Apple Delivers New Macs, Multi-Touch Mouse

"Must be trying to play catch-up with Windows 7, Zune HD, and WinMo 6.5." Dam that is funny, especially the WinMO part.

"Too bad the mouse will still probably require finger lifting to determine button presses, making it a no-sell for me." WRONG "The surface can also simulate the left and right buttons. Unlike in previous Apple's mice, the two buttons work perfectly. This time they also added *physical feedback,* so when you click the buttons, you actually get the entire surface to click—like the original clear Apple mouse." -- Gizmodo http://gizmodo.com/5385834/apple-magic-mouse-hands-on "Even on Apple's website, the keyboard and mouse pages state zero compatibility with Windows ..." This is HALF TRUE "When you use an Apple Magic Mouse with Windows XP and Vista using Boot Camp 3.0, which ships with Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard, or Boot Camp 2.1, which shipped with Mac OS X v10.5 Leopard, up or down scrolling and two finger swiping does not work." -- Apple Support Page, http://support.apple.com/kb/TS3039 So by inference it looks like the laser will track in Windows thereby moving the cursor and that you can left and right click (since that is not swipe-dependent action) but swiping actions will not work, including scrolling. I'd think this is merely a driver issue but that's the state of it as of today.

@ericof3: "It is always a mistery to me to see that a company like apple volontaraly do hardware not compatible with the most used operating system, Windows..." Because Windows is inferior. Lots of people buy it. It just shows that a lot of people don't know any better and buy cheap crap. People like you, Mike and Paul and ....

Windows and Microsoft become more irrelevant in people's mind as the days pass. It kills Microsoft apologists like Paul, Mike and the rest that people love Apple and Google. Microsoft is becoming like IBM, irrelevant in anything but the back rooms of corporations.

wlow3 "Macintosh sales have now grown faster than the rest of the PC market in 19 of the last 20 quarters." And even then it's only up to less than 4% of the market. And people who think the Apollo astronauts secretly landed on a sound stage in Nevada are still a huge group compared to Mac users. (3.9% vs 6%)

wlow3 "Unlike in previous Apple's mice, the two buttons work perfectly. " So are you agreeing with the author that every other Apple mouse ever made is a broken design where the buttons don't really work right? Why didn't we hear about this from all the Apple fans on here for all these years?

yoshi OK. We'll add reading comprehension to short term memory loss. The point was and is that despite virtually NO press, Alienware is producing a much broader line with much more flexibility of meeting the users' needs. Yes, their lowest end machine is lower (and is still a pretty high end machine) and yes their highest end machine is higher. That's part of what makes it a broad line with lots of flexibility. You know, as opposed to "you'll like what we give you" which has generally been the Apple mantra for meeting their user's needs.

Mike I apologize if I misinterpreted what you were saying. To me it seemed like it was the PC starts at $1300 and you can configure it how you want, meaning they are cheaper. My bad!

Mike "So are you agreeing with the author that every other Apple mouse ever made is a broken design where the buttons don't really work right?" I'm not quite sure what that means. On the Mighty Mouse anything from center position to the left is a left-click. To right-click you have to go off center to the right. Some people have trouble with that. Other than that, I don't know. "Why didn't we hear about this from all the Apple fans on here for all these years?" Um, actually the mouse, from the hockey puck one to the Mighty Mouse, has gotten a lot of flak from Apple fans -- everyone knows this. When you're bold with design, you might make stuff that consumers won't embrace. But the opposite, say, if we're talking cars, is a world of "safe" inoffensive (boring) jelly-bean-shaped cars. One trouble with the auto industry is that the don't take enough design risks. Same with the PC industry. By not being as "accommodating," Apple can be bolder and turn more heads.

Yoshi No problem.

