AAPLaday
Mar 26, 04:43 AM
Would need to be wireless for me. Either that or a really long cable. I dont like sitting too close to the tv when its on
NebulaClash
Sep 14, 12:44 PM
For me, the antenna issue was WORSE than people had reported.
I don't see how. I saw it being reported on the national evening newscasts and on the front pages of newspapers. How much more reporting could there possibly have been?
I don't see how. I saw it being reported on the national evening newscasts and on the front pages of newspapers. How much more reporting could there possibly have been?
v66jack
Mar 1, 06:04 PM
Yep all of them are hard drives, i have 2TB in each one and then a RAID-0 with 2x2TB. I keep most for back ups of Photos, Music and Movies and OS clones (i'm fairly meticulous with back ups and having them on more than just one drive..but most duplicated clones are taken offline and stored after back up).
One is used as my external iTunes library as there isnt enough space on the SSD and the others are free space, diagnostic drives, work drives used to do audio/video or photo storage/editing
I must say, your array of hard drives / back up system is mightily impressive
One is used as my external iTunes library as there isnt enough space on the SSD and the others are free space, diagnostic drives, work drives used to do audio/video or photo storage/editing
I must say, your array of hard drives / back up system is mightily impressive
MattG
Aug 7, 07:40 AM
I was kind of getting tired of Apple updating the iPods so often, but now that we've had all these recent updates to other hardware (laptops, iMacs), I'd be kind of excited now to see something really new and different from the iPod lineup. Here's to hoping for something with a huge screen and better video capabilities.
skiltrip
Oct 6, 01:29 PM
Thanks. That looks like a great case there too!
I hope it's nice in person. I have a cheapo $2 gel case in smokey black I got on Ebay. Looks nice, but tons of watermarking, and the fit is so-so. Hard to get on right. And the volume button cover on that cheapo case sucks. Hopefully this will be a good compromise.
I hope it's nice in person. I have a cheapo $2 gel case in smokey black I got on Ebay. Looks nice, but tons of watermarking, and the fit is so-so. Hard to get on right. And the volume button cover on that cheapo case sucks. Hopefully this will be a good compromise.
Chris Bangle
Sep 1, 12:10 PM
Why not make a 30inch macbook pro.:cool: how hard can it be.
relimw
Sep 6, 08:51 AM
Still cant see any sign of MBPs.*weeps*
Maybe next tuesday...
Dude, the MBP was updated in late April of this year, why would you think it'll be updated four and a half months later??
Maybe next tuesday...
Dude, the MBP was updated in late April of this year, why would you think it'll be updated four and a half months later??
Leoff
Oct 23, 07:14 AM
superb...im travelling to states this week, and could pick one up at the apple store 5th avenue for much cheaper than here in uk..
its gottta come out sometime...
You do know that you'll be getting a US-formatted keyboard and AC adapter, yes?
its gottta come out sometime...
You do know that you'll be getting a US-formatted keyboard and AC adapter, yes?
econgeek
Apr 12, 09:51 PM
but Adobe is looking better by the day.
So, you're telling me you're a masochist? Seriously, though, I watch screen casts of how to do things in Premier and After Effects every time I wonder what things might be like elsewhere and they always make the apps look completely unusable. Everything is a vaguely named selection on a huge popup and you have to choose several of these to do what you want-- I understand what people mean by "it takes a lot of training".... I'm sure it does to use products like that.
Everything I'm seeing here makes this sound like a major leap forward in edting-- just the automatic audio sync on import is a huge thing. No need to go buy plural eyes. Which means if my on camera mic is not appropriate I don't have to worry about the sync hassles of capturing audio with a recorder.... and that's just one of a dozen features like that.
So, you're telling me you're a masochist? Seriously, though, I watch screen casts of how to do things in Premier and After Effects every time I wonder what things might be like elsewhere and they always make the apps look completely unusable. Everything is a vaguely named selection on a huge popup and you have to choose several of these to do what you want-- I understand what people mean by "it takes a lot of training".... I'm sure it does to use products like that.
Everything I'm seeing here makes this sound like a major leap forward in edting-- just the automatic audio sync on import is a huge thing. No need to go buy plural eyes. Which means if my on camera mic is not appropriate I don't have to worry about the sync hassles of capturing audio with a recorder.... and that's just one of a dozen features like that.
snberk103
Apr 10, 07:21 PM
....
