Jdkeith
Apr 12, 08:50 PM
Any live feeds?
Mulyahnto
Jul 19, 04:03 PM
Actually, they were completely off base with their Mac estimates. Since it appears that most people on Wall St. think that Apple only makes iPods, this is no surprise.
Most estimates were for around 1 million Macs sold. Apple came in at 1.3 million. There's the margin difference right there.
This is what page 1 reported a couple days ago:
They predict Apple sales results that are close to but slightly lower than the Wall Street consensus estimates, with iPod quarterly sales between 7.7 and 8.3 million units, Mac sales of 1.2 to 1.23 million units, and revenue of $4.6 billion and $0.48 earnings per share, compared to Wall Street estimates for revenue of $4.95 billion and $0.52 earnings per share.
Most estimates were for around 1 million Macs sold. Apple came in at 1.3 million. There's the margin difference right there.
This is what page 1 reported a couple days ago:
They predict Apple sales results that are close to but slightly lower than the Wall Street consensus estimates, with iPod quarterly sales between 7.7 and 8.3 million units, Mac sales of 1.2 to 1.23 million units, and revenue of $4.6 billion and $0.48 earnings per share, compared to Wall Street estimates for revenue of $4.95 billion and $0.52 earnings per share.
tigres
Apr 19, 12:09 PM
Always a refresh of something, directly after an earnings call it seems like
lordonuthin
Nov 18, 07:57 PM
^yeah almost seems unfair to ppl that want to compete but dont have access to high end hardware. i guess if you look at it from an aggregate standpoint then low point crunchers make a bit of a diff.
the amount of power sucked from the wall per unit would be WAY less i would imagine. from an environmental standpoint it wouldnt make sense
That's why I dropped the G5 after I saw how little it was doing against the Mac Pro and even the low end amd's, it just wasn't worth it in terms of the electric bill.
And speaking of electric bills... I'm just kind of guessing here but I think folding is costing me about $50 a month :eek:
the amount of power sucked from the wall per unit would be WAY less i would imagine. from an environmental standpoint it wouldnt make sense
That's why I dropped the G5 after I saw how little it was doing against the Mac Pro and even the low end amd's, it just wasn't worth it in terms of the electric bill.
And speaking of electric bills... I'm just kind of guessing here but I think folding is costing me about $50 a month :eek:
dime21
Apr 20, 09:26 PM
sorry no longer the case for most of that.
Manuals now cost more to buy than autos due to fewer of them being built so supply is lower.
No really cheaper to maintain. Hell manuals can go 200+k with out the tranny or the engine needing to be pulled. Manuals sorry you have to pull one of those items ever 100k miles to replace the clutch. That eats up the saving so at best it is a break even in that department.
Tranny might last longer but that is about it. Still has to be pulled ever 100k to replace clutch. Hell an auto tranny will out last the car any how so a non issue.
Power wise yes auto is going to eat a little more of the power off the engine but really not much less than the manuals eat due to modern hydrolics and more physical locking together of the engine and tranny.
Fuel economy. Sorry no longer the case. High way the get the same due to the fact that the tranny of both are physically locked to with the engine so no gain there. City mileage Autos can and often times do get better MPG even more so with the modern CVT. CVT for the extra gear ratios and on top of that you have computer controlled shifting that can time it quicker and faster and at better points for MPG than any human can.
Even Autos now have 5-7 gears so that gain is even lost from the manuals. They have the same number of gears pretty much standard now.
Now control. I will give you that. but that is about it.
sorry, but wherever you got your information, it is not correct. fwiw, my last car, a vw passat, i sold with 312k miles on it. i bought it new at the dealer. still had the original clutch. your 100k replacement claim is bogus.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
Manuals now cost more to buy than autos due to fewer of them being built so supply is lower.
No really cheaper to maintain. Hell manuals can go 200+k with out the tranny or the engine needing to be pulled. Manuals sorry you have to pull one of those items ever 100k miles to replace the clutch. That eats up the saving so at best it is a break even in that department.
Tranny might last longer but that is about it. Still has to be pulled ever 100k to replace clutch. Hell an auto tranny will out last the car any how so a non issue.
Power wise yes auto is going to eat a little more of the power off the engine but really not much less than the manuals eat due to modern hydrolics and more physical locking together of the engine and tranny.
