I've been watching these for many, many years, and seriously, I can't remember one that was as bad as this since the "flower-colored" iMacs came out. I can understand why Apple would not want to be a participant anymore. Expectations were set unreasonably high, but am I missing something? Did Phil not say initially that he will talk about "Macs"? There were no mentions of "Macs"? Only the stats about last year... everything else was 1) mediocre software, 2) iTunes (blah), and 3) awesome notebook that is, again, severely over-priced. Where the heck were the Macs? And is an update to a 20+ month computer a high expectation? Worst ever Macworld...
I think this is the anothe reason steve chose not to be here. He didnt want to face another angry crowd. Anyone remember how macworld 97 turned out, when he returned to apple?
Does anyone see how it is ridiculous that the money you could spend to get this computer could equal the money you could spend to get a used car?
.
I vote for the car
Actually, removing the battery from a notebook while AC is plugged in is a stupid thing to do.
First of all, it makes no difference, your notebook battery will not be damaged even if you keep it a entire month plugged in. You know, the system is intelligent enough at the point that it just knows when is time to cut of the charging process. It does not keep sending energy to the cell when not needed. What keeps the health of a battery is the constant charge and discharge cycles, so, being on the notebook or not will make no difference if it is not being used.
Second, the processor clock of the machine is reduced when you remove the battery. The notebook really needs the battery even when plugged, because the AC does not supply enough power in some situations (thats why the processor clock is reduced when the battery is removed). So you will end up with a very slow machine.
Third, Thats a Magsafe plug, remember? how about you accidentally taking off the plug (thats happen to me eventually) of your so loved Macbook without the battery, an realizing the machine was damaged because it was suddenly powered off?
Not unless you sit at a desk with the power cord out of the way..
So your saying to give us a matte screen all apple is doing is removing the glass? Sounds like it should be $50 cheaper then.
a screen is a screen.
Apple (seemingly alone) seems to understand that for the general market, watching Blu-Ray on your laptop is a stupid idea.
1080p is simply indistinguishable from lower res (some would say as low as 480p) on a screen as small as even 17". Its pretty much useless on any monitor under 40" frankly.
Blu-Ray on a laptop is just ego stroking. Its also antithetical to the direction Apple is moving, which is streaming or downloaded media. Why in the world would they support what they consider to be the competition?
Finally, Blu-Ray belongs (if anywhere) in the living room as part of a home entertainment system, on a large screen.
Apple (really really try to get this) isn't shooting to satisfy the fringes... the 1 or 2 percent who are going to rent HD discs to watch on a lousy laptop.
As an AAPL long-holder, I thank god Apple is ignoring the uber-geek fringes.
Blu-ray belongs anywhere where the cousmer wants it. If someone wants to watch a HD movie while they are 10000 miles away from home, let them. Apple TV isnt much help, and that doesnt deserve to be in any living room, as it doesnt support true 1080p, nor does it have any DVR features.
if priced that low, they would make the people who bought the top model 15" for 2500 a few months ago very angry. getting a bigger screen, better battery and better processor for $300 less after a few months, would really piss people off.
Arnt they "pissed" off now. Seems many get pissed off at the end of every apple event because their "dream" device, many are stupid and impossable didnt show up..
Apple doesn't organize the event, although they have been the star purveyor since it's inception. Now they are leaving because they agree with you... it's not worth it. They could have easily announced the 17" on the website or had a simple media event on their campus.
In that small room where they introduced the first ipod back in 2001.
If I own a movie on Blu-ray, and I want to go away for a weekend or whatnot, say to my parent's house where there is nothing to do in the middle of nowhere, I'd like to have a notebook capable of playing said movie.
Yep. I agree.
There are some people who leave their homes and have lives....
As for backups, Time Machine is great, but if your house burns down and your notebook and Time Machine drive are both there.... I currently cycle out portable hard drives stored at my office for offsite backup of critical data, but being able to burn archival Blu-ray media would be a better option -- no need to spin up the drives every few months, no worries about my backup drive crashing.
I have 4 sony USB flash drives Ranging from 1GB, 2GB, 4GB and 8GB. Keep in mind, just because you own a mac, doesnt mean you have to use every stinking feature.
Looks far nicer too, don't care for the black bezels at all.
The black bezzel is part of the glass thats on the screen. Underneath that is the same sliver.
That's because on anything less than a 50" screen there is no difference.
I can tell. Just watching some TV shows on my 13" macbook. I can tell the difference from fringe (which I bought in SD) and the sneek peak of LOST whits I got for free in both HD and SD.
HD is HD, and you can clearly see the diference. Doesnt matter what size screen you have.
And yet you can get netbooks with Blu-ray.
If apple ever went in to the netbook world, expect them to charge close to $1000 for one.
