't click left... left+right... left while dragging; that's an often-used operation for repositioning area selections in my work, so there's no option but to hook up a two-button mouse when I'm doing graphics.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  58. Dovetails nicely with iPhone. by Lethyos · · Score: 4, Funny

    Apple is slowly phasing tactile response out of their input devices. Started with mice, then the iPhone, and now with keyboards. Soon, we will live in a polished world where nothing lets us know we touched it! I hope Apple never enters the sex industry.

    --
    Why bother.
    1. Re:Dovetails nicely with iPhone. by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This isn't going to help much when Apple enters the Sex biz, but there's this $5 utility, Keyclick, that makes typing sounds when you type. I've never used it, but it's interesting.

      There's also the Slow Keys setting in the Universal Access pref pane. I just turned it on now for the first time, and it's friggin' annoying. If you try this, be sure to set acceptance delay to short. Yeah, this is really annoying.

      Yeah, typing that last paragraph pretty much sucked.

      There was also a drop in keyboard replacement for the Ti books that was just like a touch sensitive pad. There was a keyboard printed on it I think. Oh, here it is. The TouchStream MacNTouch. Never used one, but it seems interesting because of some of the other input possibilities (chording, gestures, etc.).

      Ah, well. You were making a joke and I got all esoteric on you. Sorry. =)

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  59. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Its funny noticing the parent poster's message being cowardly modded down as overrated.

    The post, which is very true, as if MS did the things that Apple does, the SEC would be knocking on Redmond's doors in a heartbeat.

    Fine examples of this are, OS X cannot be (legally) virtualized, nor can it run on any hardware other than Apple's PC hardware, whose only two differences between it and a generic white box PC are a logo, and a certificate in a TPM chip (Well, Apple's hardware if it were compared as a generic PC would be marked as woefully inadequate except for the hyper expensive Mac Pro). Or, Apple buying companies out that sell both Mac and Windows products, then dropping the Windows versions as an underhanded way to boost Mac sales.

    If Microsoft forced their users to jump platforms and have all their older apps unable to run like Apple did with OS 9 and earlier apps on x86 Macs, people would be driving to Washington with pitchforks and torches.

    Apple doesn't innovate much either. They find 1-2 cool things, then hype the hell out of them. For example, if it wasn't for Apple buying out NeXT, MacOS will still be crashing every 1-2 hours, because the machine would be dependent on every app passing a WaitNextEvent() call or else the machine would lock up.

    MS is no angel, but at least they innovate and put stuff on the market, not just talk hype left and right.

  60. Macdolatry by fm6 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I suppose it's healthier than obsessing over Paris Hilton, but it's still pretty pathetic.

  61. Different Keyboards. by LKM · · Score: 2, Informative

    A lot of people dislike the MacBook keyboards.

    Yeah. I have a Macbook pro, almost a $3000 computer; and the keyboard is terrible.

    Uhm. You're talking about different keyboards. The MacBook Pro has a "normal" notebook keyboard, while the MacBook (without Pro) has the "new style" keyboard, which is very similar to the one being used in this new Apple keyboard, from the looks of it.

    1. Re:Different Keyboards. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The MacBook keyboard may look a bit odd, but it really feels just like a regular laptop keyboard. I personally find the regular Mac white keyboard has a little too much keytravel.

    2. Re:Different Keyboards. by urbanRealist · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have the regular MacBook and love the keyboard. The reduced key travel that everyone seems so upset about is a plus in my mind. I type at a normal keyboard all day long and by 7 or 8pm, my hands a just tired. But now I'm home and typing this on my MacBook keyboard and my hands feel fine. The reduced key travel means less work.

      --
      I've seen a lot of things, but I've never been a witness.
    3. Re:Different Keyboards. by RMH101 · · Score: 1

      I've a Macbook and don't really like the keyboard. It's OK, but I wouldn't want to do any serious typing on it: it's not got enough tactile feedback. By "serious", I mean 70wpm+ for extended periods.
      Not many people these days are touch-typists and I think those of us that are, have higher standards of what constitutes "good" than those that don't. I guess it's not surprising that MB keyboards aren't aimed at us, however.

    4. Re:Different Keyboards. by LKM · · Score: 1

      Not many people these days are touch-typists and I think those of us that are, have higher standards of what constitutes "good" than those that don't.

      Everyone I know learns how to type in school. Some people like the MB keyboard, some like the MBP keyboard, some like neither. I don't think it has anything to do with skill, it's just personal preference. I haven't used the MBs extensively, but when I have used them, I had no problem with them. My main notebook is a MBP, and I don't particularly like or dislike the keyboard. It works well enough for me.

      My main issue with the new Apple keyboard is that it's impossible to make it "flat." It's always tilted towards the user. I immensely dislike this, as I prefer flat keyboards.

    5. Re:Different Keyboards. by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      Not many people these days are touch-typists and I think those of us that are, have higher standards of what constitutes "good" than those that don't. I guess it's not surprising that MB keyboards aren't aimed at us, however.
      Funny... I'm a touch typist, and I find that key travel gets in the way of my typing... I can touch type faster on a piece of paper with a printed keyboard than on a standard PC keyboard. All you really need is the two indicators to tell you where your home key position is; the rest of the keys you store in muscle memory. You know when you've touched them because your fingers have pressure applied to them.
  62. iMac design by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one out there who thinks that the iMac's design has never been better than in its 1998-2001 (or so) version, before it started involving flat screens? I think it has never looked better than that, but that they couldn't keep it cause :

    -They had to move on to a different design for the sake that it was a few years old because people don't like "old" stuff
    -They had to put a flat screen in it because that's what people want
    -They had to make it increasingly slimer and such because that's what people expect from futuristic computers
    -Later they couldn't go back to it anyways so they have to move on into the forced design futurism

    ?

    --
    You just got troll'd!
    1. Re:iMac design by BearRanger · · Score: 1

      I suspect you are the only one, but of course there's no way to prove that. There are lots more reasons to change a design then the ones you've listed.

      Look at the improvements differently. Apple gets hammered no matter what they do, but they've been on a continual path to make their designs simpler and more easy to service. Granted, the iMac G4 was an abominable machine to service. But the G5 and Intel systems have been pretty nice. After the recent environmental flap it's also a nice concession to go with aluminum and glass for the large components. Both are easily recyclable. Add in the Energy Star compliance and you have a system that is more energy efficient, environmentally friendly, serviceable and superior to the original iMac in every way.

    2. Re:iMac design by MacDaffy · · Score: 1

      Look at the improvements differently. Apple gets hammered no matter what they do, but they've been on a continual path to make their designs simpler and more easy to service. Granted, the iMac G4 was an abominable machine to service. But the G5 and Intel systems have been pretty nice.


      The iMac G4 is pretty easy to deal with once you get the hang of it. For instance, you have to gut it to replace the power supply. I've done the whole job in half an hour. You just have to be careful not to pinch the video cable.

      But the Intel iMacs? Until I learned an alternate method of opening them, I'd have fits when one came in. I'm an Apple Authorized Service Provider, but I once closed my shop and went home early after twenty minutes of trying to open one. The "official" method of opening them is like a rigged arcade game at a carnival; try it ten times and you might get lucky once. I called around and found two alternate methods of getting them open. The first one I found is sure-fire. It's now the way I do it. The second one is ingenious but I haven't tried it yet.

      I agree with everything else you say, but the Intel iMac is the devil to open if you try to do it the way it's designed to be opened.
    3. Re:iMac design by mehgul · · Score: 1

      Not that I agree or disagree with you on the original iMac, but look at the eMac: only a 17" CRT but already humongous and super-heavy. Now imagine a 24" CRT instead. I don't now if people expect TFTs from futuristic looking computers, but I for one would really prefer not to have to carry such a beast, even if its only once in a while.

    4. Re:iMac design by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      Sorry but I don't get your point and I hardly see what it does with the style of the iMac..

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    5. Re:iMac design by porcupine8 · · Score: 1

      I have two CRT eMacs at home, and my husband and I both use the latest (well, now second-latest) iMacs at work. We both LOVE the iMacs. I mean, the eMacs are great and all, and the price was certainly right (and the main reason for choosing it), but damn. 51 pounds, and I've moved four times since I got mine. Not fun. There's a *reason* people wanted the flat screen iMacs. Plus, I love having widescreen - I can actually put two documents side-by-side on my screen without making both incredibly narrow!

      --
      Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
  63. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by teh+kurisu · · Score: 1

    Yeah. I have a Macbook pro, almost a $3000 computer; and the keyboard is terrible.

    If it's anything like the PowerBook keyboards (identical I suspect), then I agree, it's a really awful keyboard. I don't particularly care about travel (my favourite keyboard is the Logitech DiNovo), but the keys don't have that 'clicky' feel. And the right shift key is absolutely awful. You have to press it either dead centre, or really hard, for it to register.

    This is compounded by the OS's taking over all the function keys. For a *nix-based OS, this is a pretty inconvenient and poorly thought-out choice.

    Actually there's an up-side to this. When using X11 apps like OpenOffice and Gimp, the apps retain their Unix keystrokes (generally using Ctrl and Alt) while the X11 container app can use standard Mac keystrokes (predominantly using the Swedish campsite key). For example, Ctrl-Q to quit Gimp, and SwedishCampsite-Q to quit the container.

  64. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple do get away with stuff others wouldn't because of their cool image right now. How about Microsoft launching a mobile phone a Linux user couldn't use, not even just for calling, because to work it required online activation through a special MS app not available on all platforms. That would have been a very interesting "discussion" on Slashdot :)

  65. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    all those words are great and all but i'm still buying an imac

  66. Apple is NOT a monopoly by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1, Informative

    Well, Apple's hardware if it were compared as a generic PC would be marked as woefully inadequate except for the hyper expensive Mac Pro That's why a component for component matching laptop from Dell or HP costs roughly $1K more?