Fuel economy. Sorry no longer the case. High way the get the same due to the fact that the tranny of both are physically locked to with the engine so no gain there. City mileage Autos can and often times do get better MPG even more so with the modern CVT. CVT for the extra gear ratios and on top of that you have computer controlled shifting that can time it quicker and faster and at better points for MPG than any human can.
Even Autos now have 5-7 gears so that gain is even lost from the manuals. They have the same number of gears pretty much standard now.
Now control. I will give you that. but that is about it.
sorry, but wherever you got your information, it is not correct. fwiw, my last car, a vw passat, i sold with 312k miles on it. i bought it new at the dealer. still had the original clutch. your 100k replacement claim is bogus.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
speedythecat
Oct 6, 12:55 PM
That looks great! I too am thinking about getting the Belkin Grip Vue. My BestBuy currently has all the colors in stock. Looks like the night sky is the hot seller there.
Question.. Just how big of deal is it that the volume and sleep buttons are covered? Just looks like it would be sort of a pain in the butt to push through the material to get to and then push the buttons, or is it less squishy than it looks??
Question.. Just how big of deal is it that the volume and sleep buttons are covered? Just looks like it would be sort of a pain in the butt to push through the material to get to and then push the buttons, or is it less squishy than it looks??
gugy
Nov 29, 05:36 PM
Very interesting
Channels and content providers have been struggling for years in how to make an interface and technology that works well.
Apple has a huge momentum on their side. As well as Microsoft if Vista is good and they can come up
with a competitor to iTV.
I am not sure if iTV works on PCs but if Apple can pull that of, it will be even more enticing for those content
providers to jump on iTVs bandwagon.
it's a very exciting time for Apple. if they can make all this work, watch out people, the stock price will sky rocket!
Channels and content providers have been struggling for years in how to make an interface and technology that works well.
Apple has a huge momentum on their side. As well as Microsoft if Vista is good and they can come up
with a competitor to iTV.
I am not sure if iTV works on PCs but if Apple can pull that of, it will be even more enticing for those content
providers to jump on iTVs bandwagon.
it's a very exciting time for Apple. if they can make all this work, watch out people, the stock price will sky rocket!
Swarmlord
Nov 16, 11:04 AM
yup, and my webpages will load in the blink of an eye... definitely worth whatever apple will charge. ;)
seriously though, how hard is it to get a program to multi-thread? (if thats the right term; being a complete programming novice, i've no idea)
It depends on what the program does. Some programs don't lend themselves to multi-threading at all and others practically require it. It can be quite a chore to go back and multi-thread an existing program.
I would be happy if existing programs couldn't hog all the resources of the OS whether they were multi-threaded or not. Windows is the worst offender by far, but OS X has allowed an ill behaved application to dominate my computer now and then also.
seriously though, how hard is it to get a program to multi-thread? (if thats the right term; being a complete programming novice, i've no idea)
It depends on what the program does. Some programs don't lend themselves to multi-threading at all and others practically require it. It can be quite a chore to go back and multi-thread an existing program.
I would be happy if existing programs couldn't hog all the resources of the OS whether they were multi-threaded or not. Windows is the worst offender by far, but OS X has allowed an ill behaved application to dominate my computer now and then also.
68164
Nov 29, 03:17 PM
I think iTV will include 'remote desktop' functionality - if you have a BT mouse and keyboard then you will be able to operate your Mac that is in another room via iTV. Want to surf google Earth on your TV? No problems! Want to watch Live TV via eyeTV? No problems! Want to buy off iTunes? No problems! Add then with the press of a button, you are back to Front Row 2.0
This will make media cente really look out of place - your living room doesn't need a computer, it just needs iTV
This will make media cente really look out of place - your living room doesn't need a computer, it just needs iTV
Daveway
Jan 1, 07:04 PM
Where did you find that image? Are there others?
Its on the Apple.com front page
Its on the Apple.com front page
czeluff
Oct 23, 12:03 PM
In my opinion, there is a VERY good possibility of the Macbook Pros being updated tomorrow. Here's Why:
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
If you look at the Macbook Pro's "last updated" section, you'll notice that it was April 24, 2006. Tomorrow will be October 24, exactly 6 month's difference. Coincidence? perhaps, but in my opinion if it's not tomorrow, it's not until late November.
