Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Cubase Scope card clocking issue. David, Aaron or Dimitrios ?
| Cubase Scope card clocking issue. David, Aaron or Dimitrios ? [message #93179] |
Thu, 29 November 2007 12:25  |
Tom Bruhl
Messages: 1368
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>
>This app is a lifesaver (I have v4.2 from when it was EDL Convert).
>You are going to love moving freely back and forth.
>
>Dedric
>
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote in message news:47913552$1@linux...
>>
>> I think they have this App Ready for Prim Time. It even converts Pro Tools
>> 7.x WOW!!.. I hate editing in ProTools..I LOVE editing in Nuendo. SO...
If
>> this app works like they stated, I can now take the Pro Tools sessions
and
>> work in Nuendo..
>>
>> http://www.solid-state-logic.com/music/pro-convert/overview. html
>"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>I'm on that list. I'm about to take over a position whereas I'll be
>responsible for the in the field mixers.. basically put, 4 to 12 ish
>channels each.
You going to work for a TV station, Aaron?
NeilHey Jamie - I agree completely - Shelly was venting more than reviewing.
Regarding the tricked out Mac pro vs. satellites, yes, it would make sense
to go with a single machine, if the host apps could allocate a full 64-bit
address space to Kontakt, etc, but from what I've read so far on the East
West/Soundsonline forum, they can't (Logic included I think). That's only a
matter of time though - just not sure when or how long it will be.
There may be a few other limitations to running a full blown orchestral lib
a la VSL or EWQL Symphonic Platinum
on a single machine, but we are getting closer no doubt. Such a rig would
need at least 16G - 32 preferrably, so it's not
a cheap move when there are working satellite systems already in place.
On the single quad - didn't even see that. Still a bit pricey compared to a
single-quad, single socket PC (I'm guessing the MacPro motherboard is still
a dual socket with a single quad - those boards are around $400 I think, and
the single Xeon is more than the conroe Quad, which I can get for $300).
For the difference with the Mac Pro, even at $500, I would go dual quad.
It's a difference of allocating a machine for samples, or video playback
(which is hard to justify in the $2k and up range), vs. buying a host
system. For a host though, dual quad would be the way to go, and I probably
will this year. There the Mac prices are certainly competitive.... I just
can't get Sequoia ported to Mac.....and my Adobe CS3 web suite that I need
to manage my site has no platform crossgrade plan (pretty lame imho -
probably the only company I know of that has either/or platform licensing).
The other issue for the time being is that Nuendo is running 10-15% faster
on XP than Leopard. Hopefully that will change though.
I'd love to have a 1:1 choice between them - then it comes down to fun and
convenience. Mac wins there.
Btw - I really do admire Apple's attention to design, form and function and
making products that do in fact set a high standard for
the industry in general. It's really a great product line. Lovin' my iPod
Touch.
Regards,
Dedric
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:47913a5b@linux...
> Dedric Terry wrote:
>> Hey Jamie - I really didn't intend to get this far into this, and don't
>> really have time
>> to continue much more.
>
> I'm with ya, bro.
>
>
>> I was just sharing my opinion on Shelly Palmer's report
>> saying that while I'm sure there was quite a bit of tongue in cheek to
>> his opening comments,
>> he at least was pointing out why people spend more on Macs when they
>> could get the
>> job done for much less - marketing, pure and simple.
>
> OK, but I didn't get that from his piece, my complaint is about his
> illogic and hyperbole, kinda takes away from his credibility.
>
> But anyway we can kick around the relative value another time...from a
> bigger picture perspective that includes initial price, capabilities,
> subjective feel, administration time, longevity and resale.
>
> If it were just simply marketing they wouldn't have me as a customer.
>
>
>> Just to get more to the point of options - show me where I can get a Mac
>> desktop tower with a single quad
>> core cpu system.
>
> Go to the Apple store online. Take the stock duo quad and subtract a quad
> in the configuration options. Drops the price a bit...$500.
