mrmicp
Apr 3, 04:48 AM
The advert speaks volumes to me, I love it..... a select few won't, but it's just not possible to please 100% of the people 100% of the time.
CXsjr
Feb 8, 09:56 AM
Oh dear chaps, mine looks almost feeble compared to your big American monster cars!
generik
Oct 14, 07:03 PM
Since I'm home for the evening and didn't see your post until now, I can't give you any specific side-by-side tests, but I can give you a rough estimate of the speeds.
Overall, the Dual G5 is faster, not by a landslide by any means, but it is faster. Of course the G5 has 1.5 gigs of RAM vs. the mini's 512K, and the G5 has a 1Ghz BUS speed vs. the 667Mhz of the mini. If I were to slap in 2 gigs of RAM in to the mini then I'm sure I would see a little more performance, but I think the G5 would still be faster.
But the mini is still very zippy, no beachballs or waiting on Apps, very fast and clean for average use. Now if I were to do some Photoshop or, say, FCP comparisons, I'm sure the G5 would clean up in those areas.
I'm really happy with the purchase though, it's perfect for what I need it to do.
Oh, I installed Windows XP via BootCamp and after having to burn an illegal copy of my legal disc (the retail disc was bad) I got it running with no problems. I must say, this mini is the fastest Windows machine I've ever had.
Ok, that is not being very fair to the mini... at all.
I have a Mini and did my own ram upgrades on it, the before and after results are very significantly different. The Mini is horrible at 512, and at 1GB it starts picking up, at 2GB it is actually pretty damned good.
Perhaps you should strip 1GB of ram off the PM and redo the comparison, also bus speeds can't be quantified the way you did... the PPC actually needs more bandwidth due to the risc architecture.
You talk about the price but I look at it this way. shore it might not be that great for the price and the difference between the hign end mini and the low end imac is not worth the hign end mini price but the point of the mini is to get people off the windows crap.I was going to switch back when the first intel mini came out but wanted something bettter for the price I ended up getting another windows one but now that the low end mini has due core and more ram I'm looking at selling my pc and getting a mac.I have been a fan of apple and the mac for many years and can see that it is not there hardware that sells the systems but there OS. I feel vista is doomed to fail and apple will be there to pick up the pieces when leopard comes out. I think Macworld 07 will be the best yet and will put windows and the pc on the down fall for good.Apple will be king in 2007 and we need to stop complaining and know apple will keep on putting the goods out.
Not really, the cheapest iMac is $999 which is $200 more than the top end Mini, and even at that price the Mini wins out with a DVD-writer and the remote. At the expense of those you get a faster processor (probably not huge improvement) and a 17" screen. Displays are pretty cheap nowadays so if you need a DVD writer you have to shell out extra to get the next higher up iMac model.
Overall, the Dual G5 is faster, not by a landslide by any means, but it is faster. Of course the G5 has 1.5 gigs of RAM vs. the mini's 512K, and the G5 has a 1Ghz BUS speed vs. the 667Mhz of the mini. If I were to slap in 2 gigs of RAM in to the mini then I'm sure I would see a little more performance, but I think the G5 would still be faster.
But the mini is still very zippy, no beachballs or waiting on Apps, very fast and clean for average use. Now if I were to do some Photoshop or, say, FCP comparisons, I'm sure the G5 would clean up in those areas.
I'm really happy with the purchase though, it's perfect for what I need it to do.
Oh, I installed Windows XP via BootCamp and after having to burn an illegal copy of my legal disc (the retail disc was bad) I got it running with no problems. I must say, this mini is the fastest Windows machine I've ever had.
Ok, that is not being very fair to the mini... at all.
I have a Mini and did my own ram upgrades on it, the before and after results are very significantly different. The Mini is horrible at 512, and at 1GB it starts picking up, at 2GB it is actually pretty damned good.
Perhaps you should strip 1GB of ram off the PM and redo the comparison, also bus speeds can't be quantified the way you did... the PPC actually needs more bandwidth due to the risc architecture.