    If Microsoft forced their users to jump platforms and have all their older apps unable to run like Apple did with OS 9 and earlier apps on x86 Macs, people would be driving to Washington with pitchforks and torches. You need a memory booster: didn't that exactly happens with the Win9x->NT/2K move? And isn't it happening again with a lot of apps with WinXP SP2 and also with Vista? And let's not limit it to purely OSes either. What about the well-documented Office95 push via a new document format and no option for saving in previous formats nor convertors for reading the new formats for at least 6 months? Or the current default inability to share docs between O2007 and previous versions unless you manually save in older formats or force the receiver to download yet another "patch" from MS?

    Other than that, the subject of this post answers any remaining salient points you made. The rest are mere trolling drivel.
    --
    The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    1. Re:Apple is NOT a monopoly by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      That's why a component for component matching laptop from Dell or HP costs roughly $1K more?
      I haven't done the comparison in a while, but the last time I specced out a high-end Dell laptop meeting all of the Apple MacBook specs, it wasn't that far apart. Maybe $200-$300, which isn't chump change but nowhere near as bad as you say.

      Then again, it's been a while. I have no idea where they are now.

    2. Re:Apple is NOT a monopoly by 386spart · · Score: 2, Informative

      I just got a HP with a 17" screen, not one but two hard drives, 160 gigs each, firewire, card reader, hdmi out, lightscribe dvd burner, nvidia 7600 graphics, core2duo, 2 gigs of ram. It even pulsates in hibernate mode ;)

      It cost from 600 to 1k less than a macbook pro, even before adding stuff to try and match the HP specs. Desktop machines are even worse, you can easily find stuff that just blow the macs away.

      This is a cold hard fact: No macs are ever a very good value, if all you care about is the hardware components. Buy something else if that is all you care about. You are just throwing money away otherwise.

      Now, the flipside is that as a complete package, and considering the design, the software and the whole experience, they can be more than worth the premium for some people. These people care about more than the components. (Some of them don't realise it though...)

    3. Re:Apple is NOT a monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So how's that Vista treating ya?

    4. Re:Apple is NOT a monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This is a cold hard fact: No macs are ever a very good value, if all you care about is the hardware components."

      Dunno 'bout that.

      Both at work and at home I've gotten way more value per $ out of the longevity of the hardware and being able to upgrade or adapt it to new software and workflow (most often freebies, too), while my Windows counterparts are always hitting a glass ceiling when something new comes along that may or may not require a new machine but certainly ploping down more $ when new stuff comes along.

      Spend a lot now to save a lot over time versus spend a little at a time many times, is how I see it. Maybe it's just me.

    5. Re:Apple is NOT a monopoly by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      I just got a HP with a 17" screen, not one but two hard drives, 160 gigs each, firewire, card reader, hdmi out, lightscribe dvd burner, nvidia 7600 graphics, core2duo, 2 gigs of ram. It even pulsates in hibernate mode ;)

      It cost from 600 to 1k less than a macbook pro, even before adding stuff to try and match the HP specs. Desktop machines are even worse, you can easily find stuff that just blow the macs away. I'd like to see the identity of that machine, then again, I suppose you're specing out a desktop against a laptop. Of course, you realize that the MBP now comes with the 8600 and 2GB of RAM?
      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    6. Re:Apple is NOT a monopoly by 386spart · · Score: 1

      My machine is a dv9380, I got it before the geforce 8600s were released. Since then yes, the macs have been upgraded, but so have the hp 9000 series. The 9500 series have a geforce 8600 option and they start at just over 1000 usd. They are all 17". The 17" macbook pro starts at 2799!
      I won't claim that the $1000 hp is equivalent to the 2799 mac, but it's still a core2duo machine with a 17" screen. When configured with a geforce 8600, 2.2ghz core 2 duo and 2 gigs of ram the HP is still below 1800. It lacks 0.2 ghz compared to the mac but it has two disks, a great feature the mac doesn't have. It has a media center, remote control, every connection the mac has.

      What a PC doesn't have is the innovative magnetic connector, the polish, the feel, the end-to-end system integration, the OS, and all those things. that's the selling point for the mac, not the overpriced hardware components.
      I love macs, I'd buy one if I could spare the money. Macs are premium computers and therefore they have a premium price, it's dead simple. Praise the mac for the great features it does have, there's not need to invent stuff and lie.

    7. Re:Apple is NOT a monopoly by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      I'll check it out as soon as I have time. I suspect it doesn't have the battery life, the lightweight weight, or the screen resolution either, just from initial guesses, but I'll follow up and check it out. (I'm assuming those from a friend that recently bought an HP laptop, but I don't know the model)

      I'll give you this though, when I bought my MBP, I bought the 15" refurb'd unit that came in just under $2K. It came with the C2D 2.33GHz and 2GB RAM and the X1600. It was a good deal then, as this same configuration is easily fetching $1700 on ebay. I'll probably sell this one and get a new one when Leopard comes out for that very reason. It'll be cheaper to buy a new one with all the software than it will to upgrade all the software, given the increases in specs.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  67. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Divebus · · Score: 0, Troll

    wow... iTunes doesn't sync with any MP3 player besides an iPod.

    Damn! You mean iTunes only works on 80% of the music players out there? How limiting!

    Where are you getting your assertions from? They're very far off the mark about brutal monopolies but fair enough... I've seen this in people too young to remember the last 15 years of computerdom. For everyone else, it's a given. Find some of the DOJ testimonials of what Microsoft did to countless other companies. These weren't Microsoft resellers doing a shitty job that got killed, these were either business "partners" or competitors with something Microsoft wanted. They wanted it so bad they went on a lawbreaking spree for years. There are also fairly large Apple resellers out there of a serious nature, just no Walmart types.

    --

    Most of the stuff on /. won't survive first contact with facts.
  68. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by fatlaces · · Score: 1

    right on.

  69. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by OldeTimeGeek · · Score: 1
    I was thinking that I wouldn't like it until I used it a bit.

    My main keyboard is a Northgate (1989 vintage!), so I'm used to having quite a bit of key travel and positive feedback from the keys. Surprisingly enough, I find my MacBook Pro's keyboard to be very comfortable to use and can key with it just about as fast with it as I can with the Northgate.

  70. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by LKM · · Score: 1

    I sympathize for your issue with the second button, but I don't think fixing it is worth making the experience worse for everyone who doesn't need that specific use case. Clicking left-left+right-lift while dragging seems... pathological :-)

  71. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by fyngyrz · · Score: 1
    Actually there's an up-side to this.

    Well, the downside is that applications like midnight commander become extremely difficult to use; you go to open the menus or fire off a command, and some OS function happens instead.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  72. But... by catxk · · Score: 0, Redundant

    But can is possibly blend?

    --
    Don't be crazy anymore!
    1. Re:But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably not. The entire case of the new iMac is made of a single piece of machined aluminum.

    2. Re:But... by Gentlewhisper · · Score: 1

      Probably not. The entire case of the new iMac is made of a single piece of machined aluminum.


      Big deal.

      Do check out Blendtec's site someday.
  73. I disagree by encoderer · · Score: 3, Funny

    "I hope Apple never enters the sex industry"

    I disagree. Entirely.

    I'd be more than happy to wait in line for 6 hours so I can take home a stunningly beautiful iGirl that doesn't give me any feedback no matter how much I touch her, doesn't break when dropped, doesn't scratch easily, is good for up to 8 hours of activity (as long as I turn her wireless off), goes to sleep at the touch of a button and comes with a 2 year warranty.

    For sure. Sign me up.

    Of course, I'll probably regret it when they come out with a model next year that's a little bit lighter, and a little bit thinner... ...but what the hell... I could always use a spare at the office.

    1. Re:I disagree by vivek7006 · · Score: 1

      I'd be more than happy to wait in line for 6 hours so I can take home a stunningly beautiful iGirl

      But when you try to fuck her, she gladly tells you that your PC dick is incompatible with her Mac pussy

    2. Re:I disagree by encoderer · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, no.. I already have the dock adapter!

    3. Re:I disagree by Kjella · · Score: 1

      I'd be more than happy to wait in line for 6 hours so I can take home a stunningly beautiful iGirl that doesn't give me any feedback no matter how much I touch her

      You don't need an iGirl, you need rohypnol...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:I disagree by dan828 · · Score: 3, Funny

      And another big bonus is that you don't have to worry about virus protection. Not like those skanky virus ridden PCs.

    5. Re:I disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      gaah! you need a dick adapter, macboy!

  74. What's the videocard like? by tsa · · Score: 1

    I want to use the iMac for playing adventure games on, in Windows. The new iMac has an ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro videocard. Does any one of you have experiences with this card? How good is it compared to other cards in its class? Although of course the highest number of frames/s is not very important in adventure games, I'd like to know how oldfashioned the video card in the iMac will be in three years' time.

    --

    -- Cheers!

    1. Re:What's the videocard like? by FuturePastNow · · Score: 1

      The HD2600 is an acceptable, but not great, mid-range card. It probably won't do well with action games, at least not at the high resolutions of the iMac displays. It should be "good enough" now, but in three years it will probably be laughable.

      Also, I do believe the graphics on the base model are a downgrade. At $1199 it goes from an X1600 on the previous iMac to an HD2400 now, and I think the older card had better performance.

      --
      Give a man fire, and you warm him for the night. Set a man on fire, and you warm him for the rest of his life.
    2. Re:What's the videocard like? by Babbster · · Score: 1

      Even right now, this minute, the 2600 series (in single-card configuration, which of course is the only option in the iMac line) is severely underpowered for modern gaming. For the most part, it's a DirectX 10-compatible refresh of the x1600 series. It'll play great in World of Warcraft, for example, but it'll choke on new games without precipitous drops in detail and resolution.

      I could see buying an iMac if you're an occasional gamer or a single-game player (and that game is a couple years old - the 2600 does very badly even in HL2: Episode 1 for example) and you're mostly getting the iMac for all the other "stuff" (iLife, iDVD, OSX, etc.). If, however, you're planning on buying and playing newer games, you'd be much better served with a cheaper Windows PC where you "get what you pay for" instead of being locked into a single configuration.