>
> But I think the default 2.8GHZ dual quad is the sweet spot this time
> around for value - if you can use the power. The price is significantly
> lower than last month, and it's an improved version (new chipset, faster
> buses, better graphics).
>
>
>> Btw - I was in Best Buy today - there were probably 20 different laptop
>> models, and 30 desktop models there
>> to choose from. 2 iMacs, 1 desktop, and 3 laptops. Regardless of
>> preference, the distinct differences imho,
>> are 1)
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase Scope card clocking issue. David, Aaron or Dimitrios ? [message #93182 is a reply to message #93179] |
Thu, 29 November 2007 15:12  |
Tom Bruhl
Messages: 1368
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
m limitation. Seriously - it's a good deal for that purpose
>> since it isn't overstocked with extras one wouldn't need for
>> such a use, and the form factor would be really nice for stacking away in
>> a computer room.
>
> I'm looking forward to seeing your setup!
>
> I don't know much about the Mac Mini's expansion options. Lessee...looks
> like 2GB is it.
>
> But wouldn't an 8 core box with a ton of RAM (holds up to 32GB now) be
> able to keep up with separate smaller computers, and be a bit more
> convenient at that?
>
> I'd prefer to have it all in one box (like I do now with the dual G5,
> although I'm not using some of the more demanding libraries like you are).
>
> When I get the new laptop I might experiment with Logic's networking
> feature, just to see how well it works to have some instruments and FX
> running on another box. But the dual G5 is holding its own, so far. Might
> be able to hold out for a 16 core box to replace the G5, in another year
> or so... :^)
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>
>> Thanks,
>> Dedric
>>
>>
>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4791204e@linux...
>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>> Now why did you think I was criticizing Apple with hyperbole? Could it
>>>> be
>>>> that Apple skin is just a little thin? And... I don't recall a desktop
>>>> release with more than
>>>> 3 models... so, "every" means "every". That's not called hyperbole,
>>>> it's called history. ;-))
>>>
>>> Maybe I misunderstood you. I saw "hyperbole" in your statement only
>>> because you switched from talking about laptops, to talking about
>>> "desktop models," claimed they were only 2K and up, and said there's no
>>> range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to write
>>> book reports.
>>>
>>> In fact there is a range of suitable Macs below that. In both laptops
>>> and "desktops." Plenty fast for writing reports. Overkill even.
>>>
>>> BTW, both iMacs and Mac Minis are desktop machines.
>>>
>>> Now about that skin thing. I don't know how thick Apple's skin is, but
>>> on a regular apple it's thin enough to eat. Thinner than a Macbook Air.
>>> ;^)
>>>
>>> I personally don't care if you criticize Apple. I love that you buy
>>> non-Mac boxes, somebody has to.
>>>
>>> But if your claims aren't consistent, logical and true then I can't
>>> protect you in the wild world of time wasting computer bashing
>>> conversations. :^)
>>>
>>> There are plenty of criticisms to be made without hype. For example, the
>>> lack of firewire on the Air limits its market. Also, and this is my
>>> biggest criticism right now, WHERE'S MY #(*$&@#$ing UPDATED MACBOOK PRO
>>> WITH THE LED BACKLIT 17" HD SCREEN!!!!!!???? :^)
>>>
>>>
>>>> By "blinding speed" I seriously meant a dual quad in general - any dual
>>>> quad. You are missing
>>>> the whole market of families that on average probably have about $1k to
>>>> spend on a computer to serve
>>>> everyone, and when faced with a full desktop with monitor included, or
>>>> a cube with limited expansion and
>>>> I/O capabilities, and monitor additional, where do you think they will
>>>> go?
>>>
>>> Well lessee, I'm not missing any markets. I don't sell computers.
>>>
>>> If I were that struggling young family I'd buy a Linux box and be done
>>> with it.
>>>
>>> So it sounds like what you would like to see is a Mac under $1000 with
>>> dual quad chips? In time we'll probably see that. But right now, not.
