djpic
Apr 28, 04:35 PM
Everyone here seemed to have bought the black iphone 4 and now are buying the white iphone 4? I think that is stupid, why not just wait for iphone 5????
Plus, you buy a white iphone then putting a case on it? lol, why not just buy a white case for your black phone? :confused:
Sorry, I love apple products but these complains and (no offense) re-buyers of a $299+ product just for a color change is ridiculous. Plus is anyone out of contract yet? So you are renewing your contract and paying $299+ for old technology. :eek: This gives all us other apple enthusiasts a bad name (as being people without any common sense).
How many are waiting for the 'nano colored' one???? :p
Plus, you buy a white iphone then putting a case on it? lol, why not just buy a white case for your black phone? :confused:
Sorry, I love apple products but these complains and (no offense) re-buyers of a $299+ product just for a color change is ridiculous. Plus is anyone out of contract yet? So you are renewing your contract and paying $299+ for old technology. :eek: This gives all us other apple enthusiasts a bad name (as being people without any common sense).
How many are waiting for the 'nano colored' one???? :p
addicted44
Apr 22, 04:23 PM
I have never been a fan of the teardrop form factor.
Why? I loved my iPhone 4 (before I lost it) but my 3GS is far easier to hold.
I still prefer the iPhone4 design aesthetically, but the reason is the awesomeness of the exterior metallic antenna look, rather than the rectangular block shape. Although, a teardrop design would mean the loss of the external antenna, which would be disappointing from an aesthetic point of view, but something I could live with.
Why? I loved my iPhone 4 (before I lost it) but my 3GS is far easier to hold.
I still prefer the iPhone4 design aesthetically, but the reason is the awesomeness of the exterior metallic antenna look, rather than the rectangular block shape. Although, a teardrop design would mean the loss of the external antenna, which would be disappointing from an aesthetic point of view, but something I could live with.
bousozoku
Jul 26, 09:20 PM
Well Apple is using Intel parts now that explains the lower quality. They're taking their parts from the same bin now; quality suffers... :mad:
Their quality was suffering before the move to Intel processors. Ever seen an iBook G3 or iBook G4 in a store for over 2 months? The keycaps are lying all over the place.
Apple have not been interactively checking on the quality and demanding changes quickly enough to suit their problems. Also, the other companies have problems but because they don't have such a presence as a market leader, only Apple's problems reliably make front page news.
Their quality was suffering before the move to Intel processors. Ever seen an iBook G3 or iBook G4 in a store for over 2 months? The keycaps are lying all over the place.
Apple have not been interactively checking on the quality and demanding changes quickly enough to suit their problems. Also, the other companies have problems but because they don't have such a presence as a market leader, only Apple's problems reliably make front page news.
arogge
Jun 18, 01:12 PM
Check out today's Dilbert strip. It seems doubly relevant!
http://www.dilbert.com/
http://www.dilbert.com/
more...
arnistotle2000
Apr 22, 04:17 PM
what would the ppi be if the screen was made to 3.7 inches? still are sharp as the current display?
macmax
Jul 21, 08:01 PM
Watch the BUNNY :confused:
What a PERFECT name for MS ...
... ZUNE ...
... much later then SUNE !!!
��� WoW !!!
Nothing looks more similar to a TOILET :eek: I think I will FLUSH ...
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/top/microsoft-argos-final-name-the-zune-186359.php
never seen something so Ugly!!!!!!!!!!Yikes!!!!!
What a PERFECT name for MS ...
... ZUNE ...
... much later then SUNE !!!
��� WoW !!!
Nothing looks more similar to a TOILET :eek: I think I will FLUSH ...
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/top/microsoft-argos-final-name-the-zune-186359.php
never seen something so Ugly!!!!!!!!!!Yikes!!!!!
more...
AAPLaday
May 3, 07:42 AM
Hmm upgrade graphics option AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB
MagnusVonMagnum
Nov 11, 10:54 AM
What's with all the developers that won't do Universal Apps?
If you're supporting both platforms anyway, it's actually far less code, and less testing to just do a Universal App. (I know, I've done two of them so far.)