@robertsjoe said: "That is true. Mike Galos has no taste. Common among most Windows users." I, myself, have a really nice Antec p190 case - it doesn't look awe inspiring, it's just a black case that is really quiet. Look I'll be fairly blunt here - I buy my PC case based on functionality before looks.. Taste doesn't really come into it... See, the difference between a PC user, generally, and a Mac user is that PC users will say "look how fast my PC is it can run this game/program/os/whatever x times faster than yours". A Mac user points to his/her mac and says "isn't it pretty! I know it has a POS 256mb video card but it's so pretty!" I'm sorry - I have no desire to hump my computer - even if you want to hump your mac. @robertsjoe said: "Because Windows is inferior. Lots of people buy it. It just shows that a lot of people don't know any better and buy cheap crap. People like you, Mike and Paul and ...." Where is your logic? Are you telling me that Mac users are simply the chosen ones? They have some how deciphered some code and understand "Mac is better"? Cause I'll be really honest with you and say that the Mac users I know AREN'T technically minded. They don't know the "new OS features", they don't understand what "Multicore CPUs" are and they definitely don't know the shortcut to make the OS run in 64-bit mode.. The Mac users I know are graphic artists who have funny hair and militantly explain the workflow is better on a Mac (even though Photoshop CS4 is exactly the same on a PC) and they are school teachers who had their laptop supplied too them because the school purchased one for every teacher and student.. These aren't people who "choose" Mac because it is superior - I can guarantee that there is a good portion of Mac users who couldn't tell me the specs of their machine off the top of their head and an even greater number that couldn't explain the underlying technologies in the OS or on a hardware level AND an even LARGER number that couldn't give a solid reason as to why their mac is better than a PC other than "it doesn't crash" (and even that is a mute point - I haven't had a crash on my Windows Vista or 7 machine for as long as I can remember - applications may fall over once in a blue moon but the system itself is solid). And here's the point: PC users understand one thing better than any Mac user will ever understand. I want you to listen closely here: ....Operating a computer is something that you invest time in....Learning the skills to understand how to be safe on the internet, how to configure and install software, how not to destroy OS installs and so forth - these all are something that should be learned.. Learning HOW a computer works and WHY it works, so that when a problem arises you can face it - this is part of being a computer user... Most long time PC users have at one point or another built their own PC or upgraded a component.. Am I saying it's a virtue to have done this? No, of course not because there are just as many people who have never touched the hardware and just ordered from a vendor but I am saying that there are lessons to be learned from doing this... These sort of things are foreign to mac users - all they know is that the pretty box does cool things when you click it...and I'm sorry - if you can't tell me more than that and if you can't give me a better reason than "it doesn't crash" (because macs crash too - I've seen them do it..lol) then please, don't bother me with your opinion or thoughts - they aren't valid. If you want to argue the merits of a really nicely designed lounge/couch set - go ahead, talk asthetics and how it's softer and fluffier than the competitor. But if you want to talk to me about computers - please, learn enough about computers to actually discuss COMPUTERS. Tell me why a DDR3 system on 1066mhz (MAC) is better than my i7 system with 2200mhz DDR3...Or tell me why I would want a 27" monitor on a computer that has a 256mb video card - how is that thing ever going to refresh the screen, especially under load, at high resolution - I've seen a 22" mac with the 256mb video card struggle to get 15fps on World of Warcraft - how is this thing going to cope? Talk to me about things that matter in computer... Talk to me about how this is going to improve my computer experience... Tell me how this is going to keep me on the cutting edge of technology (well, not on the mac side..but sure).. I'm sorry - Mac fans, you have conversations about all the wrong things.. You discuss paint colours whilst we discuss room sizes.. Cheers..

While I'm glad Apple has finally embraced desktop class processors, a nice 27 inch screen which Windows users have had for years now, a nice mouse, and a touch up for Mini. Definitely a nice but overdue hardware refresh. However, $2000 for a core i7? HAH! I have already estimated that I can build a Core i7 for under $1,000! Easily too. That is what I call being "Ripped off Differently." All this conversation of Apple saving money with nVidia chips and other cost savings and not one single dollar of saving passed on to the consumer. That's outrageous. With the exception of the Mini, the rest of the Apple line is too expensive for the average working joe. Looks like Windows 7 will be allow me to keep my dual core running for several years to come. Oh and may I quote Walt Mossberg who made this great quote and a warning to Apple. "In recent years, I, like many other reviewers, have argued that Apple's Mac OS X operating system is much better than Windows. That's no longer true. I still give the Mac OS a slight edge because it has a much easier and cheaper upgrade path; more built-in software programs; and far less vulnerability to viruses and other malicious software, which are overwhelmingly built to run on Windows. Now, however, it's much more of a toss-up between the two rivals. Windows 7 beats the Mac OS in some areas, such as better previews and navigation right from the taskbar, easier organization of open windows on the desktopand [sic] touch-screen capabilities. So Apple will have to scramble now that the gift of aflawed [sic] Vista has been replaced with a reliable, elegant version of Windows." Keep believing the arrogant smug comments of our resident trolls on here. But this time even Mossberg has opened his eyes. History repeats itself and the hubris of the foolish will lead Apple down the the same history like an endless waltz.

@subzero WTF? "a nice 27 inch screen which Windows users have had for years now"??? and those 27inch LCD's you speak of could not be used on Mac's? You do know that Apple has made a 30inch display for some time now?? Speaking of which I went searching for 27inch back lit LCD's. I only found a few 27inch LCD monitors (the rest TV's) and both of them were not backlit and had a lower resolution than the Apple one. Both were just over $1000. (Samsung and Dell). So lets say I did find a 27inch backlit LCD at 2560x1440 what would it cost, $1200? $1300? For $700 to $800 I get that 27inch backlit LCD from Apple with a core I7 all in a small foot print desktop computer, including the new touch interface mouse. Your Walt quotes really explain those quarterly numbers yesterday well.