>>> However, the core 2 duos in the low end Macs are no slouches.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Just sayin' that the PC aisle at CompUSA
>>>> and BestBuy are always busier than the Apple sections, and the number
>>>> of PC options dwarfs the Mac shelves
>>>> significantly. This isn't our market, so it's easy to overlook it.
>>>
>>> I haven't overlooked the obvious. I'm not arguing that point. Did you
>>> think I was claiming that Macs outsell all other computers? Not hardly.
>>>
>>> But as long as we're digressing, notice that the aisles at CompUSA are
>>> shrinking fast, while Apple stores are popping up like flies. Apple's
>>> market share is growing, FWIW. It's scary. PEOPLE, STOP BUYING MACS! :^)
>>>
>>>
>>>> Nothing wrong with Macs,
>>>
>>> LOL! OK, that's BS. :^)
>>>
>>> There's plenty wrong with Macs. Just less than some of the other
>>> options, depending on your needs.
>>>
>>>
>>> > but you have to admit that the general culture
>>>> and approach of Apple is "build loyalty by limiting choices
>>>> both on the way in and when it comes time to upgrade".
>>>
>>> Heh. Now I think you're projecting because you choose to use MSWindows,
>>> from a company that has been _convicted_ of limiting choices in the
>>> marketplace.
>>>
>>> How far off topic are we now? This is turning into a boring PC/Mac
>>> bashfest. Woo.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> DT
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:4791026d@linux...
>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>> I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac
>>>>>> release, there are three desktop models,
>>>>>> usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the
>>>>>> starting price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>>>>>> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to
>>>>>> write book reports ;-).
>>>>>
>>>>> Sure, but you don't need a tower to write book reports. A Mac Mini
>>>>> will do fine for under $1k.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's entirely possible to criticize the Mac without hyperbole, ya
>>>>> know. :^)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800 for
>>>>>> one of the six base models. In the PC world
>>>>>> there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100
>>>>>> increment,
>>>>>
>>>>> Right, beca
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase Scope card clocking issue. David, Aaron or Dimitrios ? [message #93184 is a reply to message #93182] |
Thu, 29 November 2007 17:51 |
Dimitrios
Messages: 1056
Registered: August 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
does have a partially aluminum case, and
>>>>>> feels better than the Macbooks I've tried).
>>>>>
>>>>> Sounds like you like your computer. Great!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the
>>>>>> personal computer market... ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> There are many reasons. It would take too long to recount the history
>>>>> here.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other
>>>>>> than the significant investment in software that is costly to replace
>>>>>> or crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based
>>>>>> on the fact that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple,
>>>>>> rather than just getting what he needs, and that without a mystical,
>>>>>> glorious Keynote unveiling of trend setting products, that chique
>>>>>> doesn't last long.
>>>>>
>>>>> Poor guy. But his claims went beyond that. I zinged him for his
>>>>> hyperbole.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Imho, that chique is hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product
>>>>>> prices higher, with less range of price point competition, but for
>>>>>> Apple customers, price doesn't seem to be a concern.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe for some, but not overall. Apple is competing on features and
>>>>> implementation. And even, lately, on price.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants them. Imho,
>>>>>> it should be the other way around, and then we would truly have more
>>>>>> choices.
>>>>>
>>>>> Choice is good. Competition is good.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apple no more has its customers where it wants them than Microsoft has
>>>>> theirs well thumbed over. For example you yourself are trapped in
>>>>> Microsoftland by your committed investments there.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> re: BeOS.... same here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yep. Sigh... Yet another reason to mistrust Apple, to an extent, and
>>>>> Microsoft to a much larger extent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:4790eeca@linux...
