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:
You may not love me like I
My wishes for the 10th Anniversary classic:
Earendil
Nov 27, 06:02 PM
Congratulations on starting your point with not one but two violent images... clearly, you must be a real PRO.
They are figures of speech that are quite common where I live. My apologies if they were taken the wrong way by you.
And since when did I say I was a Pro?
This thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor to possibly complement the Mac Mini, Apple's only headless consumer desktop.
Go Apple if they want to make a consumer monitor to compete with Dell. I'm all for it, as consumer monitors are all I have ever bought. I've already said that though, and I am not at all against Apple doing so, if you think I was, please go re-read my posts, as you might have missed my real point.
My point is that introducing a new size will do little to plug the consumer-sized hole in Apple's monitor line-up. If Apple can squeeze extra money out of some egotists who like to think of themselves as prosumers, fine, but the overwhelming majority of users aren't going to get anal about some supposed color-accuracy issues: they want a good-quality, good-looking reliable monitor and if Apple can't provide that at a decent price, Apple loses them to someone who can..
See, that is what my counter point was to. Yes, the thread is about Apple's possible entry into Consumer level LCDs. However by claiming that only "egotists" with a hankering for "supposed" statistics are the ones that buy Apple displays is just insulting. And when your comparison is with a Dell monitor, it just shows ignorance of what the Apple monitors provide.
You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor :cool:
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in backlighting and change incolor based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benafits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level montior for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
Apple could, of course, bring out two lines of monitors, one for print professionals and one to compete directly with Dell but, of course, they won't because it wouldn't take long for people to realize that there isn't really that much difference.
I think your conclusion is correct, but I think it is for different reasons. Those that buy Apple monitors either have the money to burn, or actually do want what the monitor provides over Dell. I think the reason they may not is the same reason they don't make cheap computers. Apple afaik has had quality certified monitors for a long time running. It might be confusing if they offer both, as anyone that knows that Apple only sells quality monitors may buy the new less expensive monitor and find out it doesn't do what they think it should.
However I think that it would be worth it in sales. And worth it for me :D
i love you poems and quotes
love you poems
love you poems
day to say “I Love You”
i love you poems. i
i love you poems for sisters
quot;I Love Youquot;
love you forever poems
And you
You Poems Quotes. love
/never-say-i-love-you.gifquot;
Love+you+poems Righti love
i love you poems for her.
I LOVE YOU POEMS. Yaboze
cute i love you poems. i love
Why do I love you? (Love Poem
Never say #39;I Love You#39;
They are figures of speech that are quite common where I live. My apologies if they were taken the wrong way by you.
And since when did I say I was a Pro?
This thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor to possibly complement the Mac Mini, Apple's only headless consumer desktop.
Go Apple if they want to make a consumer monitor to compete with Dell. I'm all for it, as consumer monitors are all I have ever bought. I've already said that though, and I am not at all against Apple doing so, if you think I was, please go re-read my posts, as you might have missed my real point.
My point is that introducing a new size will do little to plug the consumer-sized hole in Apple's monitor line-up. If Apple can squeeze extra money out of some egotists who like to think of themselves as prosumers, fine, but the overwhelming majority of users aren't going to get anal about some supposed color-accuracy issues: they want a good-quality, good-looking reliable monitor and if Apple can't provide that at a decent price, Apple loses them to someone who can..
See, that is what my counter point was to. Yes, the thread is about Apple's possible entry into Consumer level LCDs. However by claiming that only "egotists" with a hankering for "supposed" statistics are the ones that buy Apple displays is just insulting. And when your comparison is with a Dell monitor, it just shows ignorance of what the Apple monitors provide.
You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor :cool:
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in backlighting and change incolor based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benafits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level montior for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
Apple could, of course, bring out two lines of monitors, one for print professionals and one to compete directly with Dell but, of course, they won't because it wouldn't take long for people to realize that there isn't really that much difference.
I think your conclusion is correct, but I think it is for different reasons. Those that buy Apple monitors either have the money to burn, or actually do want what the monitor provides over Dell. I think the reason they may not is the same reason they don't make cheap computers. Apple afaik has had quality certified monitors for a long time running. It might be confusing if they offer both, as anyone that knows that Apple only sells quality monitors may buy the new less expensive monitor and find out it doesn't do what they think it should.