      Finally, I'll recommend that folks check out "Why You'll Love an iMac" where they manage to mention almost everything except gaming. Apple has clearly decided - or "refreshed" their previous decision - that gaming isn't at all important on the iMac, and both the hardware and the marketing reflect that.

    3. Re:What's the videocard like? by Knara · · Score: 1

      Save yourself the headache, get/make a Windows box on a budget and splurge on the video card.

    4. Re:What's the videocard like? by Babbster · · Score: 1

      PS- I should note that I only discussed the ATi 2600 chipset which is in the 2.4-GHz iMac models. The "cheapest" iMac has the ATi 2400 and that is likely even less capable in terms of gaming (apart from its DirectX 10 compatibility) than the x1600 of the previous iMac generation.

    5. Re:What's the videocard like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I want to use the iMac for playing adventure games on, in Windows.

      This card should work fine for adventure games. I have used it for Zork I,II and III
      the whole Sorcerer series and my personal favorite Suspended and the card was always
      able to keep up.

    6. Re:What's the videocard like? by SpottedKuh · · Score: 1

      Even right now, this minute, the 2600 series (in single-card configuration, which of course is the only option in the iMac line) is severely underpowered for modern gaming.

      I've been trying to look for some benchmarks online to put some quantitative data to this analysis. And, I've found a lot of benchmarks comparing the 2600 Pro to other modern cards (e.g., the nVidia 8xxx series, the other current lineup of ATi cards). But, what's really missing, and what's important to me, is benchmarks on how the 2600 Pro compares to my current graphics card!

      That is, I'm thinking of ditching my current Windows desktop to get an iMac, but I still want to be able to boot into Windows on the iMac and play my games. What I want to make sure is that, if I get an iMac, I won't be losing power compared to my current PC. Simply put, I want to be able to play the few games I already own :)

      So, does anyone know of any site that would allow me to see a comparison between the iMac's Radeon HD 2600 Pro, and my current Sapphire Radeon X800 Pro?

      Thanks!

    7. Re:What's the videocard like? by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1

      The HD2600 is an acceptable, but not great, mid-range card. It probably won't do well with action games, at least not at the high resolutions of the iMac displays. It should be "good enough" now, but in three years it will probably be laughable.

      Also, I do believe the graphics on the base model are a downgrade. At $1199 it goes from an X1600 on the previous iMac to an HD2400 now, and I think the older card had better performance. Based on your comments, I'm thinking that you have never even tried gaming on the mac. I have a 1.83Ghz (first gen) MBP with a GIG of ram and an X1600 in it and I was able to play Star wars: Empire at War (original and expansion) at 1920X1200 on my external LCD with most effects high except for anti-aliasing which was set to low under XP. Even under XP, the performance you will get is determined by more than the gfx card. Factors like the bus speed and the overall layout of the motherboard can make or break performance in a gfx intensive game. I also have been able to play Age of Empires III on the OS X side (OpenGL) at 1920X1200 resolution with only the anti-aliasing set to low and everything else set to high.

      In a nut shell, your experience with that card on a cheap generic motherboard in windows via directx will not necessarily reflect the performance users on OS X will experience with the same card on OS X. I should also note that Mac gfx cards do not use a video bios but rather use the EFI equivalent mechanism for initialization and control which can result in significantly different performance over a video bios model.

      If I am able to get decent performance at high resolutions on my X1600, I would think that this new card in the iMac should have no problem running the latest games.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    8. Re:What's the videocard like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's easy. There are no adventure games out there.
      Just RPGs.

    9. Re:What's the videocard like? by slashwritr · · Score: 2

      Where're my mod points when I need them? +1 Funny.

    10. Re:What's the videocard like? by TheNetAvenger · · Score: 1

      The new iMac has an ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro videocard. Does any one of you have experiences with this card?

      This is a very, very low mid-range card. In comparison to DX9 cards, a 1950 will smoke it by a factor of 2-3x.

      For DX10 it should do well though, but you will need Vista and a DX10 made game to get the 'goodie' out of this card.

      I honestly don't see why Apple is dropping DX10 cards in Macs, as OSX and OpenGL can't use many of the features of the card beyond the basic unified shader. However for Windows dual-booters like yourself it makes more sense if that is the market they are aiming for.

      DX10 cards like the 2600 are designed to be used with an OS that does both VRAM virtualization and pre-emptive GPU operations so that the OS manages the RAM shifting and the GPU for tasking in and out game needs for video and physics. (Yes OpenGL can multi-task, but is application yielded and without an OS level driver handling the pre-emption it makes cards like this rather weak on non-Vista platforms.)

      Without the WDDM of Vista, this is only a mediocre card for OpenGL and does ok for HD playback assuming Apple adds the correct DRM to 10.5.

    11. Re:What's the videocard like? by tsa · · Score: 1

      Thank you for all the remarks about the HD 2600 Pro, and the comparison someone in this thread gave of that card to the X1600! I now think it's a waste of money for me to buy an iMac. I already have a MacBook Pro with an X1600 card, and I think I'm much better off when I buy a nice big screen for that machine so I can use it for playing adventure games. Then I can decide later what to do when the videocard in the MBP is not good enough for playing the adventure games anymore: buy a new MBP, or buy a cheaper Windows/Linux machine. You don't need a very good video card for playing most adventure games, and I think I will have fun with the MBP for quite some years.

      --

      -- Cheers!

  75. Apple knows about Tufte by LKM · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The best part, of course, is that the only time Jobs uses these crappy styles in his Keynote presentations is when the shows them off. Apple knows perfectly well about Tufte, but some of their customers are used to WordArt and might think Apple's stuff is inferior if they can't do the same ugly crap in the iWorks apps.

  76. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now if you want anything more than an iPod, you need to buy directly from Apple.


    You do?
  77. The Dumbest Question I've Ever Heard by LKM · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Apropos Intel, via Daringfireball.net:

    One question that came from the audience wondered why Apple doesn't participate in the "Intel Inside" program, in which PC manufacturers affix the well-known labels to their computers.

    "We like our own stickers better," Jobs said. "Don't get me wrong. We love working with Intel. We're proud to ship Intel products in Macs. They're screamers, and combined with our OS, we've tuned them well. It's just that everyone knows we use Intel processors. We'd rather not tell them about the product that's inside the box."
    1. Re:The Dumbest Question I've Ever Heard by kigrwik · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Translation for the impaired:

      "Because we want our computers to look classy and not like a cheap whore".

      --
      -- don't discount flying pigs until you have good air defense
    2. Re:The Dumbest Question I've Ever Heard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Real translation: Mac users are way too uber look at me cool to have lame intel inside badges on their clean white macs.

    3. Re:The Dumbest Question I've Ever Heard by LKM · · Score: 1

      You don't need to be "uber cool" (the actual word starts with an umlaut, by the way: "über") to find all those stickers on Windows computers ugly.

    4. Re:The Dumbest Question I've Ever Heard by summernot · · Score: 1

      This journalist is asking why Apple won't put a tacky sticker on its computers to someone who won't even put a license plate on his car.

  78. No kidding by porcupine8 · · Score: 1

    I'd say Numbers is the biggest news of the day, and because someone had to be OMGFIRSTTOSUBMIT, it's not even in this story.

    --
    Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
    1. Re:No kidding by jdray · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The un-news is the whole "Events" thing. Photo tagging. So what?

      Is it just me, or did he not say, "Boom!" once during this presentation?

      --
      The Spoon
      Updated 6/28/2011
    2. Re:No kidding by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Apparently, John Madden's and Emeril Lagasse's lawyers were breathing down his neck for his unauthorized use of their trademarked interjections.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    3. Re:No kidding by IndieKid · · Score: 1

      Yeah when I saw that I found myself thinking "doesn't Vista do that already?"

      It's pretty much a must have feature on any photo gallery app these days though, I'm surprised it took this long to make into a Mac application.

    4. Re:No kidding by ironring2006 · · Score: 1

      No "Boom!", but he did go "Schoom Schoom Schoom!"

    5. Re:No kidding by Stamen · · Score: 1

      The already had "photo tagging", actually in OS X, you can tag any files, and search or such for that later based on those. Events, to me, is just a more automated way of creating and organizing albums, nothing revolutionary, but evolutionary for their product, as creating albums and organizing them is something you do a lot of (not me, though, as I'm old school, I still organize my photos in folders and don't use any such fancy photo apps).

  79. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Chang · · Score: 1

    Hmm - iTunes synched with my previous MP3 player which was a RIO 500.

  80. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by Penguin's+Advocate · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hope they don't listen to all the people bashing the MacBook Pro keyboard. I *love* mine, and don't want it to change. It's significantly better than any of the last 3 laptops I've had, and better than any other laptop keyboard I've ever used (at least if you only count reasonably sized laptops and not those DTR monstrosities). That goes for the trackpad too. The trackpad on the MBP is spectacular, and the one button issue becomes a non-issue very quickly. I'm not a fan of trackpads or single-button input devices in general, but I have grown to love the MBP trackpad over the last year.

    As a point of reference, at home and at work I use a Microsoft Natural Ergonomic 4000 keyboard and a trackball (logitech marble mouse at work, Kensington Expert mouse at home).

    --
    Frag 'em all...
  81. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by graffix_jones · · Score: 1

    The primary reason that Apple ended it's retail agreements with stores like Circuit City and CompUSA is because they did not showcase the Mac the way Apple wanted it done. In fact, it's safe to say that the Mac was presented in a diminished capacity because most of the areas the Mac was in were in disarray or even in the store's least-prominent position (like behind a partition and facing the back wall in one instance).

    So there was a bit of reasoning behind that decision, though there still are many other resellers that carry Apple products. The 'big box' stores just got the most press-time.

    It continues to annoy me how folks assert that Apple nefariously 'killed' the clone market, when the clone market is what almost killed Apple. I claim self-defense, like cutting the head off of a python before it strangulates you. You claim what you wish.