>>>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of
>>>>>>>> every PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>>>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
>>>>>>>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>>>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the
>>>>>>>> family photo album.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining
>>>>>>> about _is_ under $2K (configured the way most people who care about
>>>>>>> price would buy it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac
>>>>>>> doesn't mean others will. But if that's your complaint, there are
>>>>>>> Macs for less than $2k.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be
>>>>>>> noted that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and
>>>>>>> the new super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and
>>>>>>> under 2K in the standard configuration).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't
>>>>>>>> really out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in
>>>>>>>> it's sub $2k price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except
>>>>>>> for the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash
>>>>>>> drive. As for "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case.
>>>>>>> But my wife has one (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has
>>>>>>> held up well. It also gets better wireless reception than my
>>>>>>> metal-clad Powerbook.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but
>>>>>>>> with more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not
>>>>>>>> psyched about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job
>>>>>>>> done for a lot less money).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another
>>>>>>> choice is better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a
>>>>>>> Mac, Apple would be insufferable. :^)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
>>>>>>> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes
>>>>>>> would be less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying
>>>>>>> what moves you, be it Apple or someone else.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>>>>>>>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>>>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for
>>>>>>>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>>>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the
>>>>>>>> same amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for
>>>>>>>> the gold instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever
>>>>>>>> marketing - getting you to buy way more than you need or want.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or
>>>>>>> want, and I have a Mac.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job
>>>>>>>> done (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of
>>>>>>>> course), vs. going with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip
>>>>>>>> while having no choice under $2-4k or more, how else do you
>>>>>>>> evaluate the two options?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be
>>>>>>> "brand loyal and hip,&quo
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase Scope card clocking issue. David, Aaron or Dimitrios ? [message #93187 is a reply to message #93184] |
Thu, 29 November 2007 18:45 |
Tom Bruhl
Messages: 1368
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gt;> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "I’m walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could
>>>>>>>>> easily be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the
>>>>>>>>> MacBook Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he
>>>>>>>>> blows his credibility right off the top with that exaggerated
>>>>>>>>> comparison.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody
>>>>>>>>> who needs a computer would have to set it up, it’s a $4,000
>>>>>>>>> 1.6Ghz, 64GB box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or
>>>>>>>>> a smokin’ MacBook Pro."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state
>>>>>>>>> drive. This makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains
>>>>>>>>> about is the price WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually
>>>>>>>>> charges less than street price to add that drive.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state
>>>>>>>>> drive on ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to
>>>>>>>>> the MacBook Air and then compares that configuration to laptops
>>>>>>>>> without an SSD. If that's the comparison, then he should compare
>>>>>>>>> the $1700 non-SSD version of the Air to the other subnotebooks.
>>>>>>>>> And at that point he has little point.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused
>>>>>>>>> about the need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn’t
>>>>>>>>> seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04
>>>>>>>>> the day after Steve’s speech."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares
>>>>>>>>> usually go down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a
>>>>>>>>> hit on Wednesday for issues not directly related to a speech by
>>>>>>>>> Steve Jobs. :^)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from
>>>>>>>>> Apple this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true
>>>>>>>>> sub-notebook. Something I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase
>>>>>>>>> for short hops."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why
>>>>>>>>> the Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to
>>>>>>>>> buy the base version with the hard drive.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most
>>>>>>>>> important announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's
>>>>>>>>> growth. He did like the Time Capsule, which is at least
>>>>>>>>> interesting. He hates the iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to
>>>>>>>>> keep complaining about that until their exclusive relationship
>>>>>>>>> ends.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>"LaMont" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote:
>However, I'd wish most companies would get this 8 thing(faders, mic pres
>so on..and embrace 16..16 faders, pres..so on..
yes, exactly, i've been riffing on that same point for some
time now, especially with rgeard to a/d convertors.
NeilOn 18/1/08 4:43 AM, in article 478f85a8$1@linux, "Neil" <IOUOI@OIU.com>
wrote:
>
> Yeah, Martin, don't leave... just take a break for a week like
> I did... most of the threads are gone or almost gone by that
> time (OK, well, it helped that I was out of town anyway, but it
> was still 'taking a break' from the NG).