Apple dropped support for PPC in Snow Leopard and so many programs now even require Snow Leopard to run. Such programs will not work in Leopard, let alone as Universal Apps. If you use any Snow Leopard specific features, I figure you cannot get a Universal binary regardless. It's why I think Apple should have waited until Lion to ditch PPC. Developers for OSX tend to prematurely drop support for previous versions of the operating system simply because they cannot be bothered to support it and/or have no way to test it. I think a lot of apps didn't bother with PPC purely due to the testing issue. Some apps need a bit of tweaking to work in PPC some times even with Apple's two for the price of one system.
This is why I said when Apple dropped PPC for a "tweak" upgrade (Snow Leopard) that PPC was pretty much finished despite all the people saying that "Leopard still works". Yes, it still works but most new software does not. You see the same thin on the App store for iOS a lot. Some app updates will suddenly require iOS 4.x and too bad if iTunes isn't flagged properly and it updates it locally since older iPod Touches and iPhones won't be able to use the app at that point.
You don't just lose out on any new operating system features when your hardware isn't supported any longer. You often lose out on new software as well. You rarely see this with Windows. The vast majority of software that works with Vista and Windows7 still works with XP. Even most games still support DirectX 9 as well because so many users still use XP (which is still faster for gaming for the most part). And XP isn't even officially supported by Microsoft anymore. I guess that's the problem with the high turnover rates with OSX. Older versions get dumped into oblivion instead of slowly fading away. Look how fast OS9 disappeared off the face of the earth whereas you could still get quite a bit of software for Win98 a decade later even.
As for Skyfire and flash, it just proves that despite fanboy ravings on here, a lot of people still want to be able to view Flash web sites. Having a crippled Internet experience just plain sucks, especially if it's only to push one man's agenda for a Flash free Internet. Well, it's not going anywhere fast, regardless and Apple should not be allowed to market things like "the whole Internet" for iOS devices when it's not true.
If you're supporting both platforms anyway, it's actually far less code, and less testing to just do a Universal App. (I know, I've done two of them so far.)
Apple dropped support for PPC in Snow Leopard and so many programs now even require Snow Leopard to run. Such programs will not work in Leopard, let alone as Universal Apps. If you use any Snow Leopard specific features, I figure you cannot get a Universal binary regardless. It's why I think Apple should have waited until Lion to ditch PPC. Developers for OSX tend to prematurely drop support for previous versions of the operating system simply because they cannot be bothered to support it and/or have no way to test it. I think a lot of apps didn't bother with PPC purely due to the testing issue. Some apps need a bit of tweaking to work in PPC some times even with Apple's two for the price of one system.
This is why I said when Apple dropped PPC for a "tweak" upgrade (Snow Leopard) that PPC was pretty much finished despite all the people saying that "Leopard still works". Yes, it still works but most new software does not. You see the same thin on the App store for iOS a lot. Some app updates will suddenly require iOS 4.x and too bad if iTunes isn't flagged properly and it updates it locally since older iPod Touches and iPhones won't be able to use the app at that point.
You don't just lose out on any new operating system features when your hardware isn't supported any longer. You often lose out on new software as well. You rarely see this with Windows. The vast majority of software that works with Vista and Windows7 still works with XP. Even most games still support DirectX 9 as well because so many users still use XP (which is still faster for gaming for the most part). And XP isn't even officially supported by Microsoft anymore. I guess that's the problem with the high turnover rates with OSX. Older versions get dumped into oblivion instead of slowly fading away. Look how fast OS9 disappeared off the face of the earth whereas you could still get quite a bit of software for Win98 a decade later even.
As for Skyfire and flash, it just proves that despite fanboy ravings on here, a lot of people still want to be able to view Flash web sites. Having a crippled Internet experience just plain sucks, especially if it's only to push one man's agenda for a Flash free Internet. Well, it's not going anywhere fast, regardless and Apple should not be allowed to market things like "the whole Internet" for iOS devices when it's not true.
more...
Queso
Jul 25, 11:26 AM
What if he is?
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Point is that there ARE lots of people who like to expand their systems.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
To them, iMac is completely unsuitable, and PowerMac is simply too much (too much space, too much technology, too much money, you name it). There have been LOTS of people saying that they would love to see a relatively inexpensive Mac that is expandable. iMac is not that. Neither is PowerMac.
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs? Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result. Keeping the range small means they have tight control on inventory and can dedicate the Apple Stores to showing what Macs can do. So far it's brought the company a lot of money.