    There's plenty other defensive positions regarding the rest of your arguments, but I'm pretty sure that folks here can spot the inaccuracies in your arguments, so I won't bother.

  82. Form Factors and USB/Firewire. by twitchingbug · · Score: 1

    You tout form factors and you tout using a USB/Firewire drive. I think that if you care about both, having your iMac thin and sexy and having greater than 1 drive worth of storage, that you too would want an extra HD bay in your iMac. Who wants an ugly, external firewire drive sitting next to your computer with wires and power supplies dangling around? Not to mention FW800 enclosures being $$$.

    Somehow I think they would have plenty of space, at least on the 24" model, to support an extra drive bay, without a great increase in iMac thickness, or cost. Plus, do you really care that much if your desktop is 0.5 inches thicker?

    Also, I see the preservation of all your digital stuff: photos, videos, music, documents, as being critical. You'll need redundant copies in order to rebuild corrupted data (a la ZFS), which requires 2 drives. Not to mention a backup system as well.

    1. Re:Form Factors and USB/Firewire. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're really worked about wiring cluttering things, buy NAS. Otherwise, the WD MyBook with Firewire 800 isn't too pricey and does look somewhat Book-y.

    2. Re:Form Factors and USB/Firewire. by UnknowingFool · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You tout form factors and you tout using a USB/Firewire drive. I think that if you care about both, having your iMac thin and sexy and having greater than 1 drive worth of storage, that you too would want an extra HD bay in your iMac. Who wants an ugly, external firewire drive sitting next to your computer with wires and power supplies dangling around? Not to mention FW800 enclosures being $$$.

      I was arguing from Apple's point of view. Apple doesn't care what you add to the iMac after you buy it. Their form factor concerns are with only what they sold to you. They designed a very minimalist product. If you want to clutter it, that's your business. A USB HD drive costs you about $100. A FireWire400/FireWire800 version costs you about twice as much. So I take it $200 is too much for you? And with an external HD, I count 1 power supply wire and 1 data transfer cable (USB or Firewire). That's 2 more wires.

      Somehow I think they would have plenty of space, at least on the 24" model, to support an extra drive bay, without a great increase in iMac thickness, or cost. Plus, do you really care that much if your desktop is 0.5 inches thicker?

      Considering that the iMac is now .33 inches, adding .5 inches would really make it bigger considering it is now thinner than some LCD monitors. It's not just adding thickness. You also have to engineer it to be user accessible. That adds complexity. I suspect that the 20" and the 24" model do not differ much when it comes to the internals other than the screen components and chips (faster CPU or faster GPU). So Apple would at least have to design the MB of the 24" model differently than the 20" model if they were to add an extra drive bay. That adds complexity.

      Also, I see the preservation of all your digital stuff: photos, videos, music, documents, as being critical. You'll need redundant copies in order to rebuild corrupted data (a la ZFS), which requires 2 drives. Not to mention a backup system as well.

      How are backups handled today?

      1. Backup to CD-R/DVD-R. The iMac has that covered without the need for another HD.
      2. Tape backup. You can't add one internally to an iMac but you could attach one as an external drive using USB/Firewire. But tape is much more expensive than the external HD option.
      3. External HD via USB/Firewire. Probably the most common option.
      4. Internal HD addition. Doesn't a non-removable HD defeat the purpose of having a backup system?
      5. Network backup. Not affected whether Apple offers a second HD or not.
      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    3. Re:Form Factors and USB/Firewire. by Burz · · Score: 1

      Using your logic, I think a much better argument can be made for keeping the monitor/CPU seperate, than for making people use external boxes for more HD space. If extra boxes on the desktop aren't a big deal, then the monitor/CPU combo isn't well-justified.

      Anyway, I suppose one could go with the 17" Macbook and trade some screen real estate for greater expandability. I just think people should question why Apple's laptops are more expandable than their desktops.

    4. Re:Form Factors and USB/Firewire. by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Someone had argued that people needed another HD in the iMac as a backup option. However, using an internal HD defeats the purpose of a backup. You want your backup to be portable. Tape is used for that purpose but tape is expensive. Many people buy an external as additional HD instead of installing another internal HD. That's their choice. But many people I know use it backup their files or transfers.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    5. Re:Form Factors and USB/Firewire. by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Apple's pro laptops are more expandable. And more expensive. It's not that Apple can't make their desktops more expandable. The issue lies in the trade off. More expandability means more complexity which translates to more cost. The 15" MacBook is only $300 cheaper than the largest 24" iMac. Apple thinks that the average user of their consumer desktop line will not need nor want to expand. So they made the design choice to keep the design simpler and cheaper. They might be right or wrong.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    6. Re:Form Factors and USB/Firewire. by Burz · · Score: 1

      People might just want more HD space, instead of a backup.

      But if we assume that the included drive will remain roomy enough, that still leaves the question of why a $1000+ computer has no robust expansion slots. IMHO, adding a PC Card slot would be extremely simple for Apple.

      Instead, Apple have made the iMac considerably thinner which I think adds little value.

  83. Start a poll for/against aluminum by Coward+Anonymous · · Score: 1

    My wife hates the new look. She loves the white iMacs. Bring back the white or I'm not allowed to upgrade... :(

    1. Re:Start a poll for/against aluminum by mblase · · Score: 1

      Bring back the white or I'm not allowed to upgrade... :(

      That sort of racist talk can get you banned, y'know.

    2. Re:Start a poll for/against aluminum by necro2607 · · Score: 1

      I just wish it was entirely black. The silver/black combination just screams "typical late-90s tech tryign to look futuristic", a bit tacky in my opinion. I realize they probably used black around the display in order to avoid the presence of the monitor case when using the machine in a dimly-lit room, but I still have never gone for that painfully overused silver/black combination. This doesn't mean I don't totally want one though... hahaha ;)

  84. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by cheier · · Score: 1

    From what I've been told, there is a requirement that in order to sell Apple products at a store, the shop needs to be able to prove that they are able to move over $10,000 (or is it $100k) a month in Apple product. That is one of the primary reasons that one of our local computer stores doesn't carry Apple product, even though they would like to.

  85. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ++Informative

  86. Video card by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Perhaps not great for gaming, but as a media PC even the older Intel mini could handle 1080p video.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  87. Ah... if only... by jrothwell97 · · Score: 1

    Apple's UK website hasn't updated to show the new iMacs yet (either because there'll be a few-week delay in getting it over here or because the webmaster had already packed up and gone home).

    But isn't the new machine just gorgeous?


    The problem I have with propietary lock-ins is when they're badly made (think Vista). I really can't fault Macs in anything but the price, and that's why they're such an attractive option - they're functional and decorative, which is something Micro$oft seems not to have grasped the concept with yet (at least with Windows and certain horribly-designed personal music players).

    And TBH, Macs will run quite a lot of stuff. They'll run most UNIX apps, they can dual-boot with Windows if you want and triple boot with Windows and Linux if you want. They automatically recognise and install most hardware without fail. They'll link up with your WiFi network, talk to Windows (even if Windows isn't in the mood to talk to it) and I fully expect that Leopard will be compatible with the upcoming iToaster element2.

    Now, if I can find £900 to spare, as soon as Leopard appears I'll be scooting off to Southampton to buy one.

    --
    Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
    1. Re:Ah... if only... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >I really can't fault Macs in anything but the price, and that's why they're >such an attractive option - they're functional and decorative, which is >something Micro$oft seems not to have grasped the concept with yet.

      Maybe because Microsoft doesn't manufacture PCs?

  88. Have you considered OS X with X11 and KDE? by Qbertino · · Score: 2, Informative

    Have you considered OS X with X11 and KDE?
    If you want both Aqua/OS X & KDE, that's the way to go, as it means nearly zero overhead for your Mac compared to some virtualisation or dual-boot solution. Don't forget that OS X is a full-blown Unix (bash Terminal, GNU Toolkit and all) that can easyly provide all the Linux goodies you want. It's even got this OSS project called Fink which offers a full apt-get (as in Debian Package Management) enviroment including a usefull GUI tool (Fink Commander) to operate it. Here's a post on KDE support in Fink

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:Have you considered OS X with X11 and KDE? by SpottedKuh · · Score: 1

      Have you considered OS X with X11 and KDE?

      Thank you very much for your suggestion, but unfortunately, OS X + KDE just won't do the trick. Don't get me wrong -- I absolutely love that OS X is a full UNIX, with the full toolkit and everything. In fact, I do nearly 100% of my development directly in OS X, and I absolutely love Fink :). The fact that I can run great OS X apps like OmniGraffle, TeXShop, and others alongside Emacs and various X11 stuff is a godsend.

      Unfortuatnely, every once in a while, I need to test something in Linux, either for compatibility reasons, or because it's a Linux-specific project (i.e., something that relies on Linux-specific extensions which don't exist in OS X). And, for those few (annoying) times, I really need Linux in a VM.

      Thank you so much for your great feedback, though! I always appreciate it when people suggest other options I may not have thought of.

    2. Re:Have you considered OS X with X11 and KDE? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you considered OS X with X11 and KDE?

      I've tried running X11 on top of OS X. It's awful. I'd rather lose business due to not testing in Safari than have to work like that all day.

      Don't forget that OS X is a full-blown Unix (bash Terminal, GNU Toolkit and all) that can easyly provide all the Linux goodies you want.

      I know it's officially certified as a UNIX, but it's got so much of the Apple-stuff tied into it that it never quite seems to work the same. If they did, then things like Fink wouldn't be the big projects that they are.

    3. Re:Have you considered OS X with X11 and KDE? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ROTFL,
      You obviously don't use it then. Fink is a sad joke. X11 on MacOSX tragic. Running Ubuntu under parallels is a much more practical solution.

    4. Re:Have you considered OS X with X11 and KDE? by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1

      Have you considered OS X with X11 and KDE?

      I've tried running X11 on top of OS X. It's awful. I'd rather lose business due to not testing in Safari than have to work like that all day.

