Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

More Apple Notebook Details: Clickable Glass Trackpad, GPUs, Pricing

Small & Affordable Mac Netbook

How many people would want a nice, small & affordable mac netbook?

I think they'd sell a gazzillion of them. In this economy, it would be stupid for them not to release one.

I have a 20" imac and don't necessarily NEED a portable. But if they released something more affordable, I'd find a way to get one. I'm sure many others would as well. $899 sounds ok, but I'd like to see something lower. $699 would be phenomenal.
 
title_backsoon1.gif

this is it, boys and girls!!!
 
Is it me or does that MBP look like its the size of a current Macbook? I hope they plan on releasing one that size, that would be great. As long as it boasts that Pro power and they throw in the option to have a matte screen. I really hope a nice tablet is released too. :D
 
rtdunham said:
"Don't underrate the brick as wireless power. Almost everyone I know with a mac laptop calls the power adapter the power brick. I'd be shocked if that vernacular hadn't travelled to Cupertino."
Click to expand...

Bricks are sometimes used as examples when trying to explain to laymen how wireless electricity works... here's a random snippet from the web:

The concept relates to something discovered a long time ago called magnetic viscosity. If you lift a brick really quickly or if you lift it really slowly, it still has the same potential energy. Not so with magnets. If you push two magnets together quickly there seems to be a "lag" where the magnetic property hasn't caught up yet to the movement and it is actually easier to move it than if you had done it slowly. Now, if the brick in the example above followed the same laws, you can imagine a way that you could exploit the difference in energy so that you spent less to gain more; then put that extra energy back into the system again. That's what they claim to have done
Click to expand...
 
Wait a minute... 1299$ for a 2.0 GHz?!

Can't I get a 2.1 GHz now for like 1099$?! :(

I really hope these pricings are false...
 
hello-im-mac said:
Glossy screens are NOT suitable for pro users. Apple should know this.
Click to expand...

In Germany, workplace regulations even require non-reflective displays for ergonomic reasons. (They also require desktops or external screens, so a glossy MBP wouldn't have any influence on business sales. But the iMac is certainly limited in sales by this.)
 
lftrghtparadigm said:
As much as there is to gripe about this morning, I don't see an issue with Glossy display only. IMO, its about time. I bought a MBP without the glossy screen and it was the stupidest choice I've ever made. The flat display is terrible compared to the Glossy.

Since then, I've purchased a glossy iMac and glossy Macbook. Glossy all the way. Flat is dead.
Click to expand...

glossy is flat...

unless you bought a glossy monitor from 1983

is the world round?
 
ACubed said:
DAMN YOU APPLE! I hope these price points aren't true...1299 for a 2.0 ghz? You kidding me? Anyone wanna sell their 2.4 blackbook to me? hahha
Click to expand...

And everyone wonders why competing configuration from other vendors is 500 to 800 dollars cheaper.
 
Fredd-E said:
I'd really love to know why all of you people hate glossy so much? What's the big deal?

My girlfriend is in her third year studies of graphic design and she's using an iMac 24" at home for all her work. It's glossy and she doesn't seem to suffer from it being glossy? What in fact is there to hate about a glossy screen? I just don't seem to get it all.
Click to expand...

As a bunch of people have already mentioned - it's about realism and accuracy. Similar to why you'll never see Bose speakers in a recording studio. They don't present an accurate picture of the mix.

Try DJ'ing while monitoring through a home theatre receiver with some "superbass" or "3D sound" turned on (or whatever). You get the idea.
 
amusiccale said:
I would imagine this would not be the case--the (9300m) low end range of a newer generation will likely remain behind the 8600m. Does Tom's Hardware (I don't even know if they still do that) or anything have benchmarks on this sort of thing yet?
Click to expand...

Yes he does. They suck. Which should make the cultists happy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back