User Name
Password
AppleNova Forums » Apple Products »

Capella Wasn't Here Mac Studio Thread


Register Members List Calendar Search FAQ Posting Guidelines
Capella Wasn't Here Mac Studio Thread
Page 5 of 7 Previous 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7  Next Thread Tools
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2022-03-22, 09:19

I think the Studio Display is quite attractive and probably more so in the flesh, but point taken. This brings up another aspect of their design choices historically. They're of paramount importance in Apple's brand management. A lot of companies make similar looking devices. Though Apple's products are very minimal, they are often easily identifiable.

.........................................
  quote
kscherer
The Ban Hammer
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2022-03-22, 10:45

What an absolute mess, and why not just put an iMac in there already?

Or, better yet, take the intentionally dysfunctional baby iMac out of it?
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2022-03-22, 12:42

Did they find any evidence of wireless antennae in there? That would certainly point to more standalone "smart" features...
  quote
kscherer
The Ban Hammer
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2022-03-22, 13:52

The complete teardown is forthcoming.
  quote
turtle
Lord of the Rant.
Formerly turtle2472
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Upstate South Carolina
 
2022-03-22, 14:40

I saw this machine in person today.

That is such an odd sight to behold. It really does remind me of Herman Munster’s head. Seeing a 2U mini us just odd. They should have spaced the ports out so it would be more like a winking face with the power indicator being in the middle like a white nose.

I didn’t try to do anything with it because there wasn’t a point really. This is a display with nothing I could really “demo” for any value other than browsing the web. I would need to know a site that runs Prime95 or something like that in the background to see if run.

The Display did look good with it and visually it displayed well. Again though, I just looked at a stock desktop not something that pushed the limit.

Louis L'Amour, “To make democracy work, we must be a notion of participants, not simply observers. One who does not vote has no right to complain.”
MineCraft? mc.applenova.com | Visit us! | Maybe someday I'll proof read, until then deal with it.
  quote
kscherer
The Ban Hammer
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2022-03-24, 16:44

An interview with Apple engineers.

Quote:
The Studio Display was created to compliment the Mac Studio, so Apple gave customers what they'd been asking for — the 27-inch iMac 5K panel in a reasonably priced monitor.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2022-03-24, 17:41

They have to define reasonably priced. What does $1599 buy from other vendors? How does that compare?
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2022-03-24, 20:03

Quote:
Originally Posted by kscherer View Post
So essentially they are saying that other the display the other parts in a 27" iMac were worth less than $500? Less if you count profit margin. They must be smoking some strong sh%t.
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2022-03-25, 03:36

Quote:
Originally Posted by PB PM View Post
So essentially they are saying that other the display the other parts in a 27" iMac were worth less than $500? Less if you count profit margin. They must be smoking some strong sh%t.
Less than $200! The 27-inch iMac started at $1799 for years.
  quote
Frank777
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
 
2022-03-25, 03:39

Can anybody out there recommend the best speakers (within reason) for use with the Mac Mini/Studio?
(Assuming of course, you don't buy the Display-with-iPhone-Inside.)

Asking for a friend, who will likely be editing video on his machine.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2022-03-25, 05:26

Very subjective. If he’s monitoring audio along with editing video he may have more specific needs. A lot depends on his space and desk layout as well.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2022-03-25, 07:14

Quote:
Originally Posted by chucker View Post
Less than $200! The 27-inch iMac started at $1799 for years.
My brain is always figuring these things out in local rather than US pricing. studio display is $1649 here, and the 27” has started at around for the last $2300 for 3-5 years hear. It was $1999 before that.
  quote
turtle
Lord of the Rant.
Formerly turtle2472
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Upstate South Carolina
 
2022-03-25, 07:54

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post
Can anybody out there recommend the best speakers (within reason) for use with the Mac Mini/Studio?
(Assuming of course, you don't buy the Display-with-iPhone-Inside.)

Asking for a friend, who will likely be editing video on his machine.
If you go with a Thunderbolt to Optical you can get really strong control over audio. However, most are going to plug something into their headphone jack and be done with it. I get my audio on my desktop setup via a CalDigit dock and optical to Amp then Cambridge Audio Minx Min speakers. Sounds amazing and I would highly recommend it.. if you're already going to be going with something that does optical out. You can use that amp with analog input but the way volume is managed in macOS is interesting.