      Don't forget that OS X is a full-blown Unix (bash Terminal, GNU Toolkit and all) that can easyly provide all the Linux goodies you want.

      I know it's officially certified as a UNIX, but it's got so much of the Apple-stuff tied into it that it never quite seems to work the same. If they did, then things like Fink wouldn't be the big projects that they are.

      I think you are confusing Linux with UNIX. Fink provides source compatibility with linux based projects.
      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  89. it's kdawson by everphilski · · Score: 1

    the liberal bias eats at your brains, sooner rather than later.

  90. then you've never used an IBM "Model M" keyboard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the keyboard isn't a seller for you, odds are you've never spent much time with an IBM "Model M" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_M/ keyboard. People can get quite attached to them http://www.dansdata.com/ibmkeyboard.htm/.

    Decent for self-defense, too.

  91. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by cweber · · Score: 1

    Ahh, you must have read my mind! If it weren't for your XP laptop at work, you could be me, in fact. Luckily, I need Unix-based computers for my SA job, so it's Macs right now.

    Love this quote:
    "I like the idea of free software, but I'm not devoting my life to the cause. If it works best, I'll use it. If not, I'll pay to use whatever works best. Unfortunately for Microsoft, it is almost never their product."
    Right on the money (pun fully intended)!

  92. Is .Mac by skeeto · · Score: 2, Funny

    where Mac users store their custom configuration and lisp functions?

  93. Leopard? by Zelos · · Score: 1

    I'm tempted by the new iLife bundle, but will ship with the Leopard upgrade when it's finally released? Or is iLife only included with Mac hardware?

    1. Re:Leopard? by furball · · Score: 1

      While iLife is considered a separate product, the latest shipping OS and hardware will carry the newest iLife version. Leopard will have iLife '08.

      If you weren't planning on upgrading to Leopard this upgrade makes sense. Or if you need it tomorrow.

    2. Re:Leopard? by Radiohead · · Score: 1

      I've seen this mentioned in other places - where are you getting the idea that iLife will be included with Leopard? It won't be. What will be included are some apps that previously only shipped with new hardware: Photo Booth and Front Row. If you want iLife 08 your options now and later will be to either buy a new Mac, all of which are bundled with iLife - or purchase it as a separate product.

  94. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by Squozen · · Score: 1

    You should get your keyboard looked at - none of mine have an issue with the right Shift key.

  95. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Graff · · Score: 4, Informative

    And oh wow... iTunes doesn't sync with any MP3 player besides an iPod. Oh really?

    iTunes Compatible Players

    Chances are that most USB MP3 players will work with iTunes if they follow the standards set for such devices. If you have an MP3 player give it a try and see if it works with iTunes, it probably will.

    You might want to do a bit more research the next time you make false, blanket statements like that.
  96. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Funny

    Here in Chicago, MicroCenter is a full-feature Apple dealer. When I used to work on a dual G4, I bought my system, cinema display and all my gear there (at least the stuff I didn't buy online). Their sales staff in that part of the store are pretty knowledgeable too. And they don't have that look you find on employees at the Apple store. The only way I can explain it is that Margaret O'Conner in my grammar school had that look. She was Mary in the May Crowning two years in a row and thus felt that she was closer to God than the rest of us. Her mother used to cut the crust off her sandwiches and she lifted her pinkies when she'd eat them during lunch period.

    For some reason, I think of her whenever I see the people who work at the Apple store. They look like someone cuts the crust off their sandwiches for them, and they're proud of it.

    But anyway, if you want to buy Apple in Chicago and don't want to pay 18 bucks to park downtown (and get skeeved out by the people who work in the Apple Store), MicroCenter has a nice big parking lot, and there's a PetSmart next door so you can buy kibble for you ferret when you're done.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  97. Ooh ooh pick me! Pick me!! by wandazulu · · Score: 1

    I know the answer to this one! I have been running the Fusion beta since the beginning, and bought it just before the release (which was this past weekend). I have tested Fusion with 64 and 32-bit versions of Linux and Windows and they all work flawlessly. I have also tested OpenBSD, Solaris, and even the Vmware image of the OLPC software and it's all been great. Fusion is based on Workstation 6, and the only glaring omission is that it doesn't have multiple snapshots; it can do a single snapshot but not the trees of snapshots like in Workstation.

    I have not used Parallels as I am a big VMware fan (use Workstation and server at work) and can't compare between the two. I will say that if you are happy with VMware products for Linux or Windows, the Mac version is definitely in the same camp...it's been rock solid (even the first beta!) and performance is excellent on my MacBook Pro...I have a Solaris virtual machine running Oracle 10g that I use for development, with some tables having millions of rows, and performance is great (for a single developer).

  98. you have no taste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no, worse, you have terribly bad taste.

  99. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    "The XBox is the first Microsoft product I have bought .. well, ever."

    You might want to get rid of that thing. I've heard the failure rate is 50% roughly. They run really hot. They're designed poorly. I saw a page where some Japanese design engineers analyzed it. They said it run 20degC over ambient room temp while most consumer electronics will be like 10degC. and IIRC they said if your ambient temp is 35degC about 95degF, that some parts of it can reach 100degC (212degF), add dust and enclosed spaces and undersized heatsinks and you end up with yet another crappy MS product that fails frequently. If you've been keeping up to date on PS3 news, things are looking really sweet over there. I wish I had a link to the article my friend showed me yesterday.

    And regarding the rest of your Apple comments: I agree. I got the 24" iMac in January. It's very nice. I hate iTunes (thank you Cog!). IMHO Mac ain't perfect, but it blows the competition out of the water. I have Ubuntu running in a VMware session and that is pretty sweet too though! With USB Overdrive I'm able to use my Logitech MX-518 and have all the buttons assignable to useful functions. Yeah I find myself interested in supporting more shareware on the Mac, it is kind of weird like that. You don't feel like you're being held down by some thugs and raped by Steve Balmer while Bill Gates goes through your pockets looking for money/valuables. I think feeling more at ease has made me more incline to pay for apps that make my life easier.

  100. still GMA 950 by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    and $599.00 for a Combo Drive and 2x512 of ram? with only a 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo cpu. It is still a rip off as you can buy systems for less with the same cpu and a DVDRW drive.

  101. Dropped prices? by guruevi · · Score: 1

    The new versions seem to have a serious price drop compared to the previous ones. I mean, 20 and 24" screens (and they are nice) for 1200-2200. Sure, a white box you build yourself is going to be cheaper but this is a nicely designed system.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  102. Just to get it out of the way... by thatskinnyguy · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    • I, for one, welcome our two foot overlords.
    • Will they run Linux?
    • Could you imagine a Beowulf Cluster of these?


    Ahhh! I feel better!
    --
    The game.
    1. Re:Just to get it out of the way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I, for one, welcome our two foot overlords. iMac have one foot.
  103. Why didn't they go wireless on the keyboard/mouse? by massysett · · Score: 1

    Use Bluetooth. It would have been even more stylish. Maybe they want to sell upgrades, or maybe they don't want people thinking they can use the keyboard from fifteen feet away.

  104. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by MorpheousMarty · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Looks like to me it only supports old creative players (the Rio brand has been discontinued). So iTunes does sync with some mp3 players but if you were to buy a new MP3 player today it shouldn't work (according to the list)

  105. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by flosofl · · Score: 1

    There's also an Apple Store in Oak Brook for those in the burbs (and Fry's in Downers Grove).

    --
    "This calls for a very special blend of psychology and extreme violence" - Vyvyan "The Young Ones"
  106. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Personally, I think short key travel is more ergonomic
    Sir, I'm afraid your geek card has just been revoked. Please acquire a Model M or equivalent, and you will be allowed to apply for the geek club again.
  107. Re:Why didn't they go wireless on the keyboard/mou by eefsee · · Score: 3, Informative

    Wireless versions of the new keyboard (without USB ports) and the mighty mouse are available for about $150 total. See the Apple Store for details.

  108. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by dal20402 · · Score: 1

    You won't get rid of me that easily. :) I've had several ALPS-switch keyboards in the (distant) past at work. I've had multiple Apple Extended Keyboards 2 at home. Well-designed laptop-style keyboards are more comfortable for me than all of the above... because of the short key travel. While you don't get a neato clack-clack sound typing is suddenly effortless.

    I'm still not sure how well I'll deal with flat keys, though. My laptop is a MBP with contoured keys. My very limited experience typing on MacBooks has been a little disconcerting because of the flat keys. I don't know if I'd get used to it.

  109. They did. by argent · · Score: 3, Informative

    They've got wireless and wired versions. The wireless ones look even MORE like Macbook keyboards.

  110. The CRT iMacs? You *like* them? by argent · · Score: 1

    You *like* lugging those big heavy jujubes with their absolutely horrible screens (a huge step back from the Trinitron screens Apple previously used) around?

    It's not about style, it's about the CRT iMacs being a dead end.

    1. Re:The CRT iMacs? You *like* them? by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      It's all about style, and you can fit a TFT screen inside those old iMacs to replace the CRT's.. there, problem solved, nice style kept.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    2. Re:The CRT iMacs? You *like* them? by argent · · Score: 1

      Putting a TFT inside an old CRT iMac?

      That's got all the style of a Caddy with racing slicks, spoilers, and a plastic mill superglued to the hood.

      You might as well run Gentoo on it and call it "Mac OS XI".

  111. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by RalphBNumbers · · Score: 1

    How does making your keyboard radically thinner *not* bring ergonomics into play?

    IIRC, a lot of typers' wrist problems can be largely a result of the unnatural angle people need to turn their wrists to type on a raised keyboard without lifting their wrists off the desk. Simply not raising the keyboard off the desk in the first place ought to be at least as effective a solution as those wrist-rest pads that people sell, and is far more elegant imho.