However I think that it would be worth it in sales. And worth it for me :D
netdog
Aug 25, 12:04 PM
Why would updated mac minis be such a high security product. Its nothing revolutionary so why would apple want so much security on the shipping of them? Im hoping for something BIG
Now you're talking. I want my iFon
Now you're talking. I want my iFon
DaveN
Mar 4, 08:12 PM
From the first article "A diesel Cruze would be about 12 percent more fuel efficient than the ECO, but diesel is about 9 percent more expensive than gasoline, eliminating the majority of the benefit." Also from the article, the ECO costs $19,000. In England, GM charges an extra $2700 for the diesel version. So it looks like you have to drive a lot of miles before you break even.
Am I anti diesel? Hardly, I bought a diesel Dodge Ram back in 1999 and still have it. At the time the initial cost was several thousand more than a gas model. Diesel fuel at that time was significantly less expensive than gasoline and the fuel economy was a lot better. I still have that truck though for my daily commute, I drive my Chevy Lumina as it gets 20 mpg in town (much better than my truck). If fuel prices keep going up, a may commute by bicycle this summer... I may do that anyway for health reasons though not if it gets too hot.
Am I anti diesel? Hardly, I bought a diesel Dodge Ram back in 1999 and still have it. At the time the initial cost was several thousand more than a gas model. Diesel fuel at that time was significantly less expensive than gasoline and the fuel economy was a lot better. I still have that truck though for my daily commute, I drive my Chevy Lumina as it gets 20 mpg in town (much better than my truck). If fuel prices keep going up, a may commute by bicycle this summer... I may do that anyway for health reasons though not if it gets too hot.
Multimedia
Sep 8, 09:52 PM
I wouldn't do the comparison like that, the Dual G5 does offer you drive bays and expansion capabilities that you do not get with the Mini. I will take the G5 over the Mini at that price you got it for.Thanks. But I am mainly with the Quad and need to know the actual performance difference between the D 2 G5 and one of the CD or C2D models. Thanks. Please?
I can't perform these tests in the stores because all the G5's are gone.
I can't perform these tests in the stores because all the G5's are gone.
Evangelion
Jul 14, 08:13 AM
I agree. I would be surprised if Apple even offers it before next year. Blu-Ray DVRs are still about $1k and the blank media is also very expensive. Apple will have enough challenges keeping the Intel Quad under $4k without including Blu-Ray yet. But by this time next year, I would expect it to be a BTO option for the desktops at least.
Currently, prices of Xeons seem to hover between $500 and $1000. And note: these are RETAIL PRICES for consumers! Apple's prices for those CPU's would be considerably less. So I don't see Apple having any problems offering quad-Woodcrest for under $4000. I wouldn't be one bit surprised if we saw quad-Woodcrest for under $3000!
Currently, prices of Xeons seem to hover between $500 and $1000. And note: these are RETAIL PRICES for consumers! Apple's prices for those CPU's would be considerably less. So I don't see Apple having any problems offering quad-Woodcrest for under $4000. I wouldn't be one bit surprised if we saw quad-Woodcrest for under $3000!
seenew
Aug 7, 03:43 AM
Are there going to be static downloads of the event? I mean, one I can save to view later? I hate streams, so badly.
prodigee
Feb 27, 06:23 PM
I had just gotten off the phone, so there were a bunch of oils and what not on there haha. But yeah I did clean it afterward. Just didn't care enough to for the picture hah.
zv470
Jul 18, 02:13 AM
...ok, and what about an iTunes Music Store for New Zealand and all the other countries that are missing out? :eek: please :p
~Shard~
Sep 6, 11:23 PM
...but we know that the mini-tower is inevitable....:)
Well of course, but that still doesn't excuse his hypocritical post. :D :cool:
Well of course, but that still doesn't excuse his hypocritical post. :D :cool:
DStaal
Sep 7, 11:34 AM
On the rental vs. purchase argument...
I'm not going to touch which one is 'better' for videos at the moment. I have opinions, but nevermind.
Let's work on the technolocial aspects for a moment, shall we?