If you use analog then you can control the volume with the keyboard/speaker icon. However, if you go optical out then you have to control it on the amp. This makes sense, but if you go analog then you end up having two places where you can adjust the volume. Not a big deal but something to be aware of.

Edit: oh yeah! I just remembered that I did have go digital-to-analog from the CalDigit. I used a discontinued "Avinair Spitfire Pro Digital to Analog Audio Converter" to bridge that gap. It isn't available anymore, but that means you could skip that if you went analog to the amp. I wanted to use optical for my setup and had this converter already so it worked for me.

Louis L'Amour, “To make democracy work, we must be a notion of participants, not simply observers. One who does not vote has no right to complain.”
MineCraft? mc.applenova.com | Visit us! | Maybe someday I'll proof read, until then deal with it.
  quote
kscherer
The Ban Hammer
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2022-03-29, 14:16

Well, we just got our first Studio Display in the shop and we put it on the floor.

Beautiful!

Why this thing is not the new 27" iMac I cannot fathom.

- AppleNova is the best Mac-users forum on the internet. We are smart, educated, capable, and helpful. We are also loaded with smart-alecks! :)
- Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Mat 5:9)
  quote
Frank777
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
 
2022-03-29, 22:48

Yes, they could have done 5% more engineering and just made it the new iMac. It's pretty much got a computer inside already.

Then, of course, it would have the M1 Pro, instead of the Max and Ultra, but it would have been okay.
Power users would have to wait for the Mac Pro this fall.

The big disappointment for me is that the screen doesn't pivot. Maybe they're working on a 4th stand option.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2022-03-30, 08:18

Just get a VESA mount if you want pivot and rotating, much better than the bulky Apple stands anyway.
  quote
psmith2.0
Mr. Farmiga
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
 
2022-03-30, 08:35

I’m telling you. If Apple 2022 existed in 2002, that articulating chrome arm on the iMac G4 would be an optional $169 add-on. The stock model would have the display on a non-moving, vertical chrome arm, guaranteed. Everyone here knows this.

Fact is, we now pay extra for stuff that used to just come in the box. In fact, I’m waiting for them to go back to where an AirPort card is a separate $99 purchase for those who want get online wirelessly.

That’s the only thing I can think of where they went in the other direction. Everything else - cables, adapters, chargers, cleaning cloths, adjustability, etc. - have been slowly eliminated over time and made into separate, additional accessory purchases.

I know it’s gotten their packaging sizes/weight down some, but let’s not pretend that was the primary driving factor. Apple has eleventy gazillion $$$ because they give nothing away. They don’t leave money in the table.

I figure we’re about 5-6 years away from when you buy a MacBook, you just get the bottom part in the box. The display will cost extra and you hinge it together yourself.

Remember this post when it happens.

“Holy smokes, that Paul idiot joked about this back in 2022…”.



PS - For any pedants and humor-challenged present, I’m joking.

I think. Check back with me in five years….
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2022-03-30, 09:21

Quote:
Originally Posted by psmith2.0 View Post
I’m telling you. If Apple 2022 existed in 2002, that articulating chrome arm on the iMac G4 would be an optional $169 add-on. The stock model would have the display on a non-moving, vertical chrome arm, guaranteed. Everyone here knows this.
I dunno about that.

While the 15-inch iMac G4 was $1299 just like the original iMac G3, things got pricier than that fast. 17-inch? $1999. 20-inch? $2199. Meanwhile, at the end of the iMac G3's life, it had been at $999.

I think they had real trouble getting the price of the G4 down.

And once you have a display that's 27 inches rather than 15, the mechanics to make that worse become very non-trivial. That panel is simply a lot heavier. That's also why even the insane $999 stand on the $4999 Pro Display XDR isn't as flexible as the built-in stand of the $1299 15-inch iMac G4 was: it's too heavy to accomplish that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psmith2.0 View Post
Fact is, we now pay extra for stuff that used to just come in the box.
You're not wrong. My 2006 MacBook Pro came with third-party software like OmniGraffle, and a few adapters. The 2016 and beyond MacBook Pro doesn't even come with a long power cord.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psmith2.0 View Post
Everything else - cables, adapters, chargers, cleaning cloths, adjustability, etc. - have been slowly eliminated over time and made into separate, additional accessory purchases.