    --
    "The worst tyrannies were the ones where a governance required its own logic on every embedded node." - Vernor Vinge
  112. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

    Looks like to me it only supports old creative players (the Rio brand has been discontinued). So iTunes does sync with some mp3 players but if you were to buy a new MP3 player today it shouldn't work (according to the list) "Date Modified: September 26, 2005"

    Anyway, select songs (even from an intelligent playlist that limits storage size) and drag to mounted player. How much easier can it get - apart from using an iPod?

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  113. Battery Life by barbam · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Does the power supply die after 300 uses and have to be sent back in to Apple for a week while it is replaced at a paltry cost of $100?

  114. Mac mini/Macbook Core 2 Duo. *snore* by argent · · Score: 1

    Get rid of the bloody GMA950 and put something in there with decent OpenGL support.

    Just bumping the processor to Core 2 Duo doesn't cut it. That's not the bottleneck. That's not what you need to speed up.

    1. Re:Mac mini/Macbook Core 2 Duo. *snore* by Script_God · · Score: 1

      Is it really? My MacBook's GMA950 has handled everything I throw at it very well, from UT99 to Armagetron Advanced to day-to-day usage. I don't see any reason why the baseline would need anything more.

    2. Re:Mac mini/Macbook Core 2 Duo. *snore* by argent · · Score: 1

      My MacBook's GMA950 has handled everything I throw at it

      No it hasn't. The extra CPU core has been doing the heavy lifting for it.

  115. The keyboard looks pretty bad to me... by argent · · Score: 1

    That keyboard looks like the Macbook keyboard.

    It's certainly less ergonomic than the previous model... you put skinny keyboards in laptops because you need to save space, not because they're actually *good*. Every new laptop I've used has had a skinnier keyboard and it's been more painful to work on. I can't use the Macbook Pro keyboard at all... fifteen minutes and I'm in pain.

    At least you're not stuck with them, like you are with a laptop.

    I think you're stretching on the RAM, though. They have 2GB installed but you can upgrade them all to 4GB... for less than Apple would charge.

    1. Re:The keyboard looks pretty bad to me... by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      IBM Thinkpad and Toshiba Tecra keyboards on their laptops aren't too bad. (I've used a Tecra 9100 for 5-6 years now, so I'm a little biased. I don't use an external keyboard or mouse.)

      The Tecra 9100 had a very good key layout for programming. The smaller Thinkpad X61s that I setup for someone last week was definitely made too many compromises (the home/end, pgup/pgdn, and arrow keys are all in difficult to find locations). When I purchase my Thinkpad T60 later this year, I'll need to take a close look at the key layout for those keys.

      I still prefer the model M keyboard that I have hooked up to a KVM, but when I prefer to use the laptop keyboard as much as possible. That way, when I travel, I'm not confused by the different keyboard layout.

      (And like I've said for the past few years... if Apple's would take the keyboard from a Thinkpad and put it on a Macbook Pro, I'd switch. The pointer-nubby is not optional for someone who touch types and wants to keep their fingers on the home row.)

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
  116. Faked, aural feedback? by Lethyos · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    So, if Apple enters the sex business, there will be utilities for “iGirl” that will make her produce sounds upon contact? Not sure about others here, but I dislike fakers.

    --
    Why bother.
  117. Re:iPhoto Events - Brilliant... by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1
    Wow, just wow. You have obviously never even used OS X Tiger. Spotlight will search within documents including PDF's and you can create these things called "smart" folders which behave like smart playlists in iTunes. Nice try troll.

    BTW. I tried out Vista on my MBP for a few months before and after the official release but I decided that I needed the harddrive space for my media and opted to recombine the partitions into one OS X partition.

    --
    Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  118. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by kersten78 · · Score: 1

    not yet convinced by that keyboard. The keyboard and the glossy screen were my two major concerns when I recently purchased a MacBook. The glossy screen is insufferable--a nightmare to keep clean, and a veritable mirror in the light. But pay twice as much for a MacBook Pro just for the option of having a matte screen? seriously.

    The keyboard, on the other hand, is incredible. The key travel is impressive for the limited space, and the action is akin to the old IBM Model M--there is no uncertainty when a key has been pressed. The only drawback is that I can no longer tolerate standard keyboards--anything other than the flat, responsive MacBook keyboard, and I feel like I'm typing on a bowl of jello... coated with molasses... (with the one exception of my mini Cherry keyboard).

    Just my thoughts. I have no reason to get a new iMac, but the keyboard is a must!

  119. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by old+and+new+again · · Score: 0

    like the wired one, really dislike that they ditched the numeric keypad on the wireless and what's that with changing the order of the f keys, it's meant to be display, volume, keybard dim and EXPOSE on the 2 last ones, not like f3!

  120. Pure awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    iLife '08, iWork '08, and iMac '08. Oh, and all Mac computers now run exclusively on 64-bit processors. Let's square that year!

  121. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by heinousjay · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yes, we all know the one button trackpads are the last bastion of the one button defenders in the Mac world, now that Apple has caved and added extra buttons on their Mighty Mouse. One of these days, they may even make a human interface device made to work with human hands instead of impressing human eyes, not that I'm holding my breath.

    --
    Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
  122. VMware Fusion thoughts by theurge14 · · Score: 1

    I started using the VMWare Fusion beta a few weeks ago so I could run FreeBSD and Window XP. It runs very smoothly, the Unity feature is very well done, and it autodetects any Boot Camp partitions you have and lets you run them as VMs. I can't compare it to Workstation, so I'm afraid I may be wasting your time with this reply, but I can say I really do like Fusion.

  123. Since nobody else mentioned it... by pschmied · · Score: 1

    I've been a long time user of VMWare Workstation and have recently purchased Fusion (and I was using the betas). Fusion is a solid product if you want to just run an OS.

    If, however, you want the advanced features of VMWare Workstation--multiple snapshots, simulated LANs with simulated packet loss, cheap clones, etc.--you will be disappointed with Fusion.

    A lot of people don't need the features in VMWare Workstation. If you just need to "run Linux / OpenBSD / Solaris in Mac OS X" it's a slam dunk. If you need more, you're currently screwed. I personally hope that VMWare will make a workstation version for the Mac with all the whistles and bells. I'll pay for it.

    Cheers,
    Peter

  124. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  125. also getting it out of the way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Macs come with clustering built in. Under the Sharing preference pane, you can enable XGrid. Any XGrid capable apps will automatically send data packets to it for processing. All Apple machines and OSes ship with an XGrid capable app. XCode will use XGrid for compiling.

  126. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

    Ditto. My MPB and before it my AlBook and TiBook all had the best keyboards I've ever used on a notebook, and I think I prefer them to most desktop keyboards too. And the trackpad only has one problem... that stupid button. Can we get rid of that and use the space for more trackpad? ;)

    I think the poster was talking about the MacBook with the new style keyboard though. I don't like it as much as my MPB keyboard, but it's not horrendous either.

  127. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    iTunes doesn't sync with any MP3 player besides an iPod.

    What's your stance on "this web site doesn't work with anything except IE"?

    I thought so.

  128. Re:iPhoto Events - Brilliant... by Dr.+Smoove · · Score: 0

    lol I agree, more specifically with your last sentence. However, Microsoft's "revolutionary technology" is normally 'old news' as well. It's rare for a big company to come out with tons of new features that weren't already implemented (maybe even partially) in some way elsewhere.

    Surprised you haven't gotten -113132 troll/flamebait, I'll probably get it instead. Wait, let me save myself.. uhm... I've got nude pics of M Shuttleworth, and the list of available packages in Synaptic makes me so dam randy. +31337 informative!!

    --
    "If you plant ice, you're gonna harvest wind."
  129. Shut up astroturfer by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 1

    Do you work for Microsoft or are you just an unfunny troll? I've read some of your post history and it's almost constantly about praising Microsoft for this and that. And now you're saying we don't talk about Microsoft often enough. Sigh... why am I even bothering... any retard can see that you have an agenda going here.

  130. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by kklein · · Score: 1

    I just bought a MacBook a few weeks ago, and I was really worried about the keyboard, but I love it. It's hard as a rock. You can pound away at it and it has no flex at all.

  131. It's fugly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sorry, but the old iMac with the double-shot plastic looked clean and high-tech and expensive. The color scheme and plastic look like a Dell. I mean, Dells do look pretty good nowadays, so it's not like it's hideous, but it's definitely not up to Apple's design standards.

    1. Re:It's fugly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He is absolutely right on the money.
      Black Border & a Black Apple with the same rancid cheap aluminum as an ipod.

      The white liquid 24" is going to become a classic.

  132. Not MBP's keyboard, but MB by viksit · · Score: 2, Informative

    They're talking a *MacBook* keyboard, not a MBP - the two are fundamentally different. I prefer the MBP keyboard to the MB's myself.

    --
    If Bill Gates had a dime for every time a Windows box crashed...oh, wait a minute - he already does.
  133. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by kklein · · Score: 1

    You nailed it. I still have this Windows machine, but I recently bought a MacBook and I have to say: that is a nice OS. It's like Linux if Linux worked right, but with mainstream software support. The ability to have a bootable Windows partition (for games) or to be able to run that partition as a virtual machine (I use VMware Fusion) means that platforms basically don't apply to me anymore.

    And yeah, my Xbox 360 is a damn nice product. It's more Mac-like in the way that it just works, and works well. It's part of the reason I bought a Mac. I enjoy games on the Xbox (with an HDTV) so much I didn't feel chained to Windows anymore and could start moving to the Mac. Kind of ironic. MS's great work on the Xbox lost them my OS business.

  134. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by toddestan · · Score: 1

    Sir, I'm afraid your geek card has just been revoked. Please acquire a Model M or equivalent, and you will be allowed to apply for the geek club again.

    Sorry, your geek card has also been revoked. You should know that there is no equilivent to the Model M.

  135. Yes, and that was from Apple aswell! by aliquis · · Score: 1

    "Have you ever known something hidden underneath a cloak of black cloth to not be important?"

    I guess that would be the top secret Leopard features left out in WWDC 06 keynote.