You talk about the price but I look at it this way. shore it might not be that great for the price and the difference between the hign end mini and the low end imac is not worth the hign end mini price but the point of the mini is to get people off the windows crap.I was going to switch back when the first intel mini came out but wanted something bettter for the price I ended up getting another windows one but now that the low end mini has due core and more ram I'm looking at selling my pc and getting a mac.I have been a fan of apple and the mac for many years and can see that it is not there hardware that sells the systems but there OS. I feel vista is doomed to fail and apple will be there to pick up the pieces when leopard comes out. I think Macworld 07 will be the best yet and will put windows and the pc on the down fall for good.Apple will be king in 2007 and we need to stop complaining and know apple will keep on putting the goods out.
Not really, the cheapest iMac is $999 which is $200 more than the top end Mini, and even at that price the Mini wins out with a DVD-writer and the remote. At the expense of those you get a faster processor (probably not huge improvement) and a 17" screen. Displays are pretty cheap nowadays so if you need a DVD writer you have to shell out extra to get the next higher up iMac model.
dXTC
Mar 23, 08:09 AM
As I think I've mentioned before at some point, my next iPod purchase will most likely be the classic. My wife has a touch; while I find it somewhat nifty, I'm not a fan of the iPod app.
My wishes for the 10th Anniversary classic:
Selena Gomez And Demi Lovato
Demi Lovato. # Selena Gomez
Selena Gomez and Demi Lovato
A few nice Selena Gomez images
Selena Gomez. # Demi Lovato
selena-gomez-demi-lovato
real-life BFF Demi Lovato,
demi lovato. # selena gomez
selena gomez demi lovato.
Demi Lovato, Selena Gomez
My wishes for the 10th Anniversary classic:
OdduWon
Jan 1, 09:33 PM
i hope this year apple takes a wider stance on how they support the artists used in there iTMS collection. More web links and a way of getting straight to their upcoming show list would be a nice start, as some were lost when iT 7 came out.
With iTv you could have a "front row" seat for live streamed concerts and events. This would be like pay-per view but with a apple tie in.
And if you had a camera setup YOU could be the event. A sort of iCast ;)
With iTv you could have a "front row" seat for live streamed concerts and events. This would be like pay-per view but with a apple tie in.
And if you had a camera setup YOU could be the event. A sort of iCast ;)
thisisahughes
Apr 3, 06:19 AM
I like the black theme A LOT more than the all white themes. I hope to see more like this in the future.
KindredMAC
Nov 27, 02:51 PM
I like the idea of a 17" widescreen Apple LCD..... however ONLY if it is priced at $199. Like everyone keeps saying, you can pick up a mighty nice 19" Widescreen LCD at Best Buy or Walmart for between $179-$249. I should know, I have 3 ProViews hooked up to my PowerMac G5 at home and have loved life for the last 9 months!
But in reality, I don't think a 17" is Apple's answer. Lowering the prices of the current model lineup is indeed the way to go. I've been one of the biggest bitchers about Apple's price point on LCD's for years now. That 20" LCD should not be anymore than $299. Plain and simple...simple and plain!
The 23" model should be in the ball park of $499 and the 30" should pop in at $999. Then to really goose people, Apple should bring a 36" model in at $1499.
Apple LCDs are not worth the extra price tag as long as you do your home work before purchasing an LCD monitor from a different company.
But in reality, I don't think a 17" is Apple's answer. Lowering the prices of the current model lineup is indeed the way to go. I've been one of the biggest bitchers about Apple's price point on LCD's for years now. That 20" LCD should not be anymore than $299. Plain and simple...simple and plain!
The 23" model should be in the ball park of $499 and the 30" should pop in at $999. Then to really goose people, Apple should bring a 36" model in at $1499.
Apple LCDs are not worth the extra price tag as long as you do your home work before purchasing an LCD monitor from a different company.
ju5tin81
Nov 28, 02:30 PM
I have no idea where you got that one from. The original Xbox never made a profit. Microsoft is deliberately selling the Xbox 360 at a loss to capture marketshare. However, the PS3 and Ninetindo Wii are selling like hotcakes, are latest big things, and have the buzz. The best laid plans ...
No real, true, stats on that one yet. Moving on...
However, the one thing I'm amazed at... The EU has this whole 'Anti-trust' thing going on with M$ at the mo...