Chad Z
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
If you look at the Macbook Pro's "last updated" section, you'll notice that it was April 24, 2006. Tomorrow will be October 24, exactly 6 month's difference. Coincidence? perhaps, but in my opinion if it's not tomorrow, it's not until late November.
Chad Z
ingenious
Apr 7, 09:19 AM
really, this is what Ive been taking about...I think that most Mac users don't want to hear it
maybe thats because its not true and most mac articles are written by very wintel biased writers.
maybe thats because its not true and most mac articles are written by very wintel biased writers.
catracho
Apr 19, 05:33 PM
Next tuesday pleaseee!
Im leaving the states on wednesday...
Im leaving the states on wednesday...
tvguru
Aug 7, 05:12 AM
US Store, 17" MBP (no taxes): AUD$3655
AU Store, 17" MBP (no GST): AUD$3999
CAN Store, 17" MBP (no taxes): AUD$3591
You have to add sales tax to the US and Canadian prices as they are not only aren't displayed in the price but the taxes differ from state to state/province to province. Aussie GST is quoted in the price and is that same across the country so a 17" MBP costs exactly the same in every state.
The difference is about $400 which is pretty big but we're not a big market, thus selling to us costs more as the size of the market can't make up for the increased cost of getting the products to us.
We also make more money, I remember a while ago doing a comparison between a waiter on Aussie award wages and US minimum wage in the purchase of an iBook. The US waiter would have to work ~2x as many hours as the aussie waiter to afford an iBook at our respective online Apple Stores.
Thanks for that, I forgot that the prices always tax included. This makes a lot more sense now.
Edit: Grammar
AU Store, 17" MBP (no GST): AUD$3999
CAN Store, 17" MBP (no taxes): AUD$3591
You have to add sales tax to the US and Canadian prices as they are not only aren't displayed in the price but the taxes differ from state to state/province to province. Aussie GST is quoted in the price and is that same across the country so a 17" MBP costs exactly the same in every state.
The difference is about $400 which is pretty big but we're not a big market, thus selling to us costs more as the size of the market can't make up for the increased cost of getting the products to us.
We also make more money, I remember a while ago doing a comparison between a waiter on Aussie award wages and US minimum wage in the purchase of an iBook. The US waiter would have to work ~2x as many hours as the aussie waiter to afford an iBook at our respective online Apple Stores.
Thanks for that, I forgot that the prices always tax included. This makes a lot more sense now.
Edit: Grammar
alfagta
Apr 1, 01:04 PM
Don't know if anyone mentioned this, but System Profiler has been given a complete overhaul, including detailed-USB hdd details and a refined GUI
About this Mac or System Profiler? Refreshed About this Mac was already present in DP1. Post some screenshots.
About this Mac or System Profiler? Refreshed About this Mac was already present in DP1. Post some screenshots.
vvebster
Nov 23, 10:58 PM
ROFL, tell me about it :D
Psht. I can get that up here for free.
Psht. I can get that up here for free.
Rustus Maximus
May 3, 11:19 AM
"Install" is much better than launching a disc image, opening an applications window, and then dragging the icon over to the other window.
If that 'old' process is too complicated for people then I truly weep for the future.
If that 'old' process is too complicated for people then I truly weep for the future.
stcanard
Nov 28, 04:53 PM
Word? Word's being replaced more and more by e-mail. I used to type my notes in GMail and sometimes I write essays in GMail
You might, but most businesses don't. Look at how many job applications require resumes in MS Word format. Its not the simple letters and essays that are the issue (especially with OOo being so good on import/export) but the complicated documents that come out of managers and product managers. With a resume I ceratainly don't want to risk that their version of word isn't quite compatible with my OOo export, but that's why I send it in PDF since I don't even trust Word.
Justin+ieber+weemee
You might, but most businesses don't. Look at how many job applications require resumes in MS Word format. Its not the simple letters and essays that are the issue (especially with OOo being so good on import/export) but the complicated documents that come out of managers and product managers. With a resume I ceratainly don't want to risk that their version of word isn't quite compatible with my OOo export, but that's why I send it in PDF since I don't even trust Word.
islanders
Jan 3, 10:43 PM
What's wrong with a MacBook and:
a) Pages
or
b) MS Word (yuck... but ymmv)
or
c) Framemaker in Boot Camp
?
