They only (generally) sell machines to the kind of people who want the kind of machines they sell. How they use those customers they currently have is great. They're missing out on other customers by not producing the machine that other (currently non-Apple) people want. They wouldn't have as good a lock on those customers as they do with the ones buying their current machines, but if they're afraid to compete, they shouldn't be in business.
I happen to think they CAN bring their boutique style to a regular desktop machine.
I also think they're missing a huge market opportunity by not making either the Mac Mini or the Apple TV with an eSATA port, so they can sell some nice _fast_ expansion for a change.
but realistically speaking, consumers LIKE apple's products! there's no force feeding involved! You can't really deny that.
You're missing the point - consumers who like the limited range of products Apple makes like Apple products. Apple could expand their product line into a big gaping VOID that currently exists and make even MORE people happy, and do so with a very nice profit margin considering the hardware that would be used. There's a giant stream of money flowing past Cupertino, and all they have to do is reach out and scoop some of it up, but they refuse to do so.
The problem is, you're basing these Mac user demographics on people who already own Macs. Many of us have been clamoring for years for the Mac that Apple doesn't make, and there are many people like me who simply won't buy an Apple unless they make one in the class/formfactor we want. There ARE other people out there than people who already own Macs, and not catering to them is simply stupid. A business shouldn't force products down someone's throat, but should instead offer what people want to buy.
I guess that's just me being unreasonable and an 'Apple-basher'.
Apple has for YEARS flat-out *refused* to build a Mac of this type - a normal headless box. They come out with the Mac Mini, which many said was the same thing, but it uses laptop memory and harddrives, which are more expensive per MB/GB, and the thing isn't even upgradable. The Mac Pro is a Xeon workstation, and uses memory to match, and starts at, what, $2k or so? C'mon!
And here's what's really sad for Apple and their shareholders -- the profit margins at what Apple would likely price these things at would likely be much higher than those for iMacs and Mac Minis. Normal 3.5" HDs and regular DDR2 DIMMs are much less expensive than the laptop and workstation-class hardware.
This is a gaping hole in their product lineup, and it's been there as long as I can remember. It's no wonder someone wants to fill that hole. It's just too bad that Apple is going to wipe them out of existence by the end of the week for doing what Apple should've done ten years ago.
Of course, Apple knows all this. Selling machines with built-in displays and non-upgradable machines with limited storage is great for Apple's bottomline: it forces people to upgrade when non-replaceable parts break and non-upgradable machines are too slow to handle modern tasks. But it's also screwing the customer. Fortunately, Jobs' Reality Distortion Field overrides people's common sense (and lack of knowledge about computer hardware in general) so that they FEEL good about their purchase.
In this case...online. Don't forget to get an easy to remember.com address! I was telling someone about a website of mine last night, that ends in '.info', and they put a '.com' after the.info! Urg.
Yes, there IS a difference between a mean idiot and a nice idiot, and sure, nice is always better. But an idiot's an idiot. And it's okay to be an idiot, but I think it's a mistake to think that all atheists dislike theists ONLY because of the mean ones.
Don't worry, though, we can all hate Scientologists together, as the recent comic (sorry, no link handy) showed!
I think the part where Smith "puts his dog down" is brilliant directing and quite possibly the most believable performance I've ever seen from him.
I thought the part after that was even better, where he talks to the mannequin, and begs it to say hello to him. He did some really great work in that film, despite whatever other problems the film had (mainly the special effects of the creatures - that was just terrible).
The story's author has said in interviews that the most accurate movie version (in tone, anyway) of his story was... George Romero's first zombie movie.:)
What I especially liked about Planet of the Apes is, if you see all the movies, you can tell how the timestream was altered by the two future apes travelling to the past, and introducing the smart-ape genes into the pool earlier than in the original timestream. The interaction between apes and humans changed at one point where humans wound up living peacefully with apes at the end. Very interesting, and something I didn't notice about the movies seeing them as a kid.