How can this company, legally, be allowed to sell their product at a loss with the sole intention being: capturing market share? Isn't this: putting ��$ behind a product to guarantee a products sucess ( & break smaller companies, not nessecarily Apple) : hugely illegal, and destroying consumer choice? Whether it be Zune, XboX whateva... :confused:
I'm amazed that this practice is tollerated, let alone endorsed by the music lables, and their little $1 per Zune thang... I thought they were worried about APPLE being in control, never mind M$.... :eek:
No real, true, stats on that one yet. Moving on...
However, the one thing I'm amazed at... The EU has this whole 'Anti-trust' thing going on with M$ at the mo...
How can this company, legally, be allowed to sell their product at a loss with the sole intention being: capturing market share? Isn't this: putting ��$ behind a product to guarantee a products sucess ( & break smaller companies, not nessecarily Apple) : hugely illegal, and destroying consumer choice? Whether it be Zune, XboX whateva... :confused:
I'm amazed that this practice is tollerated, let alone endorsed by the music lables, and their little $1 per Zune thang... I thought they were worried about APPLE being in control, never mind M$.... :eek:
skellener
Apr 12, 08:27 PM
will final cut express get an update too? I hope to see them do something with it! Also interested what happens to FCP pricing - will it become available through the App Store at a fraction of the price? Will Motion be available separately? Guess we'll see.
kiljoy616
Mar 22, 03:58 PM
Rather see an ipad with that size now that be something sweet. :)
Zeppelin Air and ipad 2 will surely rock with that kind of size HD. :D
Zeppelin Air and ipad 2 will surely rock with that kind of size HD. :D
Hollis
Jul 13, 11:23 PM
I'd think the option would come a bit later. I mean, who wants an optical drive that can currently play nothing and burn to nothing which will cost them $500-$1000 on a machine that is already very pricey.
Theres movies on Blu-Ray already.. and you can buy discs to burn too already... I think a BTO option is perfectly reasonable.
Theres movies on Blu-Ray already.. and you can buy discs to burn too already... I think a BTO option is perfectly reasonable.
kelving525
Sep 23, 02:46 PM
Do you feel the same about the Night Sky color, or is it more the Aquamarine and Fuscia and neon blinding green? The Night Sky one looks pretty cool. I have no problem with purple colors as long as they are dark, which the Night Sky seems to be from pictures.
Yes, it is definitely dark purple-- not those neon purple.:cool:
Yes, it is definitely dark purple-- not those neon purple.:cool:
Roy Hobbs
Jan 2, 01:36 PM
The shown device was the "breakout box".
iTV is YA Apple "ecosystem" comprising of software like OSX, Front Row, and super DVR. It has a ($299) breakout box to hook to existing computers and TV's. It has a new iMac, which if you buy it, replaces 2-3 separate elements. It will have a supersize display screen with iTV enabled features.
Of course this is all speculation, but it is based on a wide ranging discussion of media experts since the pre-release of iTV.
Rocketman
If I had to bet on it I am willing to bet that what was already shown is all we are going to get. A "break-out" box that streams media from a mac to the TV
iTV is YA Apple "ecosystem" comprising of software like OSX, Front Row, and super DVR. It has a ($299) breakout box to hook to existing computers and TV's. It has a new iMac, which if you buy it, replaces 2-3 separate elements. It will have a supersize display screen with iTV enabled features.
Of course this is all speculation, but it is based on a wide ranging discussion of media experts since the pre-release of iTV.
Rocketman
If I had to bet on it I am willing to bet that what was already shown is all we are going to get. A "break-out" box that streams media from a mac to the TV
MacRumors
Apr 12, 08:11 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/12/nab-final-cut-supermeet-coverage/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/12/210422-275739796_500.jpg
Selena Gomez, Demi Lovato on
17 March 2011
2 weeks ago on 19 March 2011
Demi Lovato. # Selena Gomez
ParamoreROCKZ March 31, 2011
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/12/210422-275739796_500.jpg
rgarjr
Mar 22, 09:17 PM
What is there to update on the classic besides capacity?
lots, Bluetooth, WIFI (for internet radio), design..
Here's my classic mockup
http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=277273&stc=1&thumb=1&d=1300734199
lots, Bluetooth, WIFI (for internet radio), design..