I know it’s gotten their packaging sizes/weight down some, but let’s not pretend that was the primary driving factor. Apple has eleventy gazillion $$$ because they give nothing away. They don’t leave money in the table.
It's both. Whether it's equally both, I don't know. Maybe 80% of it is about increasing margins, sure. But they've got to have metrics on how few people actually use those accessories, and they've probably found: not many.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psmith2.0 View Post
“Holy smokes, that Paul idiot joked about this back in 2022…”.
I mean, I think this all the time.

  quote
psmith2.0
Mr. Farmiga
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
 
2022-03-30, 09:37

That iMac G4 - like the Cube and trash can Macs - was probably “doomed” from the start…designed for initial impact and a generation or two of upgrades/support, but just couldn’t progress too far along due to weight, sizing, thermal, etc. issues.

They all looked great and made a nice front-end splash, but, big picture/long run, they really didn’t make a true dent in any real day-to-day way. Probably too funky and “different” to make it as long term computers. Maybe things are different now with the AS, and more adventurous designs are possible…more power (and room to grow) in smaller, interesting enclosures.

Sometimes it seems like Apple just hates towers, even though they sold zillions of them over the years (G3, G4, G5, Mac Pro). It’s only when they’ve tried to get cute with it - Cube, trash can - did things go a little off. If this little Studio is that powerful, I’m curious to see what the next Mac Pro is like. It’ll either be dramatically smaller (because it can), OR they’ll go absolutely nuts and make it even bigger/roomier and start at $11K.

I can imagine either one, honestly. To me, that Mac Pro desktop just kinda exists in its own category where money/budgets don’t matter and people don’t want one ounce of compromise/hold back. I think the MacBook Pro’s desktop counterpart is actually the Mac Studio, and the pro tower just exists off in its own little specialized niche, apart from the mini, iMac, studio and the notebooks.

I kinda see the new Mac Studio as the 2022 take on the G4 Cube. Same basic approach, but smaller and more powerful (and I assume it has some headroom to where it’s not discontinued in 18-24 months because it “had nowhere to go”. Surely they’ve learned those lessons after a few high-profile “oops”.
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2022-03-30, 09:45

Quote:
Originally Posted by psmith2.0 View Post
That iMac G4 - like the Cube and trash can Macs - was probably “doomed” from the start…designed for initial impact and a generation or two of upgrades/support, but just couldn’t progress too far along due to weight, sizing, thermal, etc. issues.
Yep.

We know the Cube was a bit of a Jobs vanity project, and the iMac G4 probably was, too. The 2013 Mac Pro, well, same for Jony Ive. (I ironically think it might be a good design substitute for the Mac Studio. It looks much better, and seems to have better heat dissipation as well. Oh well.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by psmith2.0 View Post
I kinda see the new Mac Studio as the 2022 take on the G4 Cube. Same basic approach, but smaller and more powerful (and I assume it has some headroom to where it’s not discontinued in 18-24 months because it “had nowhere to go”. Surely they’ve learned those lessons after a few high-profile “oops”.
Well, I'm not sure who the target audience of the Cube was, since the tower G4 did exist. I got the impression it was "people who need something moderately beefy but also it looks nice". Whereas for the Studio, it's more "people who need something quite beefy but don't want to go all the way to the Pro".

Like, I don't think anyone at Apple is under the illusion that the Studio looks attractive. But the Cube did. Except once the plastic started cracking. Oops.
  quote
psmith2.0
Mr. Farmiga
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
 
2022-03-30, 10:07

Well, looks-wise, the Studio is just a taller Mac mini. It’s clunkier for sure. I wasn’t talking about looks (the Cube is more attractive than the Studio), but just in that in-between space of an iMac and a full-blown tower. It’s a Cube that’s been whacked horizontally and wrapped in aluminum instead of acrylic.

It’s something about heights and proportions. The Mac mini looks nice, wide and flat. The Cube looked nice, taller. Those flatter AirPort and Time Capsule devices were nice, along with the later taller ones (smaller footprint, but they went vertical). Something about big/wide and “kinda taller, but not by much” can look a bit squatty/clunky, which I think the Studio suffers from a bit.

It just kinda looks like an uninspired…lump. And that’s just something odd from Apple.

I said, on release day, that had it been smaller in area (4” inches square?) but taller (8-10”…even 12”?) it might look a little more elegant and Apple-y (and not like someone simply Photoshop-stretched a Mac mini, which just comes across as a bit lazy). I know serious work went into it. It just looks like there hasn’t.

“Well, shit…I could’ve designed that…”.