What happens if the screen in the iMac breaks down? The whole computer becomes useless. What if you need faster vid-card? you have to buy a new computer. All-in-one has it's benefits, but it has it's drawbacks, and there are lots of people who do not want those drawbacks.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Yes, minitower (for example) has it's drawbacks as well, but there are lots of people who would be willing to accept those drawback for the benefits such a system offers.
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Well good for you. How that helps ME is beyond me.
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Are we using somekind of miniature-desks or something? I have a rather typical desk, and it currently has a Mac Mini, a TFT-screen, old, huge printer that does not work, and it still has plenty of space for mouse, keyboard and other items.
Yeah, I used to have one of those, then I realised how much wasted space it was causing and ditched it for a smaller one. You obviously live in a bigger place than me, but then for me it's location, location, location :)
And that "small metallic box" means that your iMac loses that all-in-one elegance it now has.
I don't care about "all-in-one elegance". I didn't buy an iMac because it matches the curtains. I just want something that takes up minimum space. The iMac does that perfectly.
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
But only SOME of you. Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower? Jobs' arrogance or because they don't think it'll sell in enough quantity to justify it? As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Let's wait and see what comes out at WWDC. The G5 case had to be enormous for cooling reasons. The MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Point is that there ARE lots of people who like to expand their systems.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
To them, iMac is completely unsuitable, and PowerMac is simply too much (too much space, too much technology, too much money, you name it). There have been LOTS of people saying that they would love to see a relatively inexpensive Mac that is expandable. iMac is not that. Neither is PowerMac.
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs? Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result. Keeping the range small means they have tight control on inventory and can dedicate the Apple Stores to showing what Macs can do. So far it's brought the company a lot of money.
What happens if the screen in the iMac breaks down? The whole computer becomes useless. What if you need faster vid-card? you have to buy a new computer. All-in-one has it's benefits, but it has it's drawbacks, and there are lots of people who do not want those drawbacks.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Yes, minitower (for example) has it's drawbacks as well, but there are lots of people who would be willing to accept those drawback for the benefits such a system offers.
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Well good for you. How that helps ME is beyond me.
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Are we using somekind of miniature-desks or something? I have a rather typical desk, and it currently has a Mac Mini, a TFT-screen, old, huge printer that does not work, and it still has plenty of space for mouse, keyboard and other items.
Yeah, I used to have one of those, then I realised how much wasted space it was causing and ditched it for a smaller one. You obviously live in a bigger place than me, but then for me it's location, location, location :)
And that "small metallic box" means that your iMac loses that all-in-one elegance it now has.
I don't care about "all-in-one elegance". I didn't buy an iMac because it matches the curtains. I just want something that takes up minimum space. The iMac does that perfectly.
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
But only SOME of you. Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower? Jobs' arrogance or because they don't think it'll sell in enough quantity to justify it? As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Let's wait and see what comes out at WWDC. The G5 case had to be enormous for cooling reasons. The MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
dXTC
Mar 10, 09:03 PM
I have stayed out of this one for a while, but now he has gone from "sick" to "awesome" with this video on Funny or Die.
http://FunnyOrDie.com/m/5cwg
I don't even know what to say...
Honestly, me neither. I don't know whether to shake my head incredulously or LMAO. Did Charlie get paid for this?
Say nothing.
It's the only way to kill him.
Won't happen. Chuck Norris can't even kill Charlie Sheen; the Adonis DNA-infused tiger blood is like Kryptonite to Norris.
http://FunnyOrDie.com/m/5cwg
I don't even know what to say...
Honestly, me neither. I don't know whether to shake my head incredulously or LMAO. Did Charlie get paid for this?
Say nothing.
It's the only way to kill him.
Won't happen. Chuck Norris can't even kill Charlie Sheen; the Adonis DNA-infused tiger blood is like Kryptonite to Norris.
more...
weg
Jul 22, 05:08 AM
Well obviously none of us here are going to be terribly interested if it's not Mac-compatible. That said, Apple has a lot to lose, so I hope they adapt and compete well.
So far, Microsoft's Hardware was always perfectly Mac compatible...
So far, Microsoft's Hardware was always perfectly Mac compatible...
jetjaguar
Sep 13, 12:48 PM
I use THIS (http://www.amazon.com/Moleskine-Ruled-Notebook-Large/dp/8883701127/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1284393671&sr=8-1) one for the Large Moleskine Cover and THIS (http://www.amazon.com/Kikkerland-Moleskine-Ruled-Notebook-Pocket/dp/8883701003/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=office-products&qid=1284393693&sr=8-4) one for the Small Moleskine Cover.