Here's my classic mockup
http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=277273&stc=1&thumb=1&d=1300734199
rasmasyean
Mar 21, 09:52 AM
Yeah, I loved his little 'wargasm' too.
That little mushroom thingie probably took a few people along with it. I'd suggest that we keep our 'oohs' and 'aahs' limited to Fourth of July fireworks.
There's a bit of "wargasm" in all of us. Some of us have less, some of us repress it to be "civilized". But if there were no army ants in addition to worker ants, the colony would have never made it.
I'm just not "ashamed" to enjoy watching the now governer of California blow up things in make believe, and enjoy the types of games created by the business and tech legend who helped put computers in everybody's office and homes.
Wow, that is a shocker.
The U.S. Congress passed a law to prohibit any attempt to assassinate any foreign leader.
Why, I don't know, but there it is. :confused:
It's not an "assasination" in this case. It's a military leadership target of war. They killed many of Sadam Hussain's top people deliberately in the early days of the Iraq War for instance. If you're interested in seeing how many "assasinations" take place, Wikipedia lists that status on the wars we are invovled in where you can see KIA's of significant people. There you will find, KIA's on "Militant Islamic movement leaders" in addition to "generals"....sometimes tracked and blown up by a drone prolly flown from arround the world. When you "declare war", anything goes apparently.
That little mushroom thingie probably took a few people along with it. I'd suggest that we keep our 'oohs' and 'aahs' limited to Fourth of July fireworks.
There's a bit of "wargasm" in all of us. Some of us have less, some of us repress it to be "civilized". But if there were no army ants in addition to worker ants, the colony would have never made it.
I'm just not "ashamed" to enjoy watching the now governer of California blow up things in make believe, and enjoy the types of games created by the business and tech legend who helped put computers in everybody's office and homes.
Wow, that is a shocker.
The U.S. Congress passed a law to prohibit any attempt to assassinate any foreign leader.
Why, I don't know, but there it is. :confused:
It's not an "assasination" in this case. It's a military leadership target of war. They killed many of Sadam Hussain's top people deliberately in the early days of the Iraq War for instance. If you're interested in seeing how many "assasinations" take place, Wikipedia lists that status on the wars we are invovled in where you can see KIA's of significant people. There you will find, KIA's on "Militant Islamic movement leaders" in addition to "generals"....sometimes tracked and blown up by a drone prolly flown from arround the world. When you "declare war", anything goes apparently.
lu0s3r322
Jul 19, 04:04 PM
that's great news. w00t im a first time conference call listener! :p
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Cat-toy
Sep 21, 07:34 AM
My only concern is that it’s not as snug top to bottom as it should be. Not so loose it’s going to slip out, but feels like there’s a little play in it when you push the power button off and on.
I have the dermaSHOT case too, and I too find the top button a little hard to press. Kinda like I have to feel around for the button.
I also have a $1 one from China, not as thick as the Incipio, but the buttons feel good
I have the dermaSHOT case too, and I too find the top button a little hard to press. Kinda like I have to feel around for the button.
I also have a $1 one from China, not as thick as the Incipio, but the buttons feel good
DewGuy1999
Nov 26, 05:33 PM
Small Pelican case for my Oakley Glasses, (as seen on the last page of the XIV Purchases Thread)
Have room for another pair too, Maybe I'll find another pair that I like in the future.:)
I personally don't have a problem with this...but...it kind of reminded me of this from SNL. :)
The Blues Brothers perform "Soul Man" (http://snltranscripts.jt.org/78/78fbluesbrothers.phtml)
[ Emcee Monty steps into the shadows, as Jake & Elwood Blues, the Blues Brothers, enter the stage. Elwood is handcuffed to a briefcase, which Jake proceeds to uncuff him from. Once uncuffed, Elwood opens his case, pulls out a harmonica, then places the empty case aside as Jake performs a cartwheel to the microphones ]
Have room for another pair too, Maybe I'll find another pair that I like in the future.:)
I personally don't have a problem with this...but...it kind of reminded me of this from SNL. :)
The Blues Brothers perform "Soul Man" (http://snltranscripts.jt.org/78/78fbluesbrothers.phtml)
[ Emcee Monty steps into the shadows, as Jake & Elwood Blues, the Blues Brothers, enter the stage. Elwood is handcuffed to a briefcase, which Jake proceeds to uncuff him from. Once uncuffed, Elwood opens his case, pulls out a harmonica, then places the empty case aside as Jake performs a cartwheel to the microphones ]
Reverend Wally
Jan 2, 03:31 PM
On a hunch I'm calling updated MacBook Pros.