>
> Neil
>
>
>
> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>> While it's true that we are free to skip any OT threads, it's also true
> that
>> we agreed some time ago to keep the political debates in the general area.
>
>> I think the truth is that we just like talking to each other and getting
>
>> quick feedback on our opinions, and some of us probably feel that the
>> general area doesn't get read as often.
>>
>> So yay us for liking to talk about stuff with each other, but perhaps we
>
>> should respect the desires of those would like to see this area a bit less
>
>> cluttered with political stuff.
>>
>> Eh?
>>
>> S
>>
>> PS: Don't leave us Martin, we like you. :)
>>
>>
>> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
>> news:478aa9ec$1@linux...
>>> You don't have to read the thread. Just like I don't have to read the
>
>>> Aussie based threads when those come up (though I chose to do so for the
>
>>> most part).You started complaining in the middle of Dedric's accurately
>
>>> labelled OT thread, and have again here when the subject clearly says
> RP.
>>> That's kinda rude man.
>>>
>>> However, I want to learn more about the people around here and maybe
>>> that's our difference in outlook? I think it's an interesting topic,
> even
>>> though I'm not participating.actively with this one. I don't understand
>
>>> your mindset, but if you feel it's necessary to leave then there's
>>> probably nothing more to say dude, and I'll miss your input. Come back
>
>>> when you can.
>>>
>>> AA
>>>
>>> "Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>>> news:C3B0E980.3514%lendan@bigpond.net.au...
>>>> On 14/1/08 5:47 AM, in article 478a4e9f$1@linux, "Deej" <noway@jose.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hay Guys/gals.
>>>> Is this an open free for all discussion group, (if you call US politics
>
>>>> free
>>>> for all,) or a dedicated audio related group?
>>>> If it's the former, I'm outa here.
>>>>
>>>> Martin Harrington
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Still here...
MartinHi James,
No intent to inflame or insult at all - let's try to be a little less
sensitive and not read into
PC users' posts.
See my other post to Jamie - I do think Apple makes a great line of
products.
The conversation really detoured way too much from the
original point, because, of course, you can argue anything, and we all tend
to read
from our own persectives, not always understanding the intent of what we are
replying
to, and too often looking for an angle to refute the other's opinion.
Curiosity question: can you unlock an iPhone within Apple's license? i.e.,
I know it can be done, but
Apple previously issued updates that reportedly wiped out 3rd party apps in
an effort to
plug that hole - have they recanted, or is it still the same as OSX - you
"can" install
it on any hardware, but you can't upgrade it since it violates the EULA. I
might consider one
at some point if it's truly open now.
Btw - I saw a super slim/mini wireless Mac keyboard at Best Buy - not too
bad at $79.
If I had a Mac, that would be a superb space saver esp. for studio use. My
Logitech wireless
is great and a real space saver, but not as small or thin. Really
impressive - coolest mini keyboard with
full sized keys I've seen - aluminum bed too so it seemed really solid, but
with a great feel to the keys.
Thanks,
Dedric
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:47913c4a$1@linux...
>
> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>Hey James,
>>
>>No, it isn't another "one of those" :-)
>>
>>Where are their desktops you quoted? I didn't see them in the Apple store
>
>>under "Mac Pro".
>>I wasn't talking about Mac minis. They are cool, but limited since they
>
>>can't be upgraded with extra ram
>>(or so I've been told), and no PCIe slots. Is that true?
>
> No PCI slots, but you were talking home users, now you are talking pro
> users.
> You can still do some pro work even on a Mac Mini. The Mac Mini can be
> up graded to 2GB of RAM, and you can up grade the processor. The iMac can
> be upgraded to 4GB of RAM, and it comes with a higher quality 20" monitor
> that you will find bundled with the typical PC in the same price range.
> A single Quad core MacPro tower costs $2299.00, and there are discounts
> off
> that price.