I think you'll love them. They're really pretty amazing.
thanks alot:)
I think you'll love them. They're really pretty amazing.
thanks alot:)
more...
macmax
Jul 21, 08:01 PM
Watch the BUNNY :confused:
What a PERFECT name for MS ...
... ZUNE ...
... much later then SUNE !!!
��� WoW !!!
Nothing looks more similar to a TOILET :eek: I think I will FLUSH ...
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/top/microsoft-argos-final-name-the-zune-186359.php
never seen something so Ugly!!!!!!!!!!Yikes!!!!!
What a PERFECT name for MS ...
... ZUNE ...
... much later then SUNE !!!
��� WoW !!!
Nothing looks more similar to a TOILET :eek: I think I will FLUSH ...
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/top/microsoft-argos-final-name-the-zune-186359.php
never seen something so Ugly!!!!!!!!!!Yikes!!!!!
daveschroeder
Oct 23, 08:35 AM
Dave,
I understand where you are coming from, but I still don't interpret the EULA as you do. Neither does Paul Thurrott http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_licensing.asp. Can you please provide links to others who think like you, preferably if they happen to work for MS. ;)
Coincidentally, I had just emailed Paul.
He already responded:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:23:04 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Microsoft told me that the retail EULA forbids the installation of Windows
Vista Home Basic or Home Premium in virtual machines. They said that if
developers wanted to do this, they should get an MSDN subscription, which
has a different license allowing such an install. All that said, there's
nothing technical from preventing users from installing any Vista version in
a virtual machine.
Paul
...to which I replied:
From: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Subject: Re: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:30:57 AM CDT
To: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Security: Signed
So Microsoft actually does intend the EULA to prohibit someone from, say, buying Vista Home as a retail box and then installing it in Parallels Desktop on a Mac? (I know there is nothing technical preventing that.)
This still seems curious, given that in that scenario, not only does Vista Ultimate allow VM use, but also includes an additional license specifically so that same copy can be installed in a VM on the same device. Why wouldn't Home's license allow a single instance of itself to be used in a VM as long as it's not already installed somewhere else? The language all revolves around "the software installed on the licensed device", and I take that to mean the software *already* installed on that device, but I suppose that could be argued to mean that it can't be installed on *any* device where it would be used in a virtualization environment...
Update: Paul's response:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:34:07 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Yeah, that's what they told me. My guess is that they don't want people
purchasing the low-cost versions, installing them on virtual machine
environments they don't understand (like Parallels) and then demanding
support.
You can understand why this is an issue, given that the Business and Ultimate EULAs not only explicitly allow VM use, but also include additional licenses to use that copy a second time in a VM, legally (on the same device). Also, all the language, as I said, revolves around using "the software installed on the licensed device" (implying that it's an installation that already exists on a licensed device) in a VM.
So I'll say that, if this is accurate, I stand corrected. After a few years of reading Microsoft (and other) EULAs, even I thought Microsoft wouldn't be that retarded. ;-)
Given the language, and given the additional-license situation with Business and Ultimate, I still have to say I'm surprised.
I understand where you are coming from, but I still don't interpret the EULA as you do. Neither does Paul Thurrott http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_licensing.asp. Can you please provide links to others who think like you, preferably if they happen to work for MS. ;)
Coincidentally, I had just emailed Paul.
He already responded:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:23:04 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Microsoft told me that the retail EULA forbids the installation of Windows
Vista Home Basic or Home Premium in virtual machines. They said that if
developers wanted to do this, they should get an MSDN subscription, which
has a different license allowing such an install. All that said, there's
nothing technical from preventing users from installing any Vista version in
a virtual machine.
Paul
...to which I replied:
From: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Subject: Re: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:30:57 AM CDT
To: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Security: Signed
So Microsoft actually does intend the EULA to prohibit someone from, say, buying Vista Home as a retail box and then installing it in Parallels Desktop on a Mac? (I know there is nothing technical preventing that.)