We’ve been so spoiled for 20+ years that when Apple comes out with a brand-new product that’s a tad pedestrian and expected (“just make a taller Mac mini),, it’s a bit of a weird jolt.
  quote
Ryan
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Promise Land of Trustafarians
 
2022-03-30, 10:12

You know, I still have my Cube somewhere. I wonder if I could mod a Studio into its case.

The G4 Cube remains one of the most gorgeous computers ever designed.
  quote
psmith2.0
Mr. Farmiga
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
 
2022-03-30, 10:24

No doubt. Paired with one of those silver/clear Acrylic Studio Displays (flat panel or CRT*), it was quite a thing.



That 17”(?) CRT Studio Display with the Möbius strip clear acrylic base is in my top three Apple designs ever, before LCDs took over. I thought it would’ve made a gorgeous 17” iMac housing, complete with tilt/swivel, which no jellybean iMac had (without a third-party base/stand)..

I kept waiting for them to stick an iMac in that.

Man, that was a sexy design. Even now I’d proudly have one - with modern AS guts - on my desk.

This is exactly why I sometimes wish Apple, like Fender, had a custom shop.
  quote
709
¡Damned!
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Purgatory.
 
2022-03-30, 10:42

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan View Post
You know, I still have my Cube somewhere. I wonder if I could mod a Studio into its case.
I've been thinking about that as well, but more likely using the guts of a M(x) mini - and a Blu-ray drive that pops out of the top slot, natch. It's on my list of eventual projects.

So it goes.
  quote
Ryan
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Promise Land of Trustafarians
 
2022-03-30, 10:50

Quote:
Originally Posted by 709 View Post
I've been thinking about that as well, but more likely using the guts of a M(x) mini - and a Blu-ray drive that pops out of the top slot, natch. It's on my list of eventual projects.
Yeah, probably easier to do with a Mini than a Studio.
  quote
kscherer
The Ban Hammer
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2022-03-30, 12:20

FWIW, the G4 iMac was the best computer design ever!

Just saying.

I loved mine!
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2022-03-30, 14:03

Quote:
Originally Posted by psmith2.0 View Post
Well, looks-wise, the Studio is just a taller Mac mini. It’s clunkier for sure. I wasn’t talking about looks (the Cube is more attractive than the Studio), but just in that in-between space of an iMac and a full-blown tower.
No, I know, but my point is the Mac Pro will likely be a price point well above the Mac Studio. That one is $2000 or $3800 with the M1 Ultra; the current Mac Pro is $6000. I don't think the next Mac Pro will be significantly below that, because they want clear segmentation. (Maybe they'll price it the Mac Studio + $1000, so $3000 or $4800, justified by the internal expansion. But I would currently bet they'll simply keep it at $6000 and also not offer an M1 Max config at all. They simply start at much higher options, thus blurring the lines of "wait, what am I paying so much more for?".)

Quote:
Originally Posted by psmith2.0 View Post
It’s a Cube that’s been whacked horizontally and wrapped in aluminum instead of acrylic.

It’s something about heights and proportions. The Mac mini looks nice, wide and flat. The Cube looked nice, taller. Those flatter AirPort and Time Capsule devices were nice, along with the later taller ones (smaller footprint, but they went vertical). Something about big/wide and “kinda taller, but not by much” can look a bit squatty/clunky, which I think the Studio suffers from a bit.

It just kinda looks like an uninspired…lump. And that’s just something odd from Apple.
Yep.

(But also, even if you take "we want the same footprint as the Mac mini, just taller", there's the additional oddity that that Mac mini design is rather dated, too. Nor does the design fit the Studio Display all that much.

And they didn't even make it Darker Silver™.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by psmith2.0 View Post
We’ve been so spoiled for 20+ years that when Apple comes out with a brand-new product that’s a tad pedestrian and expected (“just make a taller Mac mini),, it’s a bit of a weird jolt.
Not to overanalyze it (as I proceed to totally overanalyze it), but that may have even been intentional. "This is just what it says on the tin. Nothing fancy. Just a beefy Mac desktop."
  quote
Frank777
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
 
2022-03-30, 14:16

Quote:
Originally Posted by chucker View Post
No, I know, but my point is the Mac Pro will likely be a price point well above the Mac Studio. That one is $2000 or $3800 with the M1 Ultra; the current Mac Pro is $6000. I don't think the next Mac Pro will be significantly below that, because they want clear segmentation. (Maybe they'll price it the Mac Studio + $1000, so $3000 or $4800, justified by the internal expansion. But I would currently bet they'll simply keep it at $6000 and also not offer an M1 Max config at all. They simply start at much higher options, thus blurring the lines of "wait, what am I paying so much more for?".)
The next Pro will be interesting to watch. The specs need to make the Studio look like a toy, if they're going to charge $6,000 for it.