"Speaking of which I went searching for 27inch back lit LCD's. I only found a few 27inch LCD monitors (the rest TV's) and both of them were not backlit and had a lower resolution than the Apple one. Both were just over $1000. (Samsung and Dell). So lets say I did find a 27inch backlit LCD at 2560x1440 what would it cost, $1200? $1300? For $700 to $800 I get that 27inch backlit LCD from Apple with a core I7 all in a small foot print desktop computer, including the new touch interface mouse." This is what I was getting at in my original post wayyyyy up there. The Alienware BOX, with similar specs was a little (by like $15) cheaper than the 27" iMac. The Alienware box had a better video card. The iMac had more ram; but other than that they were pretty on par. Then I realized that the iMac had a 27", LED backlit screen with *very* decent resolution so I figured I'd better add a 27" LED backlit monitor to the Alienware package... only, they didn't have one. They had a 27" LCD that runs at the same resolution my (non-Apple) 24" LCD runs at ... for an extra $929. And no Mike, OS X doesn't support DX11, but I'm sure it runs Windows 7 and all it's software just fine, thank you. I know my MacBook Pro does, so I don't see why this new iMac won't. But it doesn't matter. You'll twist all this into some new and wonderful "MS is always right, no matter what because I'm mikegalos who works for MS and I'm always right no matter what" diatribe. I'm sure :)

The Apple sychophants will lap this up as usual and won't query the price one bit. I for one like to shop around and not get screwed for the technology I buy, its called choice.

Good to see people are moving to Apple. It's a good thing. You should all stop using Microsoft products.They are lagging behind in development and innovation, have missed the boat with the Internet, online search and advisertising, digital music. On top of that, they cannot create software unless they steal it from people who can, the hardware they make fails miserably (there's even a wiki for xbox-failures) and is even more expensive than PS3 (which does have a blu ray player). In fact, MS is only kept alive by lunatics like Mike who are given a few bucks a month to visit websites like this and post utterly insane comments that make no coherent sense at all. Unless you're a looney like Mike.

@ sjaak327 Obvious troll is obvious. Plus, I would consider seeking mental help if you truly believe Vista is better than OSX. You might suffer from Galosingitis. Bad thing is, there is at present no cure for that.

Well, time for the usual disclaimer... I am currently not paid by Microsoft as an employee, contractor or vendor although I was a Microsoft employee from 1988-2001 and have consulted to them several times over the past years. In no way do I speak for them nor they for me.

@ logjamming, I don't think it is better I KNOW it is better. And I have extensive experience with both Leopard and Vista. Trolling seems to be your only purpose here, haven't seen you post anything of substance yet. But I guess lack of knowledge does that too you..

"Oh, and I do use Windows for statistical and scientific applications that have not been ported to OSX or just don't work that well under OSX. In fact, I started using Windows way back in 96/97, but no Windows version yet (and yes, I run W7 using bootcamp) can match OSX." It is save to say that way back in 96/97 OSX wasn't even around. You just state no Windows version to date matches whatever OSX version, but give 0 reasons why this is the case. People who actually make a living out of running and supporting OS in networking envirornments (read in businesses) will probably without many exceptions say just the opposite. I mean in terms of configurability, roll out OSX doesn't even come close. That leaves the consumers. Now you can argue about usabiltiy, I prefer Win7 /Vista over SL or Leopard any day. But in the consumers space, two things that are quite important for me are media and games, in both cases Windows wipes the floor with OSX. Front Row ? LOL a disgrace.

mike galos, Do you really not know what a metaphore is?

"I am not sure what a middle aged man like Mike Galos' excuse is. " He lost his job and has nothing better to do.

@logjamming, @robertsjoe - Yea, Microsoft not a hardware company, got it, Microsoft can't innovate, check, Microsoft sucks and can only sell an OS because others aren't as smart as you. got it. Tell you what. We'll all stipulate those facts if you promise to quit trolling the "windows supersite". Thanks. Back on topic, the mouse looks interesting. I've never been a big fan of the alps mice, always liked IBM touchstyck better. This might be nice though (assumming windows users can use it). I know on my iTouch the screen kinda scrolls away sometimes even on a slight touch. That would probably not be too good for browsing or reading a document. But interesting nonetheless.

@dave "OK Mike I know you like logic and that you are totally immune and resistant to any concept of design, manufacturing and beauty but hey c'mon you dare comparing this: I'd take the former because I would be willing to be large sums of money that the performance on the alienware for gaming (what it's designed for) is MUCH greater. If you mean which one looks better, then obviously the second. But people would be buying these for different reasons, once again making any comparison meaningless. Not ragging on you, so please don't take it that way. Just pointing out that they aren't marketed to the same folks.

Waethorn said: "The Mac users I know are graphic artists who have funny hair and militantly explain the workflow is better on a Mac (even though Photoshop CS4 is exactly the same on a PC)" Actually, no. Photoshop CS4 on Windows is available as a full 64-bit application. That's not so on Mac. ************* Which is due to Adobe's foot dragging not Apple's Photoshop needed to be rewritten years ago on the Mac, they kept pushing it off.