This still seems curious, given that in that scenario, not only does Vista Ultimate allow VM use, but also includes an additional license specifically so that same copy can be installed in a VM on the same device. Why wouldn't Home's license allow a single instance of itself to be used in a VM as long as it's not already installed somewhere else? The language all revolves around "the software installed on the licensed device", and I take that to mean the software *already* installed on that device, but I suppose that could be argued to mean that it can't be installed on *any* device where it would be used in a virtualization environment...
Update: Paul's response:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:34:07 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Yeah, that's what they told me. My guess is that they don't want people
purchasing the low-cost versions, installing them on virtual machine
environments they don't understand (like Parallels) and then demanding
support.
You can understand why this is an issue, given that the Business and Ultimate EULAs not only explicitly allow VM use, but also include additional licenses to use that copy a second time in a VM, legally (on the same device). Also, all the language, as I said, revolves around using "the software installed on the licensed device" (implying that it's an installation that already exists on a licensed device) in a VM.
So I'll say that, if this is accurate, I stand corrected. After a few years of reading Microsoft (and other) EULAs, even I thought Microsoft wouldn't be that retarded. ;-)
Given the language, and given the additional-license situation with Business and Ultimate, I still have to say I'm surprised.
more...
jessica.
Sep 14, 08:08 AM
:D
http://siennaplantationrealtor.com/images/SOLD%20sign.jpg
http://siennaplantationrealtor.com/images/SOLD%20sign.jpg
KnightWRX
Apr 17, 08:04 AM
What about a Magic Trackpad?
Trackpads and touch screens are quite different input devices. Touch screen input requires that you actually "touch" what you want to manipulate. With a trackpad, you don't have quite the precision to precisely put your finger on an object on screen, since the object is not displayed on the track pad.
It just doesn't translate that well. Trackpads still very much require cursors, which iOS's UI lacks.
Trackpads and touch screens are quite different input devices. Touch screen input requires that you actually "touch" what you want to manipulate. With a trackpad, you don't have quite the precision to precisely put your finger on an object on screen, since the object is not displayed on the track pad.
It just doesn't translate that well. Trackpads still very much require cursors, which iOS's UI lacks.
more...
Full of Win
Apr 24, 10:13 PM
whats not to say someone just changed the carrier name? I don't own an iphone but I did search and its totally possible.
There is more to this than the carrier tag.
I don't see a reason apple would need to create an iPhone for T-Mobile if the AT&T plan goes through. If it's rejected than maybe thats a reason then to possibly go on T-Mobile.
As noted in this thread... adding an extra band opens oter networks besides TM. Also, if purchased, TM cannot flick a switch on all their towers to make them at&t compliant.
There is more to this than the carrier tag.
I don't see a reason apple would need to create an iPhone for T-Mobile if the AT&T plan goes through. If it's rejected than maybe thats a reason then to possibly go on T-Mobile.
As noted in this thread... adding an extra band opens oter networks besides TM. Also, if purchased, TM cannot flick a switch on all their towers to make them at&t compliant.
KnightWRX
Apr 24, 12:06 PM
In Vancouver (and my group of friends and co-workers) I see at least 5x the amount of iPhones then Android devices. In fact, in my and my girlfriends family alone there are 8 iPhones among 11 people (one of those without an iPhone being my dad who refuses a smartphone at all). However, it's hard to draw any real conclusions up here without any data.
I tend to ignore my family/co-workers when I talk about this stuff. The Apple bias there is quite evident and I don't expect anything other than Apple stuff there. I wouldn't draw conclusions on Mac market share from them either as it would put the Mac on top of Windows by a huge margin. ;)
I try to be honest with myself because if I looked at them, I would draw the same conclusions you and many others are here and just say Apple is leading by a huge margin, which just isn't the case. I don't have enough attachement to Apple as a vendor to go around cheerleading for them.
I tend to ignore my family/co-workers when I talk about this stuff. The Apple bias there is quite evident and I don't expect anything other than Apple stuff there. I wouldn't draw conclusions on Mac market share from them either as it would put the Mac on top of Windows by a huge margin. ;)
I try to be honest with myself because if I looked at them, I would draw the same conclusions you and many others are here and just say Apple is leading by a huge margin, which just isn't the case. I don't have enough attachement to Apple as a vendor to go around cheerleading for them.
kainjow
Nov 3, 06:19 PM
Right, and Cocoa isn't the slightest bit bloated? :rolleyes: (can you say runtime messaging and binding overhead?)