  136. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fucking astroturfer. the 360 may be flakey hardware but it doesnt make the PS3 any less shit

  137. No one seems to mention RAID card by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple has announced a HW RAID card fro both the Mac Pro and Xserve. I see specs of 304MB/s how do they do this? This is incredible performance ! !

  138. what? where do you live? by johnpaul191 · · Score: 1

    non-Apple stores that sell Macs... like Best Buy? Microcenter? CompUSA? there are also still tons of little indie stores.
    hell, Philadelphia itself doesn't have an Apple store, though the city is surrounded with a few. we don't really need one because we have some really good Apple authorized resellers (like springboardmedia.com). i'm sure the city will get one eventually, but there is no hurry.

  139. Backup system already planned for by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Also, I see the preservation of all your digital stuff: photos, videos, music, documents, as being critical. You'll need redundant copies in order to rebuild corrupted data (a la ZFS), which requires 2 drives. Not to mention a backup system as well.

    If you've been paying attention to Apple's product development, you already know the plan for backup - external USB drive hooked to Airport Express, acting as a Time Machine repository for all your macs when Leopard is released. Pretty nice and better to keep the backup at least slightly physically seperated from the primary anyway (offsite is always better of course).

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  140. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by ischorr · · Score: 1

    I assume this is sarcasm? With the tremendous amount of physical real estate that the button takes up, there's no reason why splitting it into two would make things worse for virtually any user. I've been using the two-button "right click" for nearly a year now and do it instinctively, but still think that a right button would be significantly more effective, and less limiting (I do occasionally need right-click+drag, or right-click+very very quick move)

  141. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by mrbooze · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How would enabling a true right-button support make the experience worse for anyone? Make the trackpad support two buttons the same way the Mighty Mouse does. If you enable right-click as a preference, then the right side of the button is a right-click, if you don't then the whole button acts as one button.

    Tada, you've made life better for people who like 2-button mice and you have not hurt the 1-button mouse people in the slightest!

  142. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by anagama · · Score: 1

    ummm .... same design new manufacture. That is I think an "equivalent". My Model M, manufactured Nov. 6, 1989, is showing no signs of wear -- not even worn off letters. I doubt I'll ever have to replace it but just in case I do, it is good to know that equivalents are being made. What would be super cool, would be a bluetooth Model M, that just might convince me to buy a new one.

    --
    What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
  143. YES Computers is a joke by hackshack · · Score: 1

    YES Computers is the perfect example of why "friendly local Apple stores" are dying out.

    10 years ago YES sold mostly Macs, printers, etc. There'd be one rack of accessories in the corner. Now, 90% of the place is laptop bags, wrist rests, iPod cases, $100 software, etc. Low price, high margin stuff.

    Most independent Apple stores are becoming accessory shops. Apple's squeezing their independent resellers from the bottom. Time when you'd pay $7000 for a IIfx is long gone. The official Apple Stores have the attractive displays, highly trained employees, consistent service, and most of all, inventory that tends to make customers stick with them over time, and of course at the same prices as the local guys.

  144. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by o'davy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It hurts the one-button people because we like having one big button. No matter where my finger is on the trackpad, click with my thumb, and it's a left-click. I hate using two-button trackpads. If I want a second, third, fourth, etc., button then I use an external mouse.

    --
    Sig goes here.
  145. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by Hes+Nikke · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One of these days, they may even make a human interface device made to work with human hands instead of impressing human eyes, not that I'm holding my breath. yeah, i'm hot holding my breath eather - they just shipped one a couple of months ago....
    --
    Don't call me back. Give me a call back. Bye. So yeah. But bye our, well, but alright we are on a shirt this chill.
  146. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Graff · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't say that for sure. Those are the ones that Apple has tested and definitely work, they are probably on the list because Apple had a partnership with those companies and had a reason to test them. I would give a device a try to see if it works with iTunes before I write it off. If it is a USB device and it mounts as a USB drive it has a good chance of working.

    If it doesn't work then you can always use something like the freeware SyncTunes which is supposed to work well.

  147. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

    Swedish campsite key
    That road sign is the origin of the symbol, but we Mac users call it simply "command key".
  148. Not every machine needs to be for serious gaming by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 1

    Get rid of the bloody GMA950 and put something in there with decent OpenGL support. Just bumping the processor to Core 2 Duo doesn't cut it. That's not the bottleneck. That's not what you need to speed up.

    Why? Not every machine needs to be equipped for higher end gaming. There are probably more people out there that need an inexpensive general purpose machine and the Mini serves that role quite nicely.

  149. So what? by riker1384 · · Score: 1

    Who cares if it's bigger? The last version was bigger than this version, and it was small. Do you people actually use your computers, or do you stand over them wanking while measuring them with a micrometer?

    (I personally use Macs because they have an OS that just works, without viruses. I just want a computer, and to suggest I should buy a Mac Pro to get standard, expected features that come in computers that cost ten times less is outrageous.)

    1. Re:So what? by eclectic4 · · Score: 1

      You can buy a fully loaded, upgradable computer with Dual 2.66 Xeons and a NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT graphics card with 256MB memory for $240!?! Holy shit! Where?

      Silliness aside (and that was beyond silly), the iMac is for a certain audience. You sound like you want a Mac Pro but can't afford one. Fine. I want a Corvette and I also cannot afford one. Join the club...

      --

      "The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel Boorstin
  150. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Revotron · · Score: 0

    And everything they sell is at least 50% more expensive than it's PC-based counterpart.
    I don't know what orifice you're pulling your "facts" out of, but I know from experience that the MacBook Pro is a Damn Good Deal (TM).

    Mine retails for $2300-2400 directly from Apple with the 3-year Apple Protection Plan (support+warranty), whereas an Alienware laptop with the exact same specifications (Core2Duo 2.33Ghz, 2GB Dual-channel DDR2, 120GB SATA, 8x DVD+/-RW DL Drive, 15.4-inch widescreen) and a 3-year warranty was priced direct from Alienware at $3300. The only difference with the Alienware was the video card (They offered an nVidia Go7600 which is comparable to my MRadeon x1600), and the hard drive in the Alienware was 40GB larger.

    If you ever bother to touch a Mac (based on your blind prejudice towards Windows, I'm guessing you never will) you'll instantly see why people are drawn to them. I'm a Windows/Linux aficionado and have been for ten years before I switched to a Mac (two weeks ago) and I don't regret the move at all.
  151. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by LKM · · Score: 1

    The Mighty Mouse does not have "extra buttons." By default, it works just like the "old" one-button Apple mouse.

    Also, if you think the one-button mouse is about "impressing human eyes," you are mistaken. I'm not going to repeat the reasons why the one-button mouse is a good idea, but as a Windows developer, it's painfully obvious to me that the one-button mouse forces developers to create better interfaces.

  152. Excitement by TofuMatt · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I was so excited yesterday afternoon when I read this at work. Someone's buying a new computer :D

    --
    -Matthew Riley "TofuMatt" MacPherson
    I have a website
  153. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by LKM · · Score: 3, Informative

    I assume this is sarcasm?

    No.

    With the tremendous amount of physical real estate that the button takes up, there's no reason why splitting it into two would make things worse for virtually any user.

    I take it you've never done phone support, then. In my opinion, the second mouse button is one of the single worst physical interfaces ever invented for computers. Your main input device has two unlabelled buttons which can only be discerned by whether they are on the right or on the left of the device? This is just stupid. An astonishing number of people aren't even capable of reliably telling you which side right is, and which side left is (as I find out time and time again when telling somebody where to drive - "to the right. no, the other right").

    Not to mention the bad influence the right mouse button has on UI design.

    I've been using the two-button "right click" for nearly a year now and do it instinctively, but still think that a right button would be significantly more effective, and less limiting (I do occasionally need right-click+drag, or right-click+very very quick move)

    Yes, as I've said, it would be, but it would still make it worse for the majority of all users.

  154. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by LKM · · Score: 1

    The "Mighty Mouse tech for trackpad button" idea is a good one. I'd support that.

  155. Who said anything about gaming? by argent · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why? Not every machine needs to be equipped for higher end gaming.

    The GMA950 hurts any 3d application, and any application that pushes the limits on RAM - and not only because it eats 64M of real memory. It's not just third-party software (let alone games) that exceed the limits of what the GMA950 can do, Apple's own software uses 3d effects all over the place, so it's got to load their software OpenGL to cover for the shortcomings of the GPU regardless. And it's going to be using more and more of them over time.

    I mean the original Mini's GPU was marginal, and Tiger required more than it could handle mere months after it was released... and *it* was more capable than the GMA950. It's only because they could afford to waste CPU power to inefficiently cover for the Intel GPU that they got away with it in the first place.

    1. Re:Who said anything about gaming? by porneL · · Score: 1

      I have both Minis and the new one seems to have faster and more capable graphics. GMA950 supports CoreImage, which GeForce couldn't handle. In 1920x1600 full-screen CoverFlow was annoyingly slow. With GMA950 it's smooth(ish). Expose feels much snappier, too.

    2. Re:Who said anything about gaming? by argent · · Score: 1

      I have both Minis and the new one seems to have faster and more capable graphics.

      In 2d apps, sure, but it's not the GMA950 that's doing the heavy lifting. The Core 2 Duo mini would probably be capable of beating the Radeon 9200 in the old Mini without any GPU at all... the Core Duo was only a little slower in 3d.

      But doing all that in the CPU is horribly inefficient and wasteful, AND the Radeon 9200 was a trailing edge chipset on the way out three *years* ago when Apple picked it for the original Mini... the current low end ATI and nVidia chipsets are as far beyond that as the Core 2 Duo is beyond the Pentium M. A better balanced computer could be faster overall with slower, cheaper, and less power-hungry parts... and remain practical for longer.

