Redesigned iMac?

[MacRumors]

AppleInsider claims (http://www.appleinsider.com/news.php?id=222) that Apple is working on a major revision to the iMac.

According to the rumor site, the transition is said to be as dramatic as the shift from the CRT iMac to the LCD iMac, and is targeted at early spring of 2004.

[1macker1]

i just wonder what it will look like. Anyone care to guess?

[Flowbee]

Let the tablet rumors begin! (again)

[Powerbook G5]

Wow, I cannot wait to see what a radically redesigned iMac will look like. I am still taken with the current 17" LCD beauty that my girlfriend has.

[Thanatoast]

As dramatic as CRT to LCD, eh? 3D holographic display anyone? :D

[BOOMBA]

I think the ony way to make as dramatic a change as from CRT to LCD would be for Apple to price it at what it is worth.
$800.

[SeaFox]

How can the shift be as major as the one from CRT to LCD? Getting rid of about ten pounds and 12" of backspace is pretty big. Short of making it an in-display computer (like that famous Gateway impersonator) I don't know what they'd do.


Wait. How about they change it to an aluminum screen and base.

And when you touch the base while the iMac's running your hair stands straight up with static electricity! :D

[gwangung]

Makes a lot of sense. Sucker needs a redesign on a regular basis, as a consumer machine. I wouldn't look for a G5 iMac just yet, but I'd certainly would expect as many goodies as can be crammed into a consumer box (or dome or.....)

[spankalee]

I hope so. Personally I love the new iMac. I think it's an industrial design masterpiece, and it's ergonomics are the best I've ever seen in any computer.

However it doesn't seem to really resonate with the rest of the world like it does with me. It's not "cuddly".

I think the iMac is actually a lot like the Cube right now. The over all package appeals to the high end customer. Like me, I'm buying a 2Ghz G5 pretty soon. If I ever wanted an AIO, say as a second computer in the living room or bedroom the iMac would be perfect.

But for the non high end comsumer the iMac is too expensive and too cold and impersonal. I think Apple's simply ahead of it's time yet again.

A redesign that's cheaper to manufacture and designed to get a little more emotional reaction (my mom needs to say "awwww" when she sees it) while retaining the ergonimics should sell very well.

[achmafooma]

I don't know about this... it seems such a great design.

The price could come down some, the specs could improve some, but from a design standpoint the dome iMac is still absolutely lovely, if you ask me.

Slot-loading optical drive would be a nice touch... as would bluetooth and all the other goodies on the newer hardware.

But Apple hasn't ever really disappointed me, so we'll see :-)

[LordMord]

G5 in imac...with speedbumps on the G5s...nice :D

[mstur]

Originally posted by achmafooma
I don't know about this... it seems such a great design.

The price could come down some, the specs could improve some, but from a design standpoint the dome iMac is still absolutely lovely, if you ask me.

You really found the core of the problem: The current design is expensive to produce, thus no low price.

What Apple really needs is a small, inexpensive G4 Mac with built-in TFT display.

INEXPENSIVE !!! Not cool ...

So if you like the design of the current iMac G4, go and get one ! (As I did two years ago, buying my four Cube G4s).

;-)

[PyroTurtle]

i agree, tablet!!! i want a tablet!
holographic could be fun as well, i wish! maybe one of those psudo-3d displays apple put some money into awhile ago...

[greenstork]

Ideally they will offer a consumer-priced headless system akin to the cube. I could see this in addition to a beautiful all-in-one system like the current iMac.

In order to really get PC users to switch, Apple needs to offer an inexpensive system, that is also expandable. I have many PC friends who say two things. 1) Macs are too expensive for me 2) What do I do with my monitor? If they are looking to buy a low price system they are forced to scrap their monitor and start from scratch. Indeed they would save $200-300 if they could purchase a headless iMac.

I have a 333 MHz iMac at work and it's going on 4 years old. Already the monitor has been replaced (and it's still old and blurry) and the RAM maxed out and it still doesn't run OS X with the programs that I need it to at work. If we could afford to upgrade, we would, it's a non-profit. Granted today's iMacs can hold a lot more RAM and run OS X but perhaps 2-3 years from now people will be saying the same thing about today's iMacs. I think a headless sytem of some sort would mitigate at least some of these issues. If I could upgrade my monitor, I could easily get a couple more years out of this system.

[Lanbrown]

Originally posted by achmafooma
Slot-loading optical drive would be a nice touch... as would bluetooth and all the other goodies on the newer hardware.

You can get the iMac with BT.

[RichardCarletta]

they taste like grape, orange, lime, strawberry, and blueberry . do they have casing made of fruit rollups ? or are they powdered with kool-aid ? Yuo would have to be careful not to stick your tongue into the superdrive . :p

[bousozoku]

They simply need to redesign the base so that they can fit a G5 in there and keep it from melting everything on the desk.