>>
>>They seem like a potentially nice solution for a sample library farm
>>machine, but if Ram is limited to 2G, then
>>it wouldn't work for what I need. I know other composers that considered
>
>>the same, but had to pass on them for that
>>reason alone.... again, choice... can't upgrade it to fit what you want.
> I
>>specifically said those weren't what I was comparing.
>>HP and Dell both have minitowers/cubes now, so those would be a more
>>consistent comparison, if we were
>>making that comparison, but we aren't.
>
> You said desk top computers under 2K. Now your talking sample library
> machines,
> for pro users. Show us your idea of a sample library machine for under
> 2K?
> I bet you can't run Mac software on out of the box with out having to hack
> it. You can always argue something.
>
>>
>>I had also heard the MacMinis might not be around much longer - fact or
>
>>rumor?
>
> Rumor are rumors.
>>
>>Btw - my comments were just an observation, not a slam, or hyperbole, or
>>dig - just following up with what Shelly Palmer said, pointing out that
> his
>>comments
>>make sense to those of us who aren't Mac fanatics, even if he was
>>technically generalizing,
>>and he's a self proclaimed Mac fanatic.
>
> Sure seemed like a slam.
>>
>>It is interesting how such an observation brings such strong reactions
>>from
>
>>Mac users. Kind of proves my point on
>>the marketing vs. choice issue: when your customers love you, don't
>>question anything, and will buy anything you sell,
>>you can charge whatever you want and limit the customer's options as well.
>
>>Case in point: Shelly's comment on
>>AT&T and the iPhone - I'm sure their coverage is fine for most people (it
>
>>was for us) - but we're on Verizon with no
>>choice to even use an iPhone, so there's a pretty big missed market for
>
>>Apple - not my problem though, but it is a limited choice situation that
>
>>favors AT&T even if iPhone users don't like AT&T.
>
> It's always an insult to mac users when somebody insinuates that we are
> stupid
> because we gullibly drink the SJ marketing Cool Aid. Apple stuff Rocks,
> however, not all of it appeals to me and some of it is over priced.
>>
>>I thought we all agreed choice was a good thing? Was I wrong in that
>>assumption?
>
> Choice is a good thing. Apple will offer other plans in time. You can
> unlock
> the iPhone and use other carriers now.
>
>>
>>I really never intended this to be a Mac/PC debate. It was just my
>>interpretation of Shelly's comments,
>>nothing more. Let's leave it there please.
>>
>>Regards,
>>Dedric
>>
>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:47910acd$1@linux...
>>>
>>> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac release,
>
>>>>there
>>>
>>>>are three desktop models,
>>>>usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the starting
>>>
>>>>price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>>>>no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to write
>>> book
>>>>reports ;-).
>>>>
>>>>There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800 for
> one
>>> of
>>>>the six base models. In the PC world
>>>>there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100 increment,
>>>
>>>>starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a $300
>>>>desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this on, costing
>>>
>>>>significantly less than the least expensive Macbook (current) and only
> a
>>>
>>>>slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from early last year), for $400
>>> less
>>>>than the comparable Macbook, but otherwise, pretty much identical (it
> does
>>>
>>>>have a partially aluminum case, and feels better than the Macbooks I've
>>>
>>>>tried).
>>>>
>>>>There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the personal
>>>
>>>>computer market... ;-)
>>>>
>>>>I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other
> than
>>>
>>>>the significant investment in software that is costly to replace or
>>>>crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based on the
>>> fact
>>>>that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple, rather than just
>>>>getting
>>>
>>>>what he needs, and that without a mystical, glorious Keynote unveiling
> of
>>>
>>>>trend setting products, that chique doesn't last long. Imho, that
>>>>chique
>>> is
>>>>hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product prices higher, with less
>
>>>>range
>>>
>>>>of price point competition, but for Apple customers, price doesn't seem
>>> to
>>>>be a concern. Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants
>
>>>>them.
>>>
>>>>Imho, it should be the other way around, and then we would truly have
> more
>>>
>>>>choices.