Really, is there even someone who doesn't know how to drive an automatic ? It's pretty self-explanatory, not much of a learning curve shifting from Park to Drive and hitting the gas. ...
When I was in University my buddy told me the following story - he swore it was true.
His mom drove a manual (and had only every driven manuals), and he had an automatic. One day he was driving her back from the garage where she had left her car for servicing and mom asked if she could drive his car because she wanted to see what it was like.
Naturally, it took her all of 30 seconds to figure it out (though he did note that mom kept trying to depress the clutch, even if she wasn't trying to shift.) Everything was fine, they were sailing through the traffic, and then mom wanted to stop at a store and run some errands. This meant parallel parking since they were still in town. He was a bit worried, because trying to parallel park a strange car is always a bit challenging, and sons always think their mothers are not the best parkers.
And this is what she did. She pulled up right next to an open spot, put on her turn signal, and put the car into (P)ark. She then started goosing the gas. My buddy was looking at his mom, quizzically. Mom was staring at the open spot next them intently, and revving the engine. Finally he asked her what she was doing. It seems she thought that the (P)ark meant that the car 'automatically parked' itself by moving 90� to the side. You told the car which way to go (left or right) via the turn signals.
My buddy explained that that was not how it worked. Mom sighed - pulled up a 1/2 car length, popped it into (R)erverse and parked his car smooth as butter - turned to him and commented that if an "automatic" car with (P)ark couldn't park itself, then what was the point.
Far as know, she drove a manual for the rest of her life. I don't know if he was ever sure whether is mom was pulling his leg or not.
Really, is there even someone who doesn't know how to drive an automatic ? It's pretty self-explanatory, not much of a learning curve shifting from Park to Drive and hitting the gas. ...
When I was in University my buddy told me the following story - he swore it was true.
His mom drove a manual (and had only every driven manuals), and he had an automatic. One day he was driving her back from the garage where she had left her car for servicing and mom asked if she could drive his car because she wanted to see what it was like.
Naturally, it took her all of 30 seconds to figure it out (though he did note that mom kept trying to depress the clutch, even if she wasn't trying to shift.) Everything was fine, they were sailing through the traffic, and then mom wanted to stop at a store and run some errands. This meant parallel parking since they were still in town. He was a bit worried, because trying to parallel park a strange car is always a bit challenging, and sons always think their mothers are not the best parkers.
And this is what she did. She pulled up right next to an open spot, put on her turn signal, and put the car into (P)ark. She then started goosing the gas. My buddy was looking at his mom, quizzically. Mom was staring at the open spot next them intently, and revving the engine. Finally he asked her what she was doing. It seems she thought that the (P)ark meant that the car 'automatically parked' itself by moving 90� to the side. You told the car which way to go (left or right) via the turn signals.
My buddy explained that that was not how it worked. Mom sighed - pulled up a 1/2 car length, popped it into (R)erverse and parked his car smooth as butter - turned to him and commented that if an "automatic" car with (P)ark couldn't park itself, then what was the point.
Far as know, she drove a manual for the rest of her life. I don't know if he was ever sure whether is mom was pulling his leg or not.
PBF
Apr 2, 11:40 PM
Actually, I'm talking about JUST the content within the window, and only Safari Fullscreen Mode can do it. I'll post a pic...
Ah, I see. Thanks for clarifying. That's new. By the way, it works from both left and right sides. Neat.
:)
Ah, I see. Thanks for clarifying. That's new. By the way, it works from both left and right sides. Neat.
:)
Earendil
Nov 27, 04:33 PM
I'd just like to agree with those who have pointed out that the main thing Apple's monitor division should be worrying about is price, not new sizes - the Apple logo can bear a certain price premium but not that much, especially as they don't yet include Apple-specific goodness such as integrated isight etc.
*smacks head on desk*
Beating a dead horse...
In October, I considered a 23" ACD at �848 inc. VAT, delivery and 3yrs of Applecare cover.