Agreed, the world of word processing isn't overrun with great apps. Times change, and word processing just isn't sexy any more... even though there are plenty of theses and books and magazine articles still being written.
(I notice that MS are preparing to give away updates to Office 2007 - and Vista - to anyone that got Office pre-installed on their PC. Talk about abusing their monopoly... No struggling WP developer can hope to survive against those sort of tactics.)
With a bit of luck Pages 3.0 will be along next week. Hardly a keynote showstopper, but props to Apple for getting into that market at all. Pages is cute.
If you specifically need the long-doc and publishing features of Framemaker, then it's Windows time. Sad but true. Take it up with Adobe.
It�s going to be a difficult decision.
The MB only has a 13.2�� screen. I want that extra inch to the 14.1.
I don�t like the idea of running Windows through OSX and Bootcamp. When I should only need one OS to operate a word processor.
Word isn�t a good option for me.
I may just go with BootCamp, Windows, Adobe, but that means buying Windows, BootCamp, and I�m concerned about conflicts.
Thanks for the other tips for the word processors.
I�m going to wait and keep my options open, although I want something now.
a) Pages
or
b) MS Word (yuck... but ymmv)
or
c) Framemaker in Boot Camp
?
Agreed, the world of word processing isn't overrun with great apps. Times change, and word processing just isn't sexy any more... even though there are plenty of theses and books and magazine articles still being written.
(I notice that MS are preparing to give away updates to Office 2007 - and Vista - to anyone that got Office pre-installed on their PC. Talk about abusing their monopoly... No struggling WP developer can hope to survive against those sort of tactics.)
With a bit of luck Pages 3.0 will be along next week. Hardly a keynote showstopper, but props to Apple for getting into that market at all. Pages is cute.
If you specifically need the long-doc and publishing features of Framemaker, then it's Windows time. Sad but true. Take it up with Adobe.
It�s going to be a difficult decision.
The MB only has a 13.2�� screen. I want that extra inch to the 14.1.
I don�t like the idea of running Windows through OSX and Bootcamp. When I should only need one OS to operate a word processor.
Word isn�t a good option for me.
I may just go with BootCamp, Windows, Adobe, but that means buying Windows, BootCamp, and I�m concerned about conflicts.
Thanks for the other tips for the word processors.
I�m going to wait and keep my options open, although I want something now.
ingenious
Apr 15, 11:01 AM
It's just time for us to be mature adults and walk away from this. We know this guy is an ignoramus. We know Apple doesn't need saving. We know that as far as corporations go Apple couldn't be much healthier. We know what Apple's target market is, and that a cheap computer won't accomplish anything. Most importantly, we know we won't change iMacjapan's mind. He's stubborn and he's not listening. Why risk carpal tunnel on it? How about those NHL playoffs? I predict San Jose will take the Blues in 6 games.
i agree....
i agree....
mrapplegate
Apr 1, 10:41 AM
Bingo! Now how do I remove the others? :confused:
Did you try Command-Option-Control-Click?
Oops, that does not work my bad. At least for me. Glad I don't use Launchpad.
Did you try Command-Option-Control-Click?
Oops, that does not work my bad. At least for me. Glad I don't use Launchpad.
macgeek18
Feb 21, 07:46 PM
Not concerned with the impending refresh? Or do you plan to return and rebuy post-refresh?
I bought an 08 MacBook Aluminum. So No i'm not concerned or care about the upcoming refresh.
I bought an 08 MacBook Aluminum. So No i'm not concerned or care about the upcoming refresh.
Tymmz
Sep 1, 11:50 AM
I'm wondering if Apple would kill off the 17" if they did introduce a 23". I'm pretty sure now that the manufacturing cost difference between 17" and 20" is quite small.
i find 17'' way to small for a desktop computer.
i find 17'' way to small for a desktop computer.
LarryC
Mar 24, 05:22 PM
Mac Pro's have big power supplies but thats mainly for the CPU and Ram, adding a 6970 would be pushing its limits, especially for gaming.
Couldn't they simply upgrade that as well? I can't imagine why they couldn't. I mean we are talking future Mac Pros.
Couldn't they simply upgrade that as well? I can't imagine why they couldn't. I mean we are talking future Mac Pros.
No comments:
Post a Comment