Could they make it cheaper than it already is? It's possible, given that the G5 design would need fewer support pieces than the current G4 mess.

[mainstreetmark]

I bet they're gonna replace the LCD with a CRT.

That would be exactly as dramatic (well, negative dramatic)

[reyesmac]

All they have to do is make the base about the size of the cube and put a well engineered rotating LCD mounting bracket type thing on the top. The CD drive would be at the base of the unit like it is now. It would be like a bucket with an LCD display that can rotate 180° around the top.... At least, thats how I think it will look like.

[Dahl]

I still consider the latest iMac as "new", so I feel it's almost too early to try and introduce a new design. But if it's turns out to be a very cool design and a great machine, then we can retire the current iMac. :D

[greenstork]

Originally posted by bousozoku

Could they make it cheaper than it already is? It's possible, given that the G5 design would need fewer support pieces than the current G4 mess.

Perhaps it's simply a matter of marketing but I would argue that the perception is that Macs are really expensive.

I know that when you price out systems side-by-side Macs are comparably priced, if not cheaper but that doesn't change the fact that the front of the Dell catalog has EVERY SINGLE COMPUTER PRICED BELOW $1000. Now I know it says starting at $399 and that is far from your average price computer heading out the door but they have created a perception.

I mean, it doesn't take a rocket scientists to compare the two. iMac, starting at $1299 vs Dell starting at $399. For what you get, I know it's cheap but I still think they're not going to gain market share with this marketing strategy. Maybe that's not the goal. I could care less if my PC friends buy a Mac. I am simply saying that if the goal is to increase market share, they have to be more aggressive slashing prices and on entry level systems like the iMac.

[hobbes3113]

Originally posted by Flowbee
Let the tablet rumors begin! (again)

How does a new imac update translate into a flood of tablet rumors? Powerbook update maybe, but not the imac. I imagine the first tablet (if there ever is one) is not going to be a consumer device.

[kb9000]

Originally posted by mainstreetmark
I bet they're gonna replace the LCD with a CRT.

It will probably be CRT Extreme.

[jholzner]

Originally posted by BOOMBA
I think the ony way to make as dramatic a change as from CRT to LCD would be for Apple to price it at what it is worth.
$800.

show me a windows pc that includes a 17" lcd and teh design of the imac that can do what a mac can do with the ilife suite for 800 buck. get real

[jocknerd]

Even under a $1000 without a built-in display. Then Apple will have something for the masses.

[Potus]

My 15" iMac is as sweet as the first day I bought it. The design is great, the ergonomics fantastic (an unrelated injury proved this to me: the ability to change the height and angle of the screen is priceless.

I hope Apple keeps the design and just improves the innards.

[Lancetx]

I'm a big fan of the current design, so I'm not sure if this is good news or not. Either way let's hope it will have a G5 because if it's another G4 based iMac with just a new form factor, it will go over like a lead balloon. I also hope too that it's NOT aluminum either, they should keep the white for the consumer line products...

[kansast]

What was that talk before.. I forget the rumors or the exact specs.. but seems there was some patents that Apple had taken out ? something about glowing displays ? or color displays ? something strange.. just don't remember the specifics ?

[moosecat]

I have to say I have trouble imagining a change as radical as the last iMac change. I believe they have to keep using built-in LCD screens, and it seems like the current iMac is pretty much the pinnacle of design for a computer that includes such a built-in screen. Anyway, my speculation:

What they'll keep: Built-in LCD display; arm that pivots out of a CPU-inclusive base; limited expansion options.

What they'll change: Shape of base (maybe going cube); feature set (CPU; graphics card; port configuration)

What they may or may not change: Color scheme. (It's tempting to say they'll go aluminum, but Apple likes their consumer and pro lines to have distinct looks.)

As for the headless iMac, I agree that it sounds like a good idea. They won't call it an iMac though. Perhaps that could be a fourth model line ... The iMac is the continuation, in form and function, of the original Mac, and I don' t think they'll mess with its general theme of simplicity and all-inclusiveness.

[Dreamail]

Let's take things one step at a time:


First the iMac had an all-in-one design.

Then Apple 'freed' the monitor by putting it on a beautifully crafted silver arm.

Then Apple literally freed the keyboard and mouse by introducing wireless variants.

Now, wouldn't it be the logical next step to completely free the monitor and introduce a wireless display - giving the iMac's screen total freedom?


It wouldn't be a tablet per se. All it would be is an LCD with an iBook battery (or two) plus some fast WiFi networking card.

And for what it's worth, the iMac base unit could even be a cube again!