It's already a machine that few Mac users think about owning. I'd love to own the top-end iPhone, iPad or Watch - even the $700 headphones. But I don't know what I'd do with the Pro if I had one. The machine starts too high-end to even become a realistic want for me. All it would do is raise my electricity bills.

I presume when it debuts in the fall it will have upgradable dual Ultras and PCI 5.0 SSDs, along with Thunderbolt 5.

All really cutting edge, but of little practical help to my workflow.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2022-03-30, 14:43

I must be the only one here who thinks the G4 cube looked like a cobbled together POS.

As for the rest, added costs for add-on bits, that’s just par for the course with any big company today. Apple’s leaderships job is to please shareholders by increasing profits, anything else is just a happy side deal.
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2022-03-30, 15:19

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post
The next Pro will be interesting to watch. The specs need to make the Studio look like a toy, if they're going to charge $6,000 for it.

It's already a machine that few Mac users think about owning. I'd love to own the top-end iPhone, iPad or Watch - even the $700 headphones. But I don't know what I'd do with the Pro if I had one. The machine starts too high-end to even become a realistic want for me. All it would do is raise my electricity bills.

I presume when it debuts in the fall it will have upgradable dual Ultras and PCI 5.0 SSDs, along with Thunderbolt 5.

All really cutting edge, but of little practical help to my workflow.
Well, Apple's SSDs don't use PCIe, so if they want to reach 14 Gbit/s or more, that's probably mostly a question of adding more modules (or getting faster modules). There's no bus; they just have a direct connection to the controller on the SoC, and it's probably easier to scale bandwidth that way, too.

That said, yeah, makes sense for the M2 to go PCIe 5. Might be too early for Thunderbolt 5, though.

An "M2 Extreme" — four (instead of two) M2 Maxs stuck together in a 2x2 grid seems like a given. That does raise a question about the RAM, though. I imagine the M2 line will generally double current capacities, so the M2 will go up to 32 GiB, the Pro up to 64, the Max up to 128, the Ultra up to 256, and the Extreme up to 512. Whereas the current Mac Pro already goes up to 1.5 TiB. Maybe Apple is OK with that, and maybe they're not.

There's a rumor Apple is going to do a hybrid approach where you get both the SoC's RAM and additional slots. In a sense, this adds to the cache hierarchy; the SoC RAM sort of becomes a level 4 cache. But it's not clear to me what that looks like on a process level. If each process can access both RAM, surely you lose the speed benefits of the SoC RAM? After all, the OS has to work to keep the two in sync for a shared address space. Instead, it's probably easiest if each process gets either the SoC RAM or the slot RAM. But how does the OS decide that? Does Finder come with radio buttons?

Memory:
(•) Built-in Unified Memory (512 GiB)
( ) Expanded Memory (1536 GiB installed)

(Yes, I know Apple won't use correct units. )

Kind of a throwback to System 7!

Lastly, there's the GPU, and ATP discussed a rumor where Apple will flat-out offer their own card with ASi GPU chips. But that way, you lose the performance benefits of the shared unified memory. And once you do that, why bother with your own GPU cards at all — just offer AMD's?

In short, the ARM Mac Pro is both very interesting (in that there's quite a few unanswered questions) and boring (in that I would never ever buy such a machine anyway).
  quote
Posting Rules Navigation
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Page 5 of 7 Previous 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7  Next

Post Reply

Forum Jump
Thread Tools
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Capella's Doodlings Capella Creative Endeavors 13 2010-10-09 19:57
Final Cut Pro 6 (and studio?) - NAB Moogs Speculation and Rumors 22 2007-03-20 14:49
As if the Possibility of Bird Flu wasn't Enough Moogs AppleOutsider 0 2007-03-01 08:18
that wasn't nice usurp General Discussion 1 2004-08-05 11:33
Whoever said Word wasn't professional? ast3r3x Third-Party Products 4 2004-05-26 23:03


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 17:06.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2022, AppleNova