matters's Profile

  • Jun 12, 2008
  • 21
  • 0

Latest comments made by: matters

  • Damn!! And here I thought someone plucked my forward-thinking comment out of the past, but it was just 2 spam entries. :-( Although I had the size totally wrong, my comment on page 1 did sound an awful lot like what became the iPhone. And Apple may yet make something between an iPhone and a MacBook Air that's closer to what I projected in 2005. I'm so brilliant. Thank you. Thank you. LOL.
    matters had this to say on Jun 12, 2008 Posts: 21
    The Intel iMacs Won't Have A Disk Drive
  • Wow, this is the first time I've ever agreed with something on this site. I think you're absolutely right about a CS3-type suite from Apple. And, iWeb Pro, or whatever, will certainly be a competitor to DreamWeaver, too. But, they have to have a twist. What will it be? It will have a touch interface, so that when the rumored new touch displays come out (and eventually MacBooks & MacBookPro touch screens come out), you'll be able to do editing and drawing with your fingers--and a mouse, of course. The mouse won't go away for detail work. It's not as silly as it sounds.
    matters had this to say on Aug 02, 2007 Posts: 21
    Is Apple Building A Photoshop Replacement?
  • OK, now Q is sucking up 100% of the CPU cycles of one of my two processors, even while it's idle (I set it to pause while in the background). The G5's fans are blowing wildly. Unless I'm doing something wrong, this application is 100% crap. Maybe it's better on Intel.
    matters had this to say on Sep 28, 2006 Posts: 21
    Q Gives You Mac Virtualization for Free - And It Works
  • OMG, it's literally taking *hours* to install Win2k on Q. And my Power Mac G5 dual 2 GHz fans have been blowing like crazy the whole time. This is not a useful tool for PowerPC-based products.
    matters had this to say on Sep 28, 2006 Posts: 21
    Q Gives You Mac Virtualization for Free - And It Works
  • So Q runs on both Power PC and Intel Macs? I never upgraded Virtual PC when I went from my G4 to my G5 Power Mac. So Q will let me run Win2k on my G5 Power Mac for free?!! That's pretty cool. On an Intel Mac, I'd probably use Parallels, but for just running QuickBooks 2006 on my Power Mac G5, Q may be just what the doctor ordered. Thanks, Chris, for the heads-up!
    matters had this to say on Sep 27, 2006 Posts: 21
    Q Gives You Mac Virtualization for Free - And It Works
  • > Take a look at the price of OSX, and take a look at the price of the least expensive iBook. The margins that one can take out of the price of OSX are a lot smaller than those that one can take out of an inexpensive iBook. rogueprof, that's completely backwards. Profits on software are *far higher* than profits on hardware.
    matters had this to say on Jan 04, 2006 Posts: 21
    Dell Macs
  • Interesting article, but I don't think Apple will remove FireWire from iBooks. Not because people love it or because it's Apple technology or anything like that. Simply because in order to use iMovie, you need Firewire. It's that simple. (Either that, or Apple will have some Firewire-to-USB converter thingy, if that's even possible.) Now, Apple might come out with my highly desired (but so far mythological) nanoBook/PowerPod widescreen device with pen input. That thing would be very thin and light and fairly lightly powered, so *it* certainly wouldn't need FireWire. But I doubt it would be called an iBook. One thing you have to remember about Apple rumors and patents: they often cloak a new technology in an old technology so you don't really know what's being described. As just one example, Aperture's "stacks" technology was described in a patent a few years ago that described operating system files being stacked in piles. Everyone thought that would be a OS X technology, but it came out in Aperture instead. I think this FireWire-less iBook rumor is half true: *something* will come out without FireWire, but it won't be an iBook as we know them today. Just a gut feeling.
    matters had this to say on Dec 29, 2005 Posts: 21
    What's Coming in 2006
  • Great title. And this is the best article I've seen posted on AppleMatters.
    matters had this to say on Nov 30, 2005 Posts: 21
    FUD For Thought
  • Why does software go on sale? a) When a product is near an upgrade cycle b) Competition In this case, I think it's 'b': Microsoft is scared of iWorks 2006. The more people that buy Office now, the fewer that will buy iWorks in January. Soak up all the potential iWorks buyers now.
    matters had this to say on Nov 30, 2005 Posts: 21
    Intel Macs in February? And no iWork updates yet?