Imagine this: a small white cube, the iMac base station. Next to it an LCD screen on a stand/charging unit. The LCD could be used landscape or portrait. Or even taken off the stand completely and then used anywhere within a certain radius from the base unit.

People at that point could use it as a sort of tablet with pen input. But they wouldn't have to. They could as well use the wireless keyboard and mouse.


Make sense?

[kansast]

I found a Macrumors thread that talked about some patent and apple and LEDs case changing colors or some such ?

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=36118&highlight=patent+apple

[arn]

here's the MacRumors article on the Apple Dynamic Ornamental Appearance Patent:

http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/12/20021227191929.shtml

[BOOMBA]

Originally posted by jholzner
show me a windows pc that includes a 17" lcd and teh design of the imac that can do what a mac can do with the ilife suite for 800 buck. get real

Ok, $850.

[robeen]

we have remote keyboard and mouse - how about remote display? maybe airport extreme can do it? I don't know - but it would be cool to have a headless box in my cupboard and have my monitor, keyboard, mouse nice and light and completely transportable, from the couch to the desk....

that's my fantasy...I agree with others that a cheap box, but with a coupled monitor for those of us that like the style of the complete design would be great. But not so cheap as to compromise the excellence.

Rob

[seffis]

Blue Dalmatian.

[Jerry Spoon]

Redesign can't hurt if it lowers the price. I've got a few friends who were in the market for a new mac. They didn't need a high end system b/c they weren't doing a lot of heavy work on it. When it was all said and done, they bought an emac. Why? Price was the #1 reason.

[Hawthorne]

Originally posted by seffis
Blue Dalmatian. Flower Power!

Oh, the horror. The horror.

[agentmouthwash]

I was looking at my sister's orange iMac the other day and thought to myself "wow I miss those colorful bubble computers." I really hope Apple brings back the color!

[Dont Hurt Me]

Originally posted by greenstork
Ideally they will offer a consumer-priced headless system akin to the cube. I could see this in addition to a beautiful all-in-one system like the current iMac.

In order to really get PC users to switch, Apple needs to offer an inexpensive system, that is also expandable. I have many PC friends who say two things. 1) Macs are too expensive for me 2) What do I do with my monitor? If they are looking to buy a low price system they are forced to scrap their monitor and start from scratch. Indeed they would save $200-300 if they could purchase a headless iMac.

I have a 333 MHz iMac at work and it's going on 4 years old. Already the monitor has been replaced (and it's still old and blurry) and the RAM maxed out and it still doesn't run OS X with the programs that I need it to at work. If we could afford to upgrade, we would, it's a non-profit. Granted today's iMacs can hold a lot more RAM and run OS X but perhaps 2-3 years from now people will be saying the same thing about today's iMacs. I think a headless sytem of some sort would mitigate at least some of these issues. If I could upgrade my monitor, I could easily get a couple more years out of this system. Bingo,lets hope for a consumer G5 Imac that can be bought with or without display and is upgradeable. this has hurt imac sales for so long. I love the current imac but that arm alone must cost a 100 bucks! the need a high performance consumer line instead of forcing the consumer to go with the pro line simply because of lack of expansion on the imac.

[applebum]

Originally posted by hobbes3113
How does a new imac update translate into a flood of tablet rumors? Powerbook update maybe, but not the imac. I imagine the first tablet (if there ever is one) is not going to be a consumer device.

I will tell you how - what if the Imac continues to look as it does today, however.......the screen would also be a tablet that you could unhook and take with you. That would justify a higher cost, while also making it much more functional. Now that would be truly cool. Probably won't happen, but it is nice to dream. :)

[baby duck monge]

wow. the thing that strikes me the most about this thread is the number of newbiew posting to it. not that i have a problem with that, as we were all newbies at one point and the only way to change that is to post. but it's not just that they're posting, but that they're almost all posting about wireless diplays (which no one else seems to be mentioning). crazy trend.

to respond to those ideas, though, a wireless display (as in one without its own processor, HD, memory, and whatnot) is not feasible at this moment. there have been numerous discussions about the amount of information that would need to be transfered from the base to the monitor, and there is no wireless solution at the moment that is powerful enough. now if apple came up with that at the same time as a redesign... they would just be my hero. unfortunately, it seems like a wireless display that gets its information from a seperate computing base it some ways off...

keep dreaming, though! as soon as we stop deaming, there will be no need for innovation.

[achmafooma]

Originally posted by Lanbrown
You can get the iMac with BT.
Ah yes... I stand corrected. I must not have been paying attention when they added that option.

I thought it just came with the little external bluetooth gizmo, if you wanted it.