>>>>
>>>>re: BeOS.... same here.
>>>>
>>>>Dedric
>>>
>>>
>>> Here we go again! Apple has desk top models under 2K. Apple's market
>
>>> share
>>> probably has more to do with ignorant people spewing ignorant things
>>> about
>>> Apple.
>>>
>>> Apple desk top models that start under 2K:
>>>
>>>
>>> . 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>> . 1GB memory
>>> . 80GB hard drive1
>>>
>>>
>>> $599.00
>>> or as low as $15 a month
>>>
>>> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>> . 1GB memory
>>> . 120GB hard drive1
>>>
>>>
>>> $799.00
>>> or as low as $19 a month
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>> . 1GB memory
>>> . 250GB hard drive1
>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory
>>>
>>>
>>> $1,199.00
>>> or as low as $29 a month
>>>
>>> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>> . 1GB memory
>>> . 320GB hard drive1
>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>>>
>>> $1,499.00
>>> or as low as $36 a month
>>>
>>> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>> . 1GB memory
>>> . 320GB hard drive1
>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>>>
>>> $1,799.00
>>> or as low as $43 a month
>>>
>>>
>>> Or are we going to argue form factor?
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4790eeca@linux...
>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of
>
>>>>>> every
>>>
>>>>>> PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
>>>>>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the family
>>>
>>>>>> photo album.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining about
>>> _is_
>>>>> under $2K (configured the way most people who care about price would
> buy
>>>
>>>>> it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac doesn't mean others
>>>
>>>>> will. But if that's your complaint, there are Macs for less than $2k.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be noted
>>>
>>>>> that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and the new
>>>
>>>>> super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and under 2K in
> the
>>>
>>>>> standard configuration).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't
>>>>>> really
>>>
>>>>>> out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in it's sub
> $2k
>>>
>>>>>> price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>>>
>>>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except
> for
>>>
>>>>> the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash drive. As
>>> for
>>>>> "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case. But my wife has
>>> one
>>>>> (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has held up well. It also
>>>
>>>>> gets better wireless reception than my metal-clad Powerbook.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but with
>>>
>>>>>> more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not psyched
>>>
>>>>>> about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job done for a
> lot
>>>
>>>>>> less money).
>>>>>
>>>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another choice
>>> is
>>>>> better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a Mac, Apple
>
>>>>> would
>>>
>>>>> be insufferable. :^)
>>>>>
>>>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
>>>>> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes would
>>> be
>>>>> less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying what moves
>
>>>>> you,
>>>
>>>>> be it Apple or someone else.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>>>>>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for
>>>>>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the same
>>>
>>>>>> amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for the gold
>>>
>>>>>> instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever marketing - getting
>>> you
>>>>>> to buy way more than you need or want.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or want,
>>> and
>>>>> I have a Mac.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job
> done
>>>
>>>>>> (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of course), vs.
>
>>>>>> going
>>>
>>>>>> with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip while having no choice
>>>
>>>>>> under $2-4k or more, how else do you evaluate the two options?
>>>>>
>>>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be
>>>>> "brand
>>>
>>>>> loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of the Mac
>
>>>>> users
>>>
>>>>> I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them as the preferred
>>> tool
>>>>> given the options. Frankly, I would rather be using BeOS but that
>>>>> choice
>>>
>>>>> was torpedoed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is
>>>>>> right
>>> -
>>>>>> when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage to Air vs
> a
>>>
>>>>>> regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are left with a much
>>>
>>>>>> smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>>>>
>>>>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light. This
>>>
>>>>> will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a
>>>>> compelling
>>>
>>>>> enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side. :^)
>>>>>
>>>>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people
>>>>> outside
>>>
>>>>> of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in because
> he
>>>
>>>>> complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly exaggerating to
> do
>>> so,
>>>>> while missing real issues with the Air.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>&
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Jul 16 20:22:34 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00531 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