Instead, I phoned Dell and got the 24" 2407WP for �549.08 inc. VAT, delivery and 4yrs next business day swap-out cover. For the Apple, I would have had to pay a premium of 55% and got 1yr less cover.
Good for you.
Yeah Apple is really screwing us over, man oh man. And look at NEC, they must be absolutely mad to charge $2000 for their MultiSync LCD2190UXi (http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=10754) :rolleyes:
You made the right choice for your needs and your price. You bought a consumer monitor.
If people want to say that Apple should make a consumer level LCD (for cheap) than say so. But please, for the love of all things, stop dissing on Apple monitors just because you are happy with a Dell and they are cheaper. Many people are Happy with cheapo computers, and if all you need is to write and print word documents, do not buy an Apple computer. However that doesn't mean that Apple doesn't make a computer worth it's weight in gold... for those that need it.
If you don't need color accuracy, DO NOT BUY AN APPLE MONITOR, there are cheaper monitors that, though less accurate, will satisfy you just fine.
*smacks head on desk*
Beating a dead horse...
In October, I considered a 23" ACD at �848 inc. VAT, delivery and 3yrs of Applecare cover.
Instead, I phoned Dell and got the 24" 2407WP for �549.08 inc. VAT, delivery and 4yrs next business day swap-out cover. For the Apple, I would have had to pay a premium of 55% and got 1yr less cover.
Good for you.
Yeah Apple is really screwing us over, man oh man. And look at NEC, they must be absolutely mad to charge $2000 for their MultiSync LCD2190UXi (http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=10754) :rolleyes:
You made the right choice for your needs and your price. You bought a consumer monitor.
If people want to say that Apple should make a consumer level LCD (for cheap) than say so. But please, for the love of all things, stop dissing on Apple monitors just because you are happy with a Dell and they are cheaper. Many people are Happy with cheapo computers, and if all you need is to write and print word documents, do not buy an Apple computer. However that doesn't mean that Apple doesn't make a computer worth it's weight in gold... for those that need it.
If you don't need color accuracy, DO NOT BUY AN APPLE MONITOR, there are cheaper monitors that, though less accurate, will satisfy you just fine.
Clive At Five
Sep 1, 12:55 PM
Dammit, you see what they're doing with this 23" iMac, don't you? They're trying to plug up the gaping hole in their product line by introducing a "Pro" iMac of sorts. They'll use it as an excuse NOT to make a freaking mid-level Mac.
It'll still be a gaping hole, even with the top level Merom, but it'll be small enough for Apple to ignore it. Infidels!
Prove me wrong, Apple. Prove me wrong.
-Clive
It'll still be a gaping hole, even with the top level Merom, but it'll be small enough for Apple to ignore it. Infidels!
Prove me wrong, Apple. Prove me wrong.
-Clive
Earendil
Nov 27, 03:16 PM
I find you the one that is incorrigible. The 23" inch price is competitive where it is as your link so eloquently points out. The Apple displays are easily worth a 15-20% mark-up. The problem is since the last time the display prices were updated 20" wide-screen panel prices have dropped nearly in half. So a year ago when Apple released this $699 price point it was a good price because competitors were selling the same panels at $599. Now they are at $399 and some times as low a $299. Apple's display is worth extra just not 75% to 100% extra.
I find what you say quite plausible. However a quick search finds all monitors in that price point to be of the S-PVA panel type, and not SWOP certified (or at least advertised as such). Perhaps a more in depth search would reveal the monitors you are talking about, or perhaps since you are making the claim, you are aware of some?
I fully suspect Apple has a markup on their pro-sumor monitors. However I'm tired of people using Dell monitors as an example for outrageous pricing. No one here, or in any argument I've seen recently, has offered a different comparison. My knowledge of monitors may not be up to date, but when I bought my monitor, Apple's prices were in line.
My apologies if I'm not easily swayed from what my own research has shown to be true, until someone can come up with something besides "you're wrong" :(
I mean absolutely no disrespect in any of my arguments...
I find what you say quite plausible. However a quick search finds all monitors in that price point to be of the S-PVA panel type, and not SWOP certified (or at least advertised as such). Perhaps a more in depth search would reveal the monitors you are talking about, or perhaps since you are making the claim, you are aware of some?