Well in that case -- lower price, faster stuff :-) It would be nice if the eMac prices could come down a little, and the iMac come down to about where the eMac is now (maybe a little more).

I only wish the 17" iMac had been around when I first switched in 2001. I mean, don't get me wrong, I love my Quicksilver 733, but the only reason I got the G4 tower was because the iMac at the time had such a little monitor (15" crt).

I still can't imagine how they can improve drastically on what they have. It might be nice, as some have mentioned, to have a headless system for consumers. Maybe the dome, without the arm or LCD, for $800 or something. But I think there's still a good market for the iMac as-is.

Just faster :-)

[SilentPanda]

Originally posted by Powerbook G5
I am still taken with the current 17" LCD beauty that my girlfriend has.

Somebody please... put this on a Valentine's day card... :)

[fabsgwu]

I'd imagine it would be easier to get the G5 into the iMac than the powerbook, or at least not as difficult to engineer: not as many power, cooling issues. Other than that, a wireless display might be cool, but I would worry a bit about quality and performance...

I'll just let Apple surprise me either way :)

[dongmin]

Probably the main impetus for a design change is to accomodate teh G5. The current form factor can't house the G5 and the kind of cooling you need for it. It remains to be seen what kind of heat issues we'll have with the next round of G5s. But for sure, if they want a G5 iMac before next summer, they'll need a new case.

tablet mac -- won't replace the imac, but could still happen. i'm sure though that an apple 'tablet' won't be anything like what's out there now; it'll be nothing like what we've ever imagined.

headless consumer mac -- only if there is a sure way of Apple making a profit off of it. i don't see apple doing it simply b/c the consumer demand is there. they have to worry about it eating into Power Mac sales.

[BOOMBA]

Originally posted by jholzner
show me a windows pc that includes a 17" lcd and teh design of the imac that can do what a mac can do with the ilife suite for 800 buck. get real

On Dell just now I was able to configure a dimension with DVD+R/RW for $900, with a free 17 inch flat panel. (offer expires today)

a similar iMac costs $1799.

I like the design of the iMac, but I am not so sure that having a built-in display is that big a benefit to most people,
especially since flat panels are a bit easier to break. I like having a monitor I can replace separately from the CPU.

So aside from the MAC operating system and iApps, which are admittedly better than Windows offerings in my opinion, there isn't much going for the iMac except looks.

So that means to buy an iMac you would be willing to spend TWICE what a PC costs.

Does it look THAT good?
No. It looks BETTER, but not enough to double it's value.

I think ALL Apple users should realize that we are paying almost 0.5 to 2 times what it costs for a PC across the board to buy a similar MAC. And aside from the G5 towers, we are still getting spanked in performance.

We are paying for 2 things

1) design/looks
2) the OS and "free" apps

Now, I say "free" because we have to pay EVERY YEAR $129 for the new OS and FREE apps, so ....

What do we get?

We get looks, and as shallow as I am, I am not paying twice as much for an iMac as a similar PC.

I got the G5 because for price and performance it is about as good as you can get on either side.

iMac is not a good deal.

Sorry.

Needs to cost half what it does.

[fabsgwu]

Originally posted by BOOMBA
with a free 17 inch flat panel.

But is it widescreen?:cool:

And uh, also: you get a more stable OS and the joy of ditching Micro$oft, that's priceless.

[Dont Hurt Me]

everyone is getting excited but i wonder how solid this rumor is and the validity of it? We all know moto had screwed apple for a long time and a G5 imac is no surprise, new imac sales never were close to the original crt imac sales. I think they need to bring in the fun factor again. current imac cost to much and though terrific doesnt have that appeal that all those juicy colors did with the original. really wanted a orange one but wifey said no way jose! so hard to say what apple will do. G5 cube would be fine with me.

[billyboy]

The remote screen sounds a good call. Its on a wish list of mine for a future Powerbook release. An integrated computer like a laptop or iMac is the next generation of "desktop" computer , but if you want to have the slim line brains of the operation off the desk as you would a tower, and just work with a screen (and keyboard) on the desk, that means you have to buy a second screen - and that costs. Disconnect the "in-built" screen, and you have a very useful computer.

Maybe space is not a problenm in the States, but the Japanese would love it.

[whooleytoo]

A 1.6GHz G5 with an upgradable graphics card (if you want to have any appeal to 3D gamers!), and a cheap price tag, and I'll buy one!

[iPC]

Originally posted by fabsgwu
But is it widescreen?:cool:

And uh, also: you get a more stable OS and the joy of ditching Micro$oft, that's priceless.
Not to the average consumer that wants to check their email and surf the web. If you made $25k per year, would you buy a $900 or $1900 computer that meets your needs. Not accounting for any bs factors (iApps, OS, "style", etc). $900 wins every time. Apple has shown for the last 10 years that they haven't got the foggiest idea how to build and price a system for the market.