I'm not saying that the actual virtualization should be done in Cocoa (ha yeah right), but the GUI definitely should. Parallels takes way too long to launch, and the GUI sucks.
Plus, do you really think a Qt C++ wrapper around Carbon is faster than direct Cocoa calls? :rolleyes:
I just want a nice documented-based Cocoa app that behaves like a Mac app, with a fast virtualization at its core :)
I'm not saying that the actual virtualization should be done in Cocoa (ha yeah right), but the GUI definitely should. Parallels takes way too long to launch, and the GUI sucks.
Plus, do you really think a Qt C++ wrapper around Carbon is faster than direct Cocoa calls? :rolleyes:
I just want a nice documented-based Cocoa app that behaves like a Mac app, with a fast virtualization at its core :)
slffl
Nov 3, 03:12 PM
Wow, Drag-n-Drop between OSX and Windows. Awesome!!!
AppleFanatic10
Apr 14, 05:25 PM
iPad 1st Gen - 593.4 MB :)
http://tapa.tk/mu/4c5f44af-744d-d2d7.jpg
Sent from my Verizon iPhone 4 using Tapatalk
http://tapa.tk/mu/4c5f44af-744d-d2d7.jpg
Sent from my Verizon iPhone 4 using Tapatalk
smiddlehurst
May 3, 08:37 AM
And yet prices in the Australian Apple Store are still 25% higher than the USA Store. How rude, Apple.
Top end 27" iMac = US$1999, or in the Australian Store, AUD$2299 which at the current exchange rate is about US$2500. Why should we pay more, Apple? If anything, we're closer to China so should pay less on shipping!
Whilst it's slightly better than yesterdays prices, I'm still seriously not happy.
I'd buy one if we got the USA prices.
*sigh* Every time someone makes this mistake...
Bear in mind that the US prices do not include sales tax of any kind. In your case Australian prices include GST which I believe currently runs at 10%? If you're anything like the UK there may be additional import taxes to pay and the cost of doing business is likely to be higher (everything from shipping costs to salaries affect the price you pay at the checkout). Add in a margain that Apple will calculate to protect themselves from changes in the exchange rate and you'll probably be very close to price parity. Just as in the UK you're paying extra for the product because of the country, not because of Apple.
That's not to say Apple DON'T screw up on exchange rates and gouge the heck out of us non-Americans of course. The Mac Mini being the most recent, and painful, example. But you need to make sure you compare like for like before complaining.
Top end 27" iMac = US$1999, or in the Australian Store, AUD$2299 which at the current exchange rate is about US$2500. Why should we pay more, Apple? If anything, we're closer to China so should pay less on shipping!
Whilst it's slightly better than yesterdays prices, I'm still seriously not happy.
I'd buy one if we got the USA prices.
*sigh* Every time someone makes this mistake...
Bear in mind that the US prices do not include sales tax of any kind. In your case Australian prices include GST which I believe currently runs at 10%? If you're anything like the UK there may be additional import taxes to pay and the cost of doing business is likely to be higher (everything from shipping costs to salaries affect the price you pay at the checkout). Add in a margain that Apple will calculate to protect themselves from changes in the exchange rate and you'll probably be very close to price parity. Just as in the UK you're paying extra for the product because of the country, not because of Apple.
That's not to say Apple DON'T screw up on exchange rates and gouge the heck out of us non-Americans of course. The Mac Mini being the most recent, and painful, example. But you need to make sure you compare like for like before complaining.
ChazUK
Apr 22, 04:43 AM
This settles it:
http://www.emptyhouse.net/fileshuttle/samsungphone_21e9.jpg
That settles nothing as it is inaccurate.
http://www.emptyhouse.net/fileshuttle/samsungphone_21e9.jpg
That settles nothing as it is inaccurate.
milo
Jul 28, 10:07 AM
Then it is an HD CONSOLE not an HD PLAYER. Player implies HD media.
I don't know about that. You should probably just ask the OP for clarification, it's possible you're just misunderstanding his choice of words.
Nintendo never sold any console at a loss.
Really? What's your source on that?
I don't know about that. You should probably just ask the OP for clarification, it's possible you're just misunderstanding his choice of words.
Nintendo never sold any console at a loss.
Really? What's your source on that?
No comments:
Post a Comment