Did that not just happen ... :cool:
Did that not just happen ... :cool:
63dot
Jan 5, 11:21 AM
To the BMW guys, how reliable is the E46 325i?
I have a chance to pick one up for a fairly low cost (Less than $6,000 canadian). It is pretty much mint and VERY well maintained.
Car has a bit higher miles (~125,000 miles/ 205,000km), but I am guessing well maintained they will last quite a while?
I really enjoyed my brothers E36, and I just got rid of my project cars so I figure this would be a nice change.
There isn't much out there after the legendary 2002 that has longevity attached to it. Speed, safety, handling, yes all of that, but I am with the rest of the crew on newer BMWs with miles on it.
It's a hard car to pass up if only performance and looks counted, but like Mercedes and Volvos after the 1970s and early 1980s in some cases, you are dealing with repairs all the time.
The last tough Mercedes may have been around 1980 and the Volvos kept up a long lasting car sometime later into that decade.
These days, outside of some 1990s Honda Accords/Civics, it's hard to bet on any car having an unusual amount of longevity attached to it. I wouldn't be surprised if newer Hondas are now built to crap out 10 to 15 years down the line but we won't know in another 10 to 15 years.
The best thing to do is to look at what 20 year old cars are out there. You can get a good deal on them, and they lasted that long for a reason. I am very skeptical of 1990s used cars since many makers went offshore for their production, as well as making things a lot cheaper on the inside and outside of the vehicle.
American cars, as we all know, were the first to build in obsolescence into its overall recipe. How many original late-1970s and later US cars are at shows that haven't had a ton of extra work done to them to simply make them run? Gone are the days of the '57 Chevy and '65 Mustang, many of which are still in shows and on the road.
I have a chance to pick one up for a fairly low cost (Less than $6,000 canadian). It is pretty much mint and VERY well maintained.
Car has a bit higher miles (~125,000 miles/ 205,000km), but I am guessing well maintained they will last quite a while?
I really enjoyed my brothers E36, and I just got rid of my project cars so I figure this would be a nice change.
There isn't much out there after the legendary 2002 that has longevity attached to it. Speed, safety, handling, yes all of that, but I am with the rest of the crew on newer BMWs with miles on it.
It's a hard car to pass up if only performance and looks counted, but like Mercedes and Volvos after the 1970s and early 1980s in some cases, you are dealing with repairs all the time.
The last tough Mercedes may have been around 1980 and the Volvos kept up a long lasting car sometime later into that decade.
These days, outside of some 1990s Honda Accords/Civics, it's hard to bet on any car having an unusual amount of longevity attached to it. I wouldn't be surprised if newer Hondas are now built to crap out 10 to 15 years down the line but we won't know in another 10 to 15 years.
The best thing to do is to look at what 20 year old cars are out there. You can get a good deal on them, and they lasted that long for a reason. I am very skeptical of 1990s used cars since many makers went offshore for their production, as well as making things a lot cheaper on the inside and outside of the vehicle.
American cars, as we all know, were the first to build in obsolescence into its overall recipe. How many original late-1970s and later US cars are at shows that haven't had a ton of extra work done to them to simply make them run? Gone are the days of the '57 Chevy and '65 Mustang, many of which are still in shows and on the road.
bigandy
Sep 6, 09:22 AM
i think it's a good move - all dual core. nuff said.
Dagless
Apr 19, 05:21 PM
Very nice! My 2006 iMac would like to be replaced.
From what I've seen the current iMacs would be fine for me but I've been holding off because I think it's daft buying a Mac so late into it's cycle. Just give us some better video card options and I'm set.
From what I've seen the current iMacs would be fine for me but I've been holding off because I think it's daft buying a Mac so late into it's cycle. Just give us some better video card options and I'm set.
No comments:
Post a Comment