  • Bad Beaver, > We will just have a new smart folder “sync these files to iTablet” and that’s it. Oh, I like that a lot. Great idea. > *cough* FireWire *cough* Well, they just took Firewire out of the iPod, so I'm thinking Apple's moving away from it. That's too bad, since it feels so much faster than USB. But cheap is cheap, and Apple is competing more on price now.
    matters had this to say on Nov 21, 2005 Posts: 21
    The Intel iMacs Won't Have A Disk Drive
  • As I have argued in earlier postings, this disc-less Apple product will come--but it won't be an iMac (or at least not anytime soon). Apple should come out with an iPod video/PDA hybrid device--an iTablet for lack of a better term. It would have all the benefits of an iPod (plays music & videos--DRM controlled--from an internal hard drive and/or flash memory) with all the benefits of a PDA (handwriting recognition input, larger screen, mail/web browsing/calendaring/address book/memopad apps), but in a somewhat larger form factor (5" x 8"? 6" x 10"?) with a widescreen display. It will have to be very, very thin. This will make it very portable even though its width and height will be much larger than an iPod or PDA. It will be smaller than an iBook. It won't need an optical (CD/DVD) drive. This is the mostly-consuming-with-occasional-creation product that I've been arguing for. People spend most of their time listening (to music), watching (video), browsing (the web), reading (e-mail, Word docs, PDFs). People spend significantly less time creating (iMovie, iDVD, Garage Band, composing long documents). Your iMac or iBook is used for creating/composing; your iTablet would be used mostly for consuming content. One doesn't replace the other (just as your iPod doesn't replace iTunes on your Mac); your iTablet complements your Mac. Since you'll mostly be consuming content--rather than creating it--and because Apple wants you to buy your music from the iTunes Music Store, your iTablet doesn't need a CD/DVD drive. It'll use WiFi to connect to your Mac or home or Starbucks network to buy and download content. (It'll have USB ports so you can get MP3s from an external hard drive or CD.) So, while James is right that *a* new Apple product won't have an optical disc drive, I think he's incorrect in that it'll be an iMac or iBook. It'll be a new iTablet-type device.
    matters had this to say on Nov 21, 2005 Posts: 21
    The Intel iMacs Won't Have A Disk Drive
  • As Hywel said, "it depends". As Waa said, "Doesn't every new Mac come with the current version of iLife?" And AppleWorks; and if Apple gets around to getting a spreadsheet and "FileMaker Lite" into iWorks, that'll probably come with new Intel Macs instead of AppleWorks. (So *that's* why they wrote AppleWorks from the ground up--it would never run on Intel.) So if your new consumer Mac comes with Safari, Mail, Address Book, iCal, iChat, iLife, iWork . . . what else *do* you need? For the average consumer: not much. And if iPhoto 2006 has even 10% of the features of Aperture, you probably won't need Photoshop Elements unless you're doing retouching. Apple provides a complete hardware/software solution. Compare that to Windows boxes with crippled demoware. Big difference. All Apple needs now is for iWork to include iMoney and you'd be all set.