Heck, if Apple.com didn't have the refurb section of their store (with 1yr warranties), I would probably not own the items in my sig...

[kangaroo]

Sony (W & V series vaios) & Gateway (Profile/Media Center) all-in-ones, for example, sport the computer mounted directly behind the LCD. Seems like a logical design move to get the box (dome) off the desk and hide it behind a floating display. In fact, all they need to due is take a powerbook, sans display/keyboard and slap it on the back of a 20" display and they're practically there. Hmm, how much should I charge Apple for that one? :cool:

[themadchemist]

isn't it clear?

They're going to move to a more industrial design. They started with the Xserve, moved on to the G5, and now to rest of the systems.

The artsy design is over, and its now time for less curves and more corners, so to speak.

I just hope they don't tamper with the displays too much, though. They're awesome!

[AmigoMac]

I'll get one, for sure will be those imacs with slot drive and different colors like the classic one but with TFT... I'll get a blueberry ;) .... I still continue with my 20 years theory...:)

[jeremy.king]

Originally posted by Dreamail
...It wouldn't be a tablet per se. All it would be is an LCD with an iBook battery (or two) plus some fast WiFi networking card.

I really like this idea Dreamail....sort of like the Viewsonic Wireless Smart Display....http://www.viewsonic.com/products/airpanel_airpanel100.htm

[Floop]

I heard from a friend of mine, that people are getting confused.

You see, they are mistaking what can appear to be a compactly redesigned iMac for what is in fact a handheld PDA device that Apple is prototyping.

This device is slightly larger than the iPod, but unlike the iPod, it's screen uses almost the entire area on one of the faces.

It will feature a slimmed down version of Mac OS X - current builds show it using some form of Jaguar (it still has Aqua, not the brushed metal of Panther - and it will allow pen-driven input using Inkwell, similar to the Newton.

The name is tentatively 'iWalk' but this may change. Do a search on google and you will find out all about it.

regards


Floop

[BOOMBA]

Originally posted by fabsgwu
But is it widescreen?:cool:

And uh, also: you get a more stable OS and the joy of ditching Micro$oft, that's priceless.

I already pay $129 a year on top of the hardware costs for that more stable OS and the joy of ditching microsoft. Apple basically has a subscription OS like LINDOWS. they keep changing their OS JUST ENOUGH each year that you have to buy the new one, because suddenly all the iApps will "require" it to run.

My argument was:

Let's say I just bought the better OS. (Mac for $129.)

now why do I need to pay twice as much to run it as windows?

Windows Hardware doesn't suck, just the
look and the OS.
I already bought the OS, so now it is just the "look" that is lacking.

Why pay TWICE AS MUCH FOR THE LOOK OF IT?!?!?!

[MacBoyX]

Hmmm...A G5 iMac? I for one hope not. The problem with Macs these days are that we all want machines priced differently with the same specs. We want G5 iMacs and G5 PowerMacs and we expect them to be the same but cost different. I'd still like to see G3's + AltiVec t 1.4 Ghz.

I also think apple needs to continue the current PowerMac G4 line as a cheap headless system. Put 1.25 and 1.42's in it...and sell em cheap.

As far as the wireless displays...it's not so far off...there are PC versions...

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/smartdisplay/evaluation/products.asp

hmm?

macboyX

[macMaestro]

Wow. I wireless display would be exceedingly cool. If Apple could get it to work, that is...

...But in my opinion, there is no way you could do it with current wireless technology, and next generation wireless technology would still probably not be enough to handle it. But what if you put the graphics infrastructure on the display? I don't know a great deal about the dirty aspects of computing, but if you're no longer transmitting the video wirelessly, just the data that the graphics card turns into video, this could lower the bandwidth needed. Maybe. I'm not really sure. Anyone out there know if this would work?

But, you'd need a power source anyway, and 4 AA batteries just ain't gonna cut it. It would be incredibly cool though, to have three units sitting on your desk (Display, Keyboard, Mouse) all wirelessly connected to a computer hidden from view.

[reyesmac]

Originally posted by Jerry Spoon
Redesign can't hurt if it lowers the price.

I can't think of many product redesigns from Apple that were priced less than what they replaced. Look at the G5, or the iMac when it was redesigned, or any powermac after a redesign. This new iMac will be more expensive. The only reason the current iMac is cheap is because Apple can't charge more and still have them sell well, not at its current speed anyway.

[lmalave]

Originally posted by Floop
I heard from a friend of mine, that people are getting confused.

You see, they are mistaking what can appear to be a compactly redesigned iMac for what is in fact a handheld PDA device that Apple is prototyping.