I fully suspect Apple has a markup on their pro-sumor monitors. However I'm tired of people using Dell monitors as an example for outrageous pricing. No one here, or in any argument I've seen recently, has offered a different comparison. My knowledge of monitors may not be up to date, but when I bought my monitor, Apple's prices were in line.
My apologies if I'm not easily swayed from what my own research has shown to be true, until someone can come up with something besides "you're wrong" :(
I mean absolutely no disrespect in any of my arguments...
kdarling
Apr 23, 09:10 AM
-- The cache is good
Let's be clear: the cell/hotspot lookup caching was undoubtedly an innocently added coding feature.
Jastin and Selena are dating
selena gomez red dresses.
Love#39;s young dream: Selena
selena gomez red dresses.
Let's be clear: the cell/hotspot lookup caching was undoubtedly an innocently added coding feature.
Tomorrow
Apr 20, 02:20 PM
^^ Ach, Miata. *shudder*
I try, as a rule, not to drive or ride in a car smaller than myself. :D
I try, as a rule, not to drive or ride in a car smaller than myself. :D
twoodcc
Dec 27, 09:26 AM
It worked...
just enough points to take 4th place back (at least temporarily)
;)
nice. glad it worked for you!
and congrats to mc68k for 9 million points!
and congrats to whiterabbit for 5 million points!
just enough points to take 4th place back (at least temporarily)
;)
nice. glad it worked for you!
and congrats to mc68k for 9 million points!
and congrats to whiterabbit for 5 million points!
Leoff
Nov 27, 09:05 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
kadajawi
Aug 30, 04:06 PM
Your prices really hurt. A very basic Core Solo is around $750 here.
Anyway I need to get a new computer for my parents really soon... can't really afford to wait for an upgrade (which would be nice, although not neccessary). How likely is the upgrade? Or maybe I should build them a PC... hm. Would be cheaper, as fast as the Mac, much better equipped and not that much bigger.
What I would love to see though wouldn't be a Mac not that Mini, but something in a real case, without compromising for size. Put in the cheapest Intel CPU that is up to date, so you can toss in any faster CPU. Or better let the customer decide. Basic version would have a cheap CPU, maybe even a Celeron. Onboard graphics (but PCIx slot!). Accept ordinary disc drives, maybe even deliver without. Minimum amount of RAM... as low as 256 MB? Do anything to keep prices low, but give the machine a good case, size something around Mac Pro, maybe a bit smaller. Midi Tower size. Can be white plastic for example, should be stylish. Important are only the casing and the board, so the user can upgrade. That would really be something for switchers... they could simply plug in their old hardware (please at least driver support for all ATI and nVidia cards, the most important sound cards (Creative and VIA Envy24* I guess)). Ok, I think that will only stay a dream :(
Anyway I need to get a new computer for my parents really soon... can't really afford to wait for an upgrade (which would be nice, although not neccessary). How likely is the upgrade? Or maybe I should build them a PC... hm. Would be cheaper, as fast as the Mac, much better equipped and not that much bigger.
What I would love to see though wouldn't be a Mac not that Mini, but something in a real case, without compromising for size. Put in the cheapest Intel CPU that is up to date, so you can toss in any faster CPU. Or better let the customer decide. Basic version would have a cheap CPU, maybe even a Celeron. Onboard graphics (but PCIx slot!). Accept ordinary disc drives, maybe even deliver without. Minimum amount of RAM... as low as 256 MB? Do anything to keep prices low, but give the machine a good case, size something around Mac Pro, maybe a bit smaller. Midi Tower size. Can be white plastic for example, should be stylish. Important are only the casing and the board, so the user can upgrade. That would really be something for switchers... they could simply plug in their old hardware (please at least driver support for all ATI and nVidia cards, the most important sound cards (Creative and VIA Envy24* I guess)). Ok, I think that will only stay a dream :(
yg17
Apr 10, 12:19 AM
Yes I can drive one. I also think that if you can't drive one, you shouldn't be allowed to drive period. Automatics are just things to get you from point A to B, whereas a standard transmission car is something you use for fun, with getting from point A to B just being a side effect.
-Don
I definitely think driving a manual makes me a safer, more attentive driver.
