Does anyone know what the delay is with the delivery of Quad Core iMacs. All Apple could tell me was "sometime in November". Very frustrating .... I was really looking forward to getting my new machine.
It's an old saying by coders. Some here will understand. Some won't.
Garbage In , Garbage Out. Protoplasm.
Oh and its nice to see that your marketshare value has changed again.
AirPort is the issue.
The temporary fix is just to restart Airport.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flT7U_kGpaM
farewell
can i ask, how hard are you on your hardware? dad has a 5/6year old iBook thats running fine. my 3+ year old MBP is fine aesthetically, hell even our 10+ year old original iMac is still going perfectly.
the iphone is pretty boring and just a toy - thus why i use a nokia business phone
anyway, goodluck with it.
So judging by the posts of 3 or 4 people here who seem to represent the "recent switcher" group we can expect Apple Mac sales to plummet next time Apple releases numbers for a quarter ?
Or do these people not actually represent the "massive" amount of dissatisfied customers ?
You wanna know what it actually is? This phenomenon of massive problems cropping up everywhere ?
It's an old saying by coders. Some here will understand. Some won't.
Garbage In , Garbage Out. Protoplasm.
Did ya miss this part Aiden ?
"Blame Apple: If Apple had not discontinued the 64-bit port of Carbon, Adobe could have shipped Photoshop CS4 as a 64-bit Mac OS X application as planned. At WWDC 2006, there were many sessions about developing 64-bit Carbon applications. At WWDC 2007, 64-bit Carbon was canceled. Adobe found this out the same time everyone else did, at WWDC. By canceling 64-bit Carbon so suddenly, Apple screwed Adobe.
Blame Adobe: The death of Carbon was inevitable. Adobe should have seen it coming and planned accordingly. It's been clear for years that Cocoa offers many advantages to Mac application developers. Adobe should have started its Cocoa port of Photoshop years ago. By willfully ignoring Cocoa for so long, Adobe screwed Apple."
With the transition to Intel everybody should have seen this coming.
Not just Apple.
Yes, the "$339 MSI *might* be ok" but the $2199 "i7 iMac is a pretty good deal".
If you need a quad core i7 and also need a big screen LCD, the i7 Imac isn't that bad.
Otherwise, it kind of sucks compared to $799 i7 minitowers that are easy to find.
The quality is the same everywhere. They are all made in the same factory in China.
This has typically been the case for Apple's first generation of their newly updated hardware. I bought the aluminum iMac the first week they were released and then Apple issued a firmware update for the graphics card, which rendered it useless. It would freeze 2 minutes after startup. Does anyone remember that.
This is unfortunate for people that made the switch by purchasing these new machines. Hang in there guys.![]()
I'm curious to see if this user answers your questions. I doubt it. Silly, isn't it? I've been on Macrumors for years and it's only been in the last couple that I've noticed the incessant stream of so-called Mac users bailing out on the entire company because they've become evil and their products have declined in quality and blah blah blah. And they always have these unlikely sounding horror stories of how every Apple product they bought died and Apple was soooo mean and nasty to them about it.
Funny thing is that Apple's products and service have never been better. I've been using Macs since the early 90s and I've seen it for myself. Apple's at the top of their game right now. I've never seen so much interest in Macs amongst my Windows-using friends as I see right now.
I don't find it even remotely difficult to believe that there's an astroturfing effort happening on Mac sites. It's hard to think otherwise. These posts are always so fakey sounding and it's always these people who have joined Macrumors in the last year who are throwing these hissy fits and jumping ship.
Garsh... it's so believable.![]()
I'm still looking for some advice on this (reposted) because I was about to order a new 21" iMac:
----
1.) Is it a driver issue where a simple update can fix the problem?
2.) Is the problem on iMacs with ATi or Nvidia cards, regardless of size (21 or 27")?
3.) Should I hold off on purchasing a new 21" iMac (I was going to get the ATI model)?
thanks
Flash was, is, and always will be sh*t technology. How it managed to garner such wide acceptance is beyond me.
I'm still looking for some advice on this (reposted) because I was about to order a new 21" iMac:
----
1.) Is it a driver issue where a simple update can fix the problem?
2.) Is the problem on iMacs with ATi or Nvidia cards, regardless of size (21 or 27")?
3.) Should I hold off on purchasing a new 21" iMac (I was going to get the ATI model)?
I don't find it even remotely difficult to believe that there's an astroturfing effort happening on Mac sites. It's hard to think otherwise.
Flash was, is, and always will be sh*t technology. How it managed to garner such wide acceptance is beyond me.
Does anyone know what the delay is with the delivery of Quad Core iMacs. All Apple could tell me was "sometime in November". Very frustrating .... I was really looking forward to getting my new machine.
+++there's absolutely no reason why it shouldn't run well on a 27" iMac.
Part of me wonders just how much hostility exists between Adobe and Apple.
The common belief as to why the Quad-Cores did not ship immediately is because Apple is waiting on getting the ATI Radeon HD 4850.
Flash was, is, and always will be sh*t technology. How it managed to garner such wide acceptance is beyond me.
SL can't run on a 2005 iMac.
All 2005 iMacs were PPC machines.
SL doesn't run on any PPC machine.