    matters had this to say on Nov 18, 2005 Posts: 21
    The Applications You Really Need
  • Vets, You're talking about a PowerBook with a touchscreen built in. That's basically what Windows tablets are (a powerful laptop with a touchscreen), and that's why they failed--teensy eensy market for something like that. In your case, you're talking about Photoshop users who need to make last minute changes on the way in to work. There's no way Apple's gonna make a machine just for them. Not enough of 'em. Apple is turning into a service provider, a software company, and a consumer electronics company. Think iTunes & .Mac; FCP, DVDSP, iLife, iWork; and iPod. A tablet that's more about CONSUMING standard content (web, email, movies, music) is something Apple will be able to sell to everyone--whether they own a Mac or Windows. It's a much larger market than selling a souped-up-PowerBook-with-a-touchscreen to existing Mac users. A tablet is everything you need in a single box--hardware, software, everything. They'll just try to sell you some Movies, iTunes, and .Mac subscriptions to get you to keep paying every month. It's the subscription model, like cell phones or NetFlix. It's the wave of the future, and it's definitely the direction Apple is moving in. And I suppose that's all I have to say on the subject.
    matters had this to say on Sep 13, 2005 Posts: 21
    Can Apple save the Tablet?
  • Hi, Vets. Welcome to the thread. My apologies for the all-caps. What can I say--it was a weak moment. :-) Vets said, " ...and by the way I hope you have fun watching videos on your $3000 tiny assed screen!" Ah, but that's my point--it won't be $3000 because that's one of the primary problems with Windows tablets: they're too expensive. Normal people just don't buy $3000 computers anymore. That's so 1980s. ;-) Vets said, "Just because you are a brainless zombie that does nothing but absorb the world around you, doesn’t mean others are too! (how do you think you’re able to consume all this stuff if no one is CREATING?!" Ah, but I do create--quite a bit, actually. My main computer is a dual 2.0 GHz G5 with a 24-inch screen. Now that's a photo-editing station. A tablet is not a heavy-duty photo editing station or a video editing station. The screen is way too small. Apple promoted large, widescreen monitors so you can fit all your palettes on the screen while editing your image. You can't do that on a 8-inch, 10-inch, or even a 12-inch monitor. Oh, sure, maybe some basic iPhoto retouching (red eye removal, autofix, basic cropping) but that's about it. Vets, you're making the same mistake that Chris is making. You're thinking of a tablet as a desktop replacement. But it won't be. Repeat after me: A tablet is not a desktop replacement. A tablet is not a desktop replacement..... A tablet is an accessory, just like an iPod. Do you do any creating on an iPod? Well, sure, you can rate songs and create on-the-go playlists, but that's about it. An Apple tablet would be an iPod/VideoPod/PDA supercombo device. You'll be able to do some creating (iPhoto, iCal, Address Book, e-mail, Pages, etc.) but it won't be your primary input device. Your primary input device will still be your desktop or laptop. Anyone who thinks a tablet is going to be a Photoshop or Final Cut Pro or DVD Studio Pro workstation is on drugs. An Apple tablet will be a consumer device, like an iPod. People won't think of it as a "computer". It probably won't be called a "Mac".
    matters had this to say on Sep 13, 2005 Posts: 21
    Can Apple save the Tablet?
  • Ten years ago, you needed a top of the line computer to get any kind of decent performance out of Windows or Mac OS. So whether you were doing intense database/spreadsheet stuff or just a word processor document, you needed an expandable tower/box. Nowadays, though, a lot of home and small business users do mostly word processing, e-mail, and web surfing. Maybe a spreadsheet or two here and there. For that kind of use, a G5 iMac is plenty of horsepower. For what home office & small business people do nowadays, you don't need a tower. And so you make a very good point when you address these users, Chris. However, you don't address the Pro market at all, as some others here have alluded. If you're running DVD Studio Pro or Final Cut Pro, a G5 iMac isn't gonna cut it. So, while the tower market is significantly smaller than it ever was, it still must be very profitable--but even higher profits on a very small market won't encourage a lot of investment on Apple's part. So Apple might spend less time & effort designing the ultimate tower and have something more generic looking. Either that, or Apple will migrate power users to dual-cpu XServes or something. But there's definitely a section of Apple users that need RAID and expandability beyond a Firewire 400 drive or two that you get with iMacs or Mac minis.
    matters had this to say on Aug 30, 2005 Posts: 21
    Apple Towers: Heading for the Long Goodbye