Rental requires working DRM. Period. Absolutely. Otherwise there is no way for it to be just rental: you have the file, you can watch it whenever.
Purchase doesn't. You get the file, you can use forever, because you own it.
There is no unbreakable DRM scheme. It doesn't exist today, it probably never will. This is because you, the consumer, are required to be able to decrypt the files sometimes but not others. Which means you have all the info needed to decrypt it. Which means, sooner or later, that someone will figure out how to access that info when they want to, not when the software wants to.
So, Apple requiring a purchase model is just recognizing the limitations of the technology. They have nothing they can 'take back' at the end of a rental period, and it is no cheaper (it's actually more expensive) for them to rent something to you.
There is an apparent temporary advantage to the rental model to the movie studios, since they can charge you multiple times for the same movie. It costs Apple just as much to 'rent' you a movie or sell it to you, so Apple has no advantage, and you get the same file either way.
If you don't want to keep it, just throw it out. Same difference. The rest is pricing games.
I'm not going to touch which one is 'better' for videos at the moment. I have opinions, but nevermind.
Let's work on the technolocial aspects for a moment, shall we?
Rental requires working DRM. Period. Absolutely. Otherwise there is no way for it to be just rental: you have the file, you can watch it whenever.
Purchase doesn't. You get the file, you can use forever, because you own it.
There is no unbreakable DRM scheme. It doesn't exist today, it probably never will. This is because you, the consumer, are required to be able to decrypt the files sometimes but not others. Which means you have all the info needed to decrypt it. Which means, sooner or later, that someone will figure out how to access that info when they want to, not when the software wants to.
So, Apple requiring a purchase model is just recognizing the limitations of the technology. They have nothing they can 'take back' at the end of a rental period, and it is no cheaper (it's actually more expensive) for them to rent something to you.
There is an apparent temporary advantage to the rental model to the movie studios, since they can charge you multiple times for the same movie. It costs Apple just as much to 'rent' you a movie or sell it to you, so Apple has no advantage, and you get the same file either way.
If you don't want to keep it, just throw it out. Same difference. The rest is pricing games.
CalBoy
Mar 21, 12:32 AM
There are homeopathic apps in the AppStore. Those won't work any better than this 'pray the gay away' app, but they still are allowed in the store.
Then I think Apple might be exposed to the same potential liabilities for homeopathic remedies too. Mind you I don't think (or know definitely) anyone has successfully maintained that companies that knowingly permit the propagation of dangerous materials should be held liable. I do, however, think that it would be a fair standard to apply if the company is going to trumpet it's own "protective" prowess.
Apple is being inconsistent with its policies on the App Store. Either any offensive or potentially dangerous app should be barred, or none of them should be. By trying to play the part of the micromanager, Apple is revealing its own limitations.
No-one could possibly be offended by homeopathy.
I disagree. The level of offense might be lower than this gay-be-gone app, but I'm sure many physicians, nurses, and skeptics are not too fond of junk science being spread.
Moreover, it isn't just about what offends; that is merely a measuring stick to figure out what Apple's priorities are. I'm sure there is an app to offend everyone in the app store (does the Auduban Society approve of Angry Birds?). The question is which of these apps represents a real problem for users? As much as I disagree with Jobs about porn in the app store, there is at least some minimal possibility of utility in leaving porn out of the app store in that parents will be better able to decide what their kids download (not that there aren't other means of doing so, or that the kids haven't already seen porn). Sure it isn't a fantastic reason, but at least there's plausibility.
I think something similar can be said for this gay-be-gone app or a homeopathic app. In these situations the dangers from app use are not only higher, but they also run contrary to what medical professionals the world over recommend. If Apple is so willing to ban something for its plausible dangers, why not ban something for its very real dangers?
I think that should be a more important metric over offense. An app that is offensive but which doesn't hurt anyone either directly on indirectly should be scrutinized much less than one that does. In this light, it becomes more clear that what Apple really wanted to do all along was keep porn out of the App Store. Not because it's offensive or dangerous, but because it would make their devices easier to sell even in the most conservative of markets.
Then I think Apple might be exposed to the same potential liabilities for homeopathic remedies too. Mind you I don't think (or know definitely) anyone has successfully maintained that companies that knowingly permit the propagation of dangerous materials should be held liable. I do, however, think that it would be a fair standard to apply if the company is going to trumpet it's own "protective" prowess.
Apple is being inconsistent with its policies on the App Store. Either any offensive or potentially dangerous app should be barred, or none of them should be. By trying to play the part of the micromanager, Apple is revealing its own limitations.
No-one could possibly be offended by homeopathy.
I disagree. The level of offense might be lower than this gay-be-gone app, but I'm sure many physicians, nurses, and skeptics are not too fond of junk science being spread.
Moreover, it isn't just about what offends; that is merely a measuring stick to figure out what Apple's priorities are. I'm sure there is an app to offend everyone in the app store (does the Auduban Society approve of Angry Birds?). The question is which of these apps represents a real problem for users? As much as I disagree with Jobs about porn in the app store, there is at least some minimal possibility of utility in leaving porn out of the app store in that parents will be better able to decide what their kids download (not that there aren't other means of doing so, or that the kids haven't already seen porn). Sure it isn't a fantastic reason, but at least there's plausibility.
I think something similar can be said for this gay-be-gone app or a homeopathic app. In these situations the dangers from app use are not only higher, but they also run contrary to what medical professionals the world over recommend. If Apple is so willing to ban something for its plausible dangers, why not ban something for its very real dangers?
I think that should be a more important metric over offense. An app that is offensive but which doesn't hurt anyone either directly on indirectly should be scrutinized much less than one that does. In this light, it becomes more clear that what Apple really wanted to do all along was keep porn out of the App Store. Not because it's offensive or dangerous, but because it would make their devices easier to sell even in the most conservative of markets.
Eraserhead
Mar 20, 06:22 PM
What does homeopathy achieve?
The placebo effect.
You can't even test homeopathy scientifically against a placebo because the placebo would be identical to the remedy!
The reason you test against the placebo rather than no medicine at all is that the placebo effect is non-trivial.
The placebo effect.
You can't even test homeopathy scientifically against a placebo because the placebo would be identical to the remedy!
The reason you test against the placebo rather than no medicine at all is that the placebo effect is non-trivial.
laserjames
Apr 3, 05:01 AM
I've never in my life voluntarily watched an ad for anything four times in a row. Ever. I watched it, sat with a "wowed" face like I just watched a really good movie, then clicked "replay" three times. G'job. I will agree with others in that the new iPhone ads are a bit sassy, and that's all good and makes you kinda smirk if you have an iPhone, but it has a tinge of disrespectfulness, even though android wouldn't even exist if the iPhone hadn't come out, but slight disrespectfulness nonetheless. This new ad just plays the nice guy method with really, really good camera angles, lighting, and true content illustrating how many miles ahead of the competition they really are. Bravo.
bloodycape
Jul 16, 04:00 AM
We've seen it with Betamax, MiniDisc, MemoryStick, etc. Sony doesn't play well with others, they like their own formats. Heck, take a look at the Sony DRM fiasco from last year with the rootkit CDs. Do you really trust Sony to be checking in on what Blueray discs you are playing and verifying your encryption keys on a dailybasis? There are very few features in Blueray which are consumer friendly.
I'd beg to differ on that point. MemoryStick is actually doing pretty well in the market considering that the top three cards are SD, CF and MS stick. Granted they keep changing it but it is doing better then Beta, MiniDisc and MinisDisk HD(even though there are many die hard minidisk fans). Hell you even look at those multi memory card readers there is always support for MS stick. So it does look like Sony did something right there.
I'd beg to differ on that point. MemoryStick is actually doing pretty well in the market considering that the top three cards are SD, CF and MS stick. Granted they keep changing it but it is doing better then Beta, MiniDisc and MinisDisk HD(even though there are many die hard minidisk fans). Hell you even look at those multi memory card readers there is always support for MS stick. So it does look like Sony did something right there.
NT1440
Mar 19, 11:47 AM
Thinking ahead, what happens when the power vacuum is in place?
Get ready for the same old story, yet again, just in Libya this time.
Get ready for the same old story, yet again, just in Libya this time.
TheBobcat
Nov 28, 09:40 PM
in five years neither the iPod nor the Zune will have any significance. The hardware market will be dominated by Samsung and distribution by walmart.
Samsung is becoming the most dominant consumer electronics company in the world: from LCD TVs to cell phones, to camcorders, to MP3 players. in 2006 they will have sold 150 million phones, growing much faster than Nokia and Motorola. Their camcorder business is just picking off with megapixel camcorders priced below $300. They are just now getting to be serious about the MP3 market. The YP-Z5 would have been one of the top players, had they decided to be agressive on pricing, however for some reason it's held very high selling prices throut the world. Now watch for the YP-T9, it will outsell iPod nano in 2007. It is ridiculously loaded with features and is much better priced than the Z5s.
Walmart controls 40% of DVD distribution. If the DVD goes the way of the music CD, they are not going to let this market slip away from them. They have just started selling digital downloads and have much more clout with content companies than either Microsoft or Apple.
Amazon.com rankings offer extremely limited view of the world. They are only USA, plus research shows that it is the preferred vendor for highly sophisticated users. The world is much bigger. Creative Zen Nano is #1 electronics seller at Amazon.fr and Amazon.de (France and Germany) you can check it out. Creative is not a powerhouse, though. Watch out for Samsung to start ramping up the YP-T9s next year and blow everyone out of the water. As it is now, they are on backorder and sold out at many outlets... Plus Samsung's music phones will far outsell the Iphone...
Which cost more, your device for predicting the future or your Samsung stock?
Samsung is becoming the most dominant consumer electronics company in the world: from LCD TVs to cell phones, to camcorders, to MP3 players. in 2006 they will have sold 150 million phones, growing much faster than Nokia and Motorola. Their camcorder business is just picking off with megapixel camcorders priced below $300. They are just now getting to be serious about the MP3 market. The YP-Z5 would have been one of the top players, had they decided to be agressive on pricing, however for some reason it's held very high selling prices throut the world. Now watch for the YP-T9, it will outsell iPod nano in 2007. It is ridiculously loaded with features and is much better priced than the Z5s.
Walmart controls 40% of DVD distribution. If the DVD goes the way of the music CD, they are not going to let this market slip away from them. They have just started selling digital downloads and have much more clout with content companies than either Microsoft or Apple.
Amazon.com rankings offer extremely limited view of the world. They are only USA, plus research shows that it is the preferred vendor for highly sophisticated users. The world is much bigger. Creative Zen Nano is #1 electronics seller at Amazon.fr and Amazon.de (France and Germany) you can check it out. Creative is not a powerhouse, though. Watch out for Samsung to start ramping up the YP-T9s next year and blow everyone out of the water. As it is now, they are on backorder and sold out at many outlets... Plus Samsung's music phones will far outsell the Iphone...
Which cost more, your device for predicting the future or your Samsung stock?
ahuman7341
Jul 19, 04:29 PM
Most critical applications to be out in september? wouldnt adobe fall into this category???
I was thinking the same things and didn't adobe say that their stuff would be out in md 2007?
I was thinking the same things and didn't adobe say that their stuff would be out in md 2007?
pimjai
Sep 18, 03:36 AM
are there any sleeves yet?
Hisdem
Mar 19, 03:52 PM
I am a bit suprised the Mods let you start such an Anti-American thread title ..."U.S. will use Lybia as aerial target practice"
This is not about the USA ... this is about the UN Security Council deciding to stop a Dictator like Gaddafi from forcing his will on the people of Lybia.
The USA is only one of 10 countries that approved this decision.
Those with knowledge of this situation will agree that sometimes people need protection from thugs like Gaddafi who tell his people "there will be no mercy" and fire weapons upon them for the sole reason of staying in power.
where many others in this thread just want to chirp more "Ridiculous" Anti-American crap.
Agreed. Only one thing though, I think reason the mods let him put that title is because it's not really hard to see americans saying the whole world sucks compared to them on here. And insulting people who live in "third world" countries. Just look at it as a polite payback. ;)
And to make myself clear, I support the US and all the other countries involved with this intervention, it just needed to be done.
This is not about the USA ... this is about the UN Security Council deciding to stop a Dictator like Gaddafi from forcing his will on the people of Lybia.
The USA is only one of 10 countries that approved this decision.