Out of all the adaptations of Matheson's novel I am Legend , Heston's The Omega Man was probably the most entertaining. It certainly stands tall above the dreck Will Smith starred in last year.
I think it depends on which aspects of each of those movies you're talking about. As far as the performance of the main character, I think Will Smith turned in a vastly superior performance than Heston (no slight on Heston - I doubt any of Will Smith's work (to date) will stand the test of time that Heston's has). There was no scarier moment in the Heston version that was anywhere near as scary as when Smith goes in the dark building to get his dog. Certainly the special effects of an abandoned New York were nowhere up to the Smith version. The bad guys in the Heston movie were far more effective, I thought, than in the Smith version, though. And both fall down rather badly on the ending, neither of which makes the title of the original story (I Am Legend) make any sense - even in the alternate ending for the Smith movie. I don't know why it's so hard for the filmmakers to understand the title, or why they need to change it, considering noone has yet to make a movie of that story WITH the original ending.
I don't know about FF3b5 yet (just downloaded it), but I can say with some experience on both my home and work machines, and my coworkers experience on his Mac, that FF 2.0.0.13 is an unstable piece of crap, at least when upgraded from a previous version (2.0.0.12 in my case). Installing it fresh may get better results, but I dunno. Beware of the evil.13!
Slashdot Mirror
They only (generally) sell machines to the kind of people who want the kind of machines they sell. How they use those customers they currently have is great. They're missing out on other customers by not producing the machine that other (currently non-Apple) people want. They wouldn't have as good a lock on those customers as they do with the ones buying their current machines, but if they're afraid to compete, they shouldn't be in business.
I happen to think they CAN bring their boutique style to a regular desktop machine.
I also think they're missing a huge market opportunity by not making either the Mac Mini or the Apple TV with an eSATA port, so they can sell some nice _fast_ expansion for a change.
>> Apple has for YEARS flat-out *refused* to build a Mac of this type - a normal headless box.
>Woah?
> Then may I present, the Apple Xserve
Being deliberately obtuse doesn't make you smart. FYI.
but realistically speaking, consumers LIKE apple's products! there's no force feeding involved! You can't really deny that.
You're missing the point - consumers who like the limited range of products Apple makes like Apple products. Apple could expand their product line into a big gaping VOID that currently exists and make even MORE people happy, and do so with a very nice profit margin considering the hardware that would be used. There's a giant stream of money flowing past Cupertino, and all they have to do is reach out and scoop some of it up, but they refuse to do so.
The problem is, you're basing these Mac user demographics on people who already own Macs. Many of us have been clamoring for years for the Mac that Apple doesn't make, and there are many people like me who simply won't buy an Apple unless they make one in the class/formfactor we want. There ARE other people out there than people who already own Macs, and not catering to them is simply stupid. A business shouldn't force products down someone's throat, but should instead offer what people want to buy.
I guess that's just me being unreasonable and an 'Apple-basher'.
Apple has for YEARS flat-out *refused* to build a Mac of this type - a normal headless box. They come out with the Mac Mini, which many said was the same thing, but it uses laptop memory and harddrives, which are more expensive per MB/GB, and the thing isn't even upgradable. The Mac Pro is a Xeon workstation, and uses memory to match, and starts at, what, $2k or so? C'mon!
And here's what's really sad for Apple and their shareholders -- the profit margins at what Apple would likely price these things at would likely be much higher than those for iMacs and Mac Minis. Normal 3.5" HDs and regular DDR2 DIMMs are much less expensive than the laptop and workstation-class hardware.
This is a gaping hole in their product lineup, and it's been there as long as I can remember. It's no wonder someone wants to fill that hole. It's just too bad that Apple is going to wipe them out of existence by the end of the week for doing what Apple should've done ten years ago.
Of course, Apple knows all this. Selling machines with built-in displays and non-upgradable machines with limited storage is great for Apple's bottomline: it forces people to upgrade when non-replaceable parts break and non-upgradable machines are too slow to handle modern tasks. But it's also screwing the customer. Fortunately, Jobs' Reality Distortion Field overrides people's common sense (and lack of knowledge about computer hardware in general) so that they FEEL good about their purchase.