This device is slightly larger than the iPod, but unlike the iPod, it's screen uses almost the entire area on one of the faces.

It will feature a slimmed down version of Mac OS X - current builds show it using some form of Jaguar (it still has Aqua, not the brushed metal of Panther - and it will allow pen-driven input using Inkwell, similar to the Newton.

The name is tentatively 'iWalk' but this may change. Do a search on google and you will find out all about it.

regards


Floop

This rumor has been around for ages. The iWalk has proven to be a hoax. There is absolutely no reason for Apple to make a handheld device when cell phones are taking over that market. I know ever since I got a phone that was compatible with iSync (sync with Address Book and iCal), I haven't even touched my Palm.

I think if Inkwell is going to be used for anything, it'll be for a detachable smart display as has been suggested already. Touch screens are much more expensive than regular LCDs, though, so I imagine this will be a high-end option on the iMacs. Like, we're talking a $300-$500 add-on.

Besides that, I think the case will be redesigned for the G5. I don't know if it will be aluminum, though - I think they want to separate the "Power" line from the "i" line, and the Aluminum is now the distinguishing feature of the Power line. More likely, the iMacs will have the same color scheme as the redesigned iBooks that are supposed to debut next month. Maybe the iBooks will also incorporate the ornamental LED idea? This will maybe make the iBook and iMac look more "cuddly" as one poster above suggested.

[Dont Hurt Me]

i would get away from wireless displays etc everyone, if you want to carry it with you buy a laptop, this is about a Desk top system so a removable display makes no sense. what apple needs is a g5 imac with a kickbutt video card that can be upgraded and a pci slot. G5 cube please,be it clear,multicolor,or aluminum or painted aluminum, just give me a small upgradable g5 with cool cool styling( unlike G5powermac) at a good price and the world will make a path to your door apple.

[lmalave]

Originally posted by macMaestro
Wow. I wireless display would be exceedingly cool. If Apple could get it to work, that is...

...But in my opinion, there is no way you could do it with current wireless technology, and next generation wireless technology would still probably not be enough to handle it. But what if you put the graphics infrastructure on the display? I don't know a great deal about the dirty aspects of computing, but if you're no longer transmitting the video wirelessly, just the data that the graphics card turns into video, this could lower the bandwidth needed. Maybe. I'm not really sure. Anyone out there know if this would work?

But, you'd need a power source anyway, and 4 AA batteries just ain't gonna cut it. It would be incredibly cool though, to have three units sitting on your desk (Display, Keyboard, Mouse) all wirelessly connected to a computer hidden from view.

This is basically exactly how the Viewsonic smart display works. It's basically just a small computer that is running Windows Remote Desktop. The Windows remote desktop has amazing compression, though - I've gotten it to work pretty well even over a 56K modem. Maybe Apple will release a new version of its own Remote Desktop that improves the compression to be more in line with what Windows can achieve now. Maybe Apple can do something amazing with Quartz? Maybe with Airport Extreme and a graphics-card accelerated Quartz Extreme, Apple can make it work. But then we're talking about the "Smart Display" basically being a full-fledged tablet computer...

[robeen]

Originally posted by baby duck monge
wow. the thing that strikes me the most about this thread is the number of newbiew posting to it.

to respond to those ideas, though, a wireless display (as in one without its own processor, HD, memory, and whatnot) is not feasible at this moment. there have been numerous discussions about the amount of information that would need to be transfered from the base to the monitor, and there is no wireless solution at the moment that is powerful enough. now if apple came up with that at the same time as a redesign... they would just be my hero. unfortunately, it seems like a wireless display that gets its information from a seperate computing base it some ways off...

keep dreaming, though! as soon as we stop deaming, there will be no need for innovation.

As one of those newbies, I'd like to resond 8-) I may be a newbiew, but I'm also a Ph.D physicist, so my request, I hope, has some grounding in reality 8-)


whilst not reasonable for a "raw" display: if you borrow the idea of a remote X-server and consider a "cocoa server" i.e. a display that could turn high level cocoa commands into a rendered display, then you might still be able to get good performance over a wireless protocol....
(so it would have some stripped down processor, but no need for HD, large memory etc)

now that may mean the display is too expensive etc etc but as you say...may as well keep dreaming!!

Rob

ooops -just added: seems last few posts are addressing this idea also...

[mrsebastian]

let the speculation begin!!! it always make me laugh that we all start foaming at the mouth at a rumor, that we have no idea will come true... but i'm no better :D

so here's my prediction: i expect a new studio display as the form factor base. with the g5 this form will allow the monster heat sinks to extend out of the back (apple will of course make 'em look pretty). a dvd/cdrw drive will come out of the side and will feature the usual plugs in back. i would expect the g5 to be at 1.6 or 1.8 ghz, while the towers have been bumped up to top off around 3ghz.

anyway my two cents on what i wouldn't mind seeing.