  156. Function keys remapped by AttilaSz · · Score: 1

    If you look at the photos of the keyboard available at http://www.apple.com/imac/design.html, you'll see that the F-keys have been remapped. F3 has what looks like an Expose "All Windows" icon (normally, F9) on it, and F4 definitely has a Dashboard icon (normally F12) on it. Volume controls have been moved to F10-F12 from their "old" location above the numeric keypad, and in their place are now F16-F19. Also, F7-F9 are now rew/play+pause/ff buttons, presumably for iTunes.

    That's all nice and dandy, but I wonder how does it interoperates with factory settings in Mac OS X. I mean, if I install Mac OS X from scratch and look at System Preferences, Expose All Windows will be F9 and Dashboard will be F12 by default. Of course, it's perfectly possible that there are "secret" key codes for those somewhere, and this new keyboard emits those...

    --
    Sig erased via substitution of an identical one.
    1. Re:Function keys remapped by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It says on the Apple site that the keyboard requires a software update.

    2. Re:Function keys remapped by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      a simple os x update

  157. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by Tim+Browse · · Score: 1

    Out of interest, did you even read the post you replied to?

    They suggested leaving the trackpad as one physical button, but with the ability to determine which side of the button is being pressed, and to default to left-click for everything.

    To summarise: you would have one button, that acted as a left-click no matter how/where you pressed it. (Anyone who wants a right-click would enabled it in the system preferences.)

    Is this solution (i.e. the existing behaviour) not good enough for you?

  158. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's bollocks anyway - I used to use iTunes to sync with AeroPlayer on my Palm.

  159. Where's the hate? by nerdstrap · · Score: 0

    Where is the mention of Open Standards (ODF and OOXML) or Open Source Software. Oh wait, this is an anti-M$ site... 5 Years from now, everyone will be complaining how monopolistic and evil Apple is :)

  160. Best Buy by porcupine8 · · Score: 1

    I was surprised when I walked into a Best Buy a few weeks ago and found Macs, not just iPods, on sale there. They have a huge eye-catching display you can see from the front of the store (even though the macs are near the back), too.

    --
    Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
  161. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by porcupine8 · · Score: 1

    The Best Buy on the Evanston side of Howard St carries Macs now, too. Petsmart's another few blocks north, but there's a Target and a Jewel next door.

    --
    Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
  162. trackpad by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 1

    There's a button on the trackpad on the MacBook? Oh, yeah, there it is... Dude. Tap to click. Get with the program. It's in your system preferences. Turn it on and use it for a few minutes, you'll forget all about the mouse button on the trackpad.

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  163. Re:iPhoto Events - Brilliant... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Windows95 also had saved Search Folders, which is what Apple OS X calls 'Smart Folders' today and it is SCARY that Mac users think Apple is innovative or new with this idea.
    apple lifted that idea (search folders) from copland. which precedes windows95 by at least a year. bastards! apple can't come up with a new idea they had to rip themselves off. scary indeed.
  164. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dell Inspiron 1720

    Jet Black
    Intel® Core(TM) 2 Duo T7700 (2.4GHz/800Mhz FSB/4MB cache)
    Genuine Windows Vista® Home Premium Edition
    High Resolution, glossy widescreen 17.0 inch display (1920 x 1200)
    256MB NVIDIA® GeForce® 8600M GT
    FREE! 2GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 at 667MHz
    FREE! 160GB SATA Hard Drive (5400RPM)
    CD / DVD writer (DVD+/-RW Drive)
    Intel Next-Gen Wireless-N Mini-Card
    No Webcam Option
    85Whr Lithium Ion Battery (9 cell)
    High Definition Audio 2.0

    3 Year Accidental damage and In home Service

    $2233

    Apple Mac Pro 17"

            * 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
            * 2GB 667 DDR2 - 2x1GB SO-DIMMs
            * 160GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
            * SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
            * MacBook Pro 17-inch High-Resolution Glossy Widescreen Display
            * Backlit Keyboard/Mac OS - U.S. English
            * AppleCare Protection Plan for MacBook Pro/PowerBook (w/or w/o Display) - Auto-enroll

    $3248

    Hmm, only 45% more.

  165. Re:then you've never used an IBM "Model M" keyboar by SenorCitizen · · Score: 1

    Not everyone likes the Model M either. I've got one in the cupboard, but I prefer a split ergo keyboard. MS Natural 4000 in use these days. The old IBM had fabulous tactile feedback, but my wrists feel better with a split keyboard... and I like to have dedicated buttons for volume control.

  166. Steve Jobs' License Plates by LKM · · Score: 1

    Wow, that's really interesting! And it seems to be true. Here's a picture, and here's a discussion.

    Some people claim that it's legal to do so with a special permit. One possible reason for his doing so might be that his license plates get stolen by fanboys as souvenirs if he leaves them on. Another might be that you can't find out where celebrities live if you can't get their license plate numbers.

    1. Re:Steve Jobs' License Plates by summernot · · Score: 1

      He doesn't put a license plate on his car because he doesn't like the way it looks.

      He racks up citations regularly. The DPS (or whatever it's called in CA) affixed a bar code on his car to enable them to quickly issue the citations.

      This was one of the many Legends of Steve that circulated among employees. I worked at The Fruit for 7 years.

  167. Re:iPhoto Events - Brilliant... by aedan · · Score: 1

    Are you talking about searching for text within a document when you say a feature which Win 95 had and Apple tout as new? Sometimes these messages can be difficult to de-convolute.

    Search for text within a document was in pre OS X version of the Macintosh OS. Spotlight made it better but it was already there. I can't find a reference to when it came in but it was pre Sherlock as well. There was no index, you just sent it to search inside documents. In those days I had a 40 mb drive so there weren't many docs on there. It took a while but it worked.

    Here is the oldest reference I can find to this kind of technology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppleSearch but that was not what I was using. This did use an index, as did Sherlock.

  168. Apple and the Sex Industry by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 1

    "I hope Apple never enters the sex industry."
    Uhm... iMovie... iDVD... Final Cut Pro... MacBook Pro with 4GB of RAM... I'm pretty sure that Apple is already a major player in the sex industry. There will be an explosion of... uhm... home movies with the new iMovie in iLife 08. The best way to participate financially in the industry's coming transition is to buy AAPL, I'd guess.
    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  169. Down with the former Apple reseller whining by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 1

    Most of the Apple resellers killed themselves by being incompetent. Those that didn't are still around. New ones even crop up now and then, like Best Buy.

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  170. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

    So would I. In a heartbeat.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  171. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by pressman · · Score: 1

    Just go into your dashboard and expose preferences and unmap all the f-key mappings.

    Easy.

    --
    Pooty tweet
  172. Review of Keynote '08 by znerd · · Score: 1

    Here's an initial review of Keynote '08:
    http://ernstdehaan.blogspot.com/2007/08/keynote-08 .html

  173. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by heinousjay · · Score: 1

    Funny, when I plugged mine in it acted like a four button mouse with a scroll nub. Maybe I have a different kind of Mac.

    --
    Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
  174. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by WMD_88 · · Score: 1

    There's a couple Apple stores in Chicago besides the downtown one on Michigan Ave. There's one in Skokie and another in Oak Brook.

  175. when it comes to usability.... by ThePengwin · · Score: 1

    Control-click = right click.

    a two button mouse just makes that click one keypress less. and i like that.

    Sure there are ways to do almost everything in context menus in some other way, but i like all my commands in the reach of one hand.

    oh, in a completly un-suss way of course :)

    1. Re:when it comes to usability.... by LKM · · Score: 1

      Sure there are ways to do almost everything in context menus in some other way, but i like all my commands in the reach of one hand.

      See, and that "almost" is precisely the (usability) problem. The system should force developers to only use context menu as shortcuts, and never use them as the only way to access a feature. Single-button-mice do exactly that.

  176. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by LKM · · Score: 1

    Funny, when I plugged mine in it acted like a four button mouse with a scroll nub. Maybe I have a different kind of Mac.

    There's a System Preference which controls the touch-sensitive "second button." It's turned off by default. Squeezing and "nub-clicking" is turned on, I think.

    If you plugged your mouse in and it defaulted to active touch-sensitive buttons, I would guess you probably changed that setting earlier.

  177. Pages still a poor copy of Word? by argent · · Score: 1

    I've been using Pages and it's got all the structural problems of Word, with no nesting and primitive directly-manipulated layout. Apple would be better off, I think, making HTML a primary target of the editor rather than trying to mimic the structure of Word documents. Is the new version any better?

  178. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by elbobo · · Score: 1

    They could do that, or they could do even better and do exactly what they've done with two finger clicking.

    What you're describing requires you moving your hand unduly. What they've done requires only the slightest change in movement. Better.

  179. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by o'davy · · Score: 1

    I did read the comment ... after I replied. Busted!

    Actually, they already have something similar. There is an option on the Macbook Pro to "Place two fingers on trackpad and click button for secondary click".

    The GP post is a good idea as well. I definitely stand corrected.

    --
    Sig goes here.
  180. Re:I, for one, welcome our... by HAKdragon · · Score: 1

    This is slightly OT, but since you seem to prefer laptop style keyboards (as do I), do you have any recommendations as a good desktop keyboard with laptop style keys? Kensington makes a few that, from what I remember, feel very similar to my iBook's keyboard. Any knowledge or advice on those?

    --
    "Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. We have a protractor."
  181. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn! You mean iTunes only works on 80% of the music players out there? How limiting!

    Troll, huh? That's what happens as time passes. Parasitic capitalists like Bill Gates (and countless others) will forever be known as a generous philanthropist. Anyone old enough to remember him building his fortunes, however, will recall the brutality and reckless disregard for others which brought him into prominence.

  182. Re:Down with the Apple monopoly by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    To be precise, Skokie and Oak Brook aren't really in Chicago. Close, but not in.

    There are those of us who, living in a great city, make a point of not visiting the suburbs unless there is a need so pressing we cannot escape it.

    Buying a USB cable for my iPod is not such a need. As long as there is an internet that takes my credit cards, I will not willingly visit the suburbs.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  183. Mod parent +1 marketing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What? Mods don't give bonus points to corporate shills?

    A pity it's an AC. I was hoping to expand my foes list