See what I mean?
"Location, location, location!"
.com address! I was telling someone about a website of mine last night, that ends in '.info', and they put a '.com' after the .info! Urg.
In this case...online. Don't forget to get an easy to remember
Green on black. If it's good enough for the Matrix, it's surely good enough for the likes of YOU, coppertop.
A good point. Maybe if I become the leading proponent of, say, gravity, I'll become rich and famous, too! Think of the controversy -- GRAVITY!
Yes, there IS a difference between a mean idiot and a nice idiot, and sure, nice is always better. But an idiot's an idiot. And it's okay to be an idiot, but I think it's a mistake to think that all atheists dislike theists ONLY because of the mean ones.
Don't worry, though, we can all hate Scientologists together, as the recent comic (sorry, no link handy) showed!
I can't imagine the average person would get excited over the guy if he appeared on an episode of Friends or Deal or No Deal.
Well, to be fair, if the fans of those shows could READ, they might be more excited about an author being on their favourite show.
I think the part where Smith "puts his dog down" is brilliant directing and quite possibly the most believable performance I've ever seen from him.
I thought the part after that was even better, where he talks to the mannequin, and begs it to say hello to him. He did some really great work in that film, despite whatever other problems the film had (mainly the special effects of the creatures - that was just terrible).
The story's author has said in interviews that the most accurate movie version (in tone, anyway) of his story was ... George Romero's first zombie movie. :)
What I especially liked about Planet of the Apes is, if you see all the movies, you can tell how the timestream was altered by the two future apes travelling to the past, and introducing the smart-ape genes into the pool earlier than in the original timestream. The interaction between apes and humans changed at one point where humans wound up living peacefully with apes at the end. Very interesting, and something I didn't notice about the movies seeing them as a kid.
The original ending is the zombies win. No producer in Hollywood will ever shoot an ending like that.
... unlike pretty much every zombie movie ever made.
Sure
Out of all the adaptations of Matheson's novel I am Legend , Heston's The Omega Man was probably the most entertaining. It certainly stands tall above the dreck Will Smith starred in last year.
I think it depends on which aspects of each of those movies you're talking about. As far as the performance of the main character, I think Will Smith turned in a vastly superior performance than Heston (no slight on Heston - I doubt any of Will Smith's work (to date) will stand the test of time that Heston's has). There was no scarier moment in the Heston version that was anywhere near as scary as when Smith goes in the dark building to get his dog. Certainly the special effects of an abandoned New York were nowhere up to the Smith version. The bad guys in the Heston movie were far more effective, I thought, than in the Smith version, though. And both fall down rather badly on the ending, neither of which makes the title of the original story (I Am Legend) make any sense - even in the alternate ending for the Smith movie. I don't know why it's so hard for the filmmakers to understand the title, or why they need to change it, considering noone has yet to make a movie of that story WITH the original ending.
VISTA == RAMBUS
Yeah, I went there.
"Windows Is Not Windows"
I haven't installed it yet, but FF Portable has a FF3b5 version available:
Firefox Portable
Yay!
I don't know about FF3b5 yet (just downloaded it), but I can say with some experience on both my home and work machines, and my coworkers experience on his Mac, that FF 2.0.0.13 is an unstable piece of crap, at least when upgraded from a previous version (2.0.0.12 in my case). Installing it fresh may get better results, but I dunno. Beware of the evil .13!
since when has Lunch been a proper noun?
If what you eat for Lunch doesn't deserve a capital L, then you're eating the wrong food.
CONFIG.SYS: FATALITY!
Maybe FireFox needs a "lite" version.
It already exists: K-Meleon
&& and I am not at all into social networking.
And if you keep using programming terminology like '&&' instead of 'and', YOU NEVER WILL BE.
Hosers.