[acj]

The new imac will turn into the only single G5. Duals only for powermac.

[choogheem]

LED/OLED display? G5 processor? I'm just bummed, waiting for a new computer and then finally settling on the new iMac and now a NEW, completely revamped one in 2004. Oh well - I'm happy with what I've got.

[DGFan]

Originally posted by kingjr3
I really like this idea Dreamail....sort of like the Viewsonic Wireless Smart Display....http://www.viewsonic.com/products/airpanel_airpanel100.htm

That is what I would like....

A small, cheap cube forming the main computer.
Then you could add as many wireless display (on an arm like the current iMac - I hate stands) and/or wireless keyboard/mouse (maybe connecting to the display or main unit via bluetooth).

You could also use one wired monitor, keyboard, and mouse if you chose to.

So you could go cheap by doing:

base unit + wired keyboard + wired mouse (headless - any monitor you want)

Or you could go a little upscale by doing:

base unit + multiple (wireless monitor + wireless keyboard + wireless mouse)

You could have several people all logged into the same base unit!

My only question is, what kind of range you could get on the wireless connection and still have it useful.

[yamabushi]

I'm sure Apple is going to make the new iMac appealing. I just hope that they can reduce their costs dramatically so that the price can come down. We also don't really need two different sizes of displays for the iMac. That just makes it more confusing for the average consumer since the display is such a large part of the final price. The reality of the current enironment is that if the price is close to $2000 it will be considered a model for power users. The price should be no more than $1200 in order to have broad consumer appeal. This is not an unreasonable price if improvements are made in the manufacturing process as well as the the entire supply chain.

[Sabbath]

The part of this rumour we are all referring to is comment that the redesign " is said to be as dramatic as the shift from the CRT iMac to the LCD iMac."

So we think about the screen, surely there is not much apple can do, the current iMac design is brilliant, no other comparable screen (to my knowledge) is as adjustable (plus the fact its widescreen (17") which is a much more natural shape for our eyes) & hence comfortable to use. The obvious other option would be to remove it and have a headless system maybe with an optional attachable screen, so you don't lose deskspace if you use the apple screen. But then why would Apple introduce a new imac as effectively a new cube, surely that wont happen? Otherwise a wireless screen, is just not feasible to the standard of operation we expect from apple, and surely they cant make that small base hold up a cinema display

So most likely its something else, but what? Its surely going to be a G5 or a new IBM G3 based chip, otherwise apple would stick with the current form factor, so what surprises could they have?

Something consumer orientated, so maybe an expansion on the digital hub idea, it has to do something extra to command the extra price over an emac or PC. From my experience the current iMac has the “cuddly” factor, its just too expensive for what it is, & often people who would buy iMacs end up buying PC laptops as they want the aio form factor (mostly for the fact it takes up very little space) but a laptop in addition offers portability.

I really have no idea what they’re going to produce, but I can’t wait to see.

Mr Ive please keep some of our products arty and white
:D

[BOOMBA]

Originally posted by Sabbath

So most likely its something else, but what? Its surely going to be a G5 or a new IBM G3 based chip, otherwise apple would stick with the current form factor, so what surprises could they have?

Something consumer orientated, so maybe an expansion on the digital hub idea, it has to do something extra to command the extra price over an emac or PC. From my experience the current iMac has the “cuddly” factor, its just too expensive for what it is, & often people who would buy iMacs end up buying PC laptops as they want the aio form factor (mostly for the fact it takes up very little space) but a laptop in addition offers portability.

I really have no idea what they’re going to produce, but I can’t wait to see.

Mr Ive please keep some of our products arty and white
:D


This "something else" is when they will introduce that odd LED display technology that let's the computer change color.

Maybe then you can CHOOSE what color your iMac is day-to-day. either white (no lights turned on), or any color you want depending on the day of the week or your mood.

[BOOMBA]

Originally posted by baby duck monge
wow. the thing that strikes me the most about this thread is the number of newbiew posting to it. not that i have a problem with that, as we were all newbies at one point and the only way to change that is to post.



Well, when do turn from a Newbie?
200 posts?

Some of us have jobs....

Not ME, but some of us.

[BOOMBA]

Originally posted by BOOMBA
Well, when do turn from a Newbie?
200 posts?

Some of us have jobs....

Not ME, but some of us.
Whoops!
Nevermind!
It seems I am now a "MEMBER"!

Guess I just made my last Newbie post!

SWEEEEET.