I'm against crap that makes people lazy like adaptive cruise control, auto headlights and auto wipers and stuff like that, I suppose an automatic can fall in there too. That stuff makes drivers lazy and inattentive because they don't have to concentrate on the road.
-Don
I definitely think driving a manual makes me a safer, more attentive driver.
I'm against crap that makes people lazy like adaptive cruise control, auto headlights and auto wipers and stuff like that, I suppose an automatic can fall in there too. That stuff makes drivers lazy and inattentive because they don't have to concentrate on the road.
DeSnousa
Aug 6, 08:47 PM
I'm sorry I'm really slow, I don't get the slogan :(
"Mac OS X Leopard, Introducing Vista 2.0"
Do they mean that Leopard is years ahead of Vista, like if it were to be like Windows next version OS :confused:
:o
"Mac OS X Leopard, Introducing Vista 2.0"
Do they mean that Leopard is years ahead of Vista, like if it were to be like Windows next version OS :confused:
:o
emotion
Aug 16, 09:30 AM
as i have said in a previous thread there was a big article a few months ago that discussed the idea of homes having 'media servers' and you stream your music from home to the ipod instead of having it all stored locally.
Good point. A little like airtunes. This would require maybe just flash storage on the device as the main storage is on the server.
For those saying the download functions could be via an iphone....well from a UK perspective i hope not becasue currently the UK mobile networks charge a fortune for GPRS data transfer that to be honest would not make it at all viable to use that service unless apple has cut a deal with them but i very much doubt that.
We need flat data rates on mobiles in the UK. It will happen (esp. if they want people to embrace 3g that they spent all the money on), it's just when.
Good point. A little like airtunes. This would require maybe just flash storage on the device as the main storage is on the server.
For those saying the download functions could be via an iphone....well from a UK perspective i hope not becasue currently the UK mobile networks charge a fortune for GPRS data transfer that to be honest would not make it at all viable to use that service unless apple has cut a deal with them but i very much doubt that.
We need flat data rates on mobiles in the UK. It will happen (esp. if they want people to embrace 3g that they spent all the money on), it's just when.
poppe
Jul 14, 12:25 PM
It was originally made by Philips, but the CD we know today is a Philips/Sony Co-Op.
And, regarding the BetaMax... It was actually quite succesfull. Yes, it failed in consumer-space, but it's still being used in television-productions.
Is it REALLY that bad? BetaMax wasn 't really a failure, since it's widely used even today. It's just not used by consumers. Sony was very important in creating the CD. They do have to misses that can't be denied: Memory Stick and MiniDisk.
Other companies might have less misses in these things, but we must acknowledge that none of them has been as active in coming up with alternatives. I haven't really seen Matsushita (for example) try to come up with new stuff. Sony has tried to come up with new stuff. Some of the succeeded, some of them failed.
On betamax. Your very right it is very succesful in a production studios for broadcasting and what not. But now even those are being replaced by DVC Pro (which I think is sony is it not?).
But I was more talking about the format war that keeps getting mentioned. It was one vs. the other in the consumer market. Who won? VHS. Thats all I meant.
And, regarding the BetaMax... It was actually quite succesfull. Yes, it failed in consumer-space, but it's still being used in television-productions.
Is it REALLY that bad? BetaMax wasn 't really a failure, since it's widely used even today. It's just not used by consumers. Sony was very important in creating the CD. They do have to misses that can't be denied: Memory Stick and MiniDisk.
Other companies might have less misses in these things, but we must acknowledge that none of them has been as active in coming up with alternatives. I haven't really seen Matsushita (for example) try to come up with new stuff. Sony has tried to come up with new stuff. Some of the succeeded, some of them failed.
On betamax. Your very right it is very succesful in a production studios for broadcasting and what not. But now even those are being replaced by DVC Pro (which I think is sony is it not?).
But I was more talking about the format war that keeps getting mentioned. It was one vs. the other in the consumer market. Who won? VHS. Thats all I meant.
UnreaL
Sep 5, 04:15 PM
Where's my new mac mini damnit! :mad:
Disappointed :(
Anyone know if it will be having a revision or if all of this was baseless dross, little more than hype?
Disappointed :(
Anyone know if it will be having a revision or if all of this was baseless dross, little more than hype?