Those with knowledge of this situation will agree that sometimes people need protection from thugs like Gaddafi who tell his people "there will be no mercy" and fire weapons upon them for the sole reason of staying in power.
where many others in this thread just want to chirp more "Ridiculous" Anti-American crap.
Agreed. Only one thing though, I think reason the mods let him put that title is because it's not really hard to see americans saying the whole world sucks compared to them on here. And insulting people who live in "third world" countries. Just look at it as a polite payback. ;)
And to make myself clear, I support the US and all the other countries involved with this intervention, it just needed to be done.
Detlev
Jul 18, 06:15 AM
This does play into the news published about the industry allowing people to burn movies to DVDs but can someone do the math? What would the file size be for 2 hour movie at present? What about if it were compressed into a zip or tz file? What would it be if the quality were improved? How long would it take to download these files with dialup, on dsl, on cable. I would think that most people would not be downloading using their offices T1 connection ;)
How long would you wait or tie up your computer's internet connection to download an old movie from Disney?
Here is another issue to think about. With large files being downloaded to your HD and then errasing them you will have to defragment your HD quite often or you will suffer. Is there rumor of improved Disk Utility or other method of handling this?
How long would you wait or tie up your computer's internet connection to download an old movie from Disney?
Here is another issue to think about. With large files being downloaded to your HD and then errasing them you will have to defragment your HD quite often or you will suffer. Is there rumor of improved Disk Utility or other method of handling this?
BlizzardBomb
Oct 24, 04:49 AM
I advocate the 2007FP 20 1600x1200 for only $359.20 (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-4687). That extra 150 verticle pixels is very helpful.
That monitor wouldn't be any good if you watch HD videos (or even DVDs).
Dell really are fleecing their none US customers:
20" 2007FP: £311
24" 2407WFP: £566
20" 2007WFP: £401
30" 3007WFP: £1,365
People here are always raving about Dells low prices here, but I really dont think they're that cheap at all (in the UK) - unless you buy something with very old hardware that is.
Got it in one. :)
That monitor wouldn't be any good if you watch HD videos (or even DVDs).
Dell really are fleecing their none US customers:
20" 2007FP: £311
24" 2407WFP: £566
20" 2007WFP: £401
30" 3007WFP: £1,365
People here are always raving about Dells low prices here, but I really dont think they're that cheap at all (in the UK) - unless you buy something with very old hardware that is.
Got it in one. :)
danvdr
Oct 23, 11:12 PM
FWI Dell Just Lowered The List Of All Their Monitors � 30" $1279 24" $679 Right Now (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productlisting.aspx?c=us&category_id=6198&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs). We paid $1349 last week in a sale and now it's been trumped. New 30" list is only $1599 and 24" list is $799.
2007FP 20" 1600x1200 is now only $359.20 (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-4687). This is amazing.
And the E207WFP 20" monitor (which seems to be comparable to the 2007FP minus a few bells and whistles (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productcompare.aspx?c=us&category_id=6198&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&p=320-4688~320-5123~)) is only $289.
2007FP 20" 1600x1200 is now only $359.20 (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-4687). This is amazing.
And the E207WFP 20" monitor (which seems to be comparable to the 2007FP minus a few bells and whistles (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productcompare.aspx?c=us&category_id=6198&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&p=320-4688~320-5123~)) is only $289.
kelving525
Sep 19, 02:47 PM
ok sounds great. post a link I'll buy that for 99c until I find something I really like.
BTW What camera did you use to take the shot ? Makes it look much more than 99c
http://cgi.ebay.com/Silicone-Case-Cover-Skin-Apple-iPod-Touch-4-4th-Gen-/360297195747?pt=PDA_Accessories&hash=item53e362e8e3
And I used a Nikon D5000 with 50mm F/1.4G lens. :cool:
BTW What camera did you use to take the shot ? Makes it look much more than 99c
http://cgi.ebay.com/Silicone-Case-Cover-Skin-Apple-iPod-Touch-4-4th-Gen-/360297195747?pt=PDA_Accessories&hash=item53e362e8e3
And I used a Nikon D5000 with 50mm F/1.4G lens. :cool:
No comments:
Post a Comment