[srobert]

Originally posted by kangaroo
Sony (W & V series vaios) & Gateway (Profile/Media Center) all-in-ones, for example, sport the computer mounted directly behind the LCD. Seems like a logical design move to get the box (dome) off the desk and hide it behind a floating display. In fact, all they need to due is take a powerbook, sans display/keyboard and slap it on the back of a 20" display and they're practically there. Hmm, how much should I charge Apple for that one? :cool:


That's about what Jonathan Ives initially presented to Steve and Steve sent him back to the drawing board with the sunflower concept.

[rainman::|:|]

Originally posted by jocknerd
Even under a $1000 without a built-in display. Then Apple will have something for the masses.

kind of misunderstand what iMac means, eh? iMac is an ALL IN ONE, it would never be sold without display built-in. But i agree that they need to keep the current price point or lower it while increasing speed... a G5 is a ways off, but the G5 iMac will have a new form factor. But it's too soon for that, I'd say late 2004 is the earliest we could expect anything like that. Minimal speed bumps and perhaps form factor tweaks until then.

pnw

[eclipse525]

I'll bet everything that, it's NOT going to be that radically different. My guess is that it will feel similar to the current ones. It won't be white but rather a design with the aluminum look. This is because it will most likely have a G5 in it and perhaps, slightly larger base for the heat factor. Ofcourse the spec's over all will be improved BUT will cost around what they are priced at now.

OH, Tablets won't be happening. It just doesn't make sense. It would sabotage their Laptop line.


~e

[Moonlight]

actually to get a comparable Dell it is about $1479, not $999 and it is butt ugly!


Originally posted by BOOMBA
On Dell just now I was able to configure a dimension with DVD+R/RW for $900, with a free 17 inch flat panel. (offer expires today)

a similar iMac costs $1799.

I like the design of the iMac, but I am not so sure that having a built-in display is that big a benefit to most people,
especially since flat panels are a bit easier to break. I like having a monitor I can replace separately from the CPU.

So aside from the MAC operating system and iApps, which are admittedly better than Windows offerings in my opinion, there isn't much going for the iMac except looks.

So that means to buy an iMac you would be willing to spend TWICE what a PC costs.

Does it look THAT good?
No. It looks BETTER, but not enough to double it's value.

I think ALL Apple users should realize that we are paying almost 0.5 to 2 times what it costs for a PC across the board to buy a similar MAC. And aside from the G5 towers, we are still getting spanked in performance.

We are paying for 2 things

1) design/looks
2) the OS and "free" apps

Now, I say "free" because we have to pay EVERY YEAR $129 for the new OS and FREE apps, so ....

What do we get?

We get looks, and as shallow as I am, I am not paying twice as much for an iMac as a similar PC.

I got the G5 because for price and performance it is about as good as you can get on either side.

iMac is not a good deal.

Sorry.

Needs to cost half what it does.

[BOOMBA]

Originally posted by kangaroo
Sony (W & V series vaios) & Gateway (Profile/Media Center) all-in-ones, for example, sport the computer mounted directly behind the LCD. Seems like a logical design move to get the box (dome) off the desk and hide it behind a floating display. In fact, all they need to due is take a powerbook, sans display/keyboard and slap it on the back of a 20" display and they're practically there. Hmm, how much should I charge Apple for that one? :cool:

If you put all that weight up on the "floating" display, how will you support it?

A 30 lb display isn't going to FLOAT on anything. and no arm could support it and be as mobile as the current arm.

You would still need either a big heavy DOME for weight, or a large footprint stand so that thing don't "tip me over and pour me out".

[whooleytoo]

Originally posted by MacBoyX
Hmmm...A G5 iMac? I for one hope not. The problem with Macs these days are that we all want machines priced differently with the same specs.

Well, Apple - as the only Mac maker - is always going to have difficulties trying to please everyone.

The problem is, there are no fast, budget Mac's (ideally suited for gamers) like on the PC side. I can get a 2.4GHz Dell P4 for 850 euros here (includes monitor, DVD+RW, and GeForce4MX), and then add a faster graphics card and surround sound easily. Or, I could spend 1,450 on the cheapest iMac, and have a slower games machine, with no option to add faster graphics cards, or surround sound.

I know you can dismiss that as "that's just gamers", but I don't think Apple can afford to have 1.2 or 1.4 GHz G4s competing for attention with 2.4GHz PC's that are a lot cheaper.

[jocknerd]

Originally posted by acj
The new imac will turn into the only single G5. Duals only for powermac.

The G4 is dead. It just can't compete with the Intel/AMD crowd. The consumer market is different than the professional market. Most of the G5 owners are saying that the G4 is perfect for the iMac. Thats BS! Just because its smokes the G4 doesn't mean it should be exclusive to the Power Macs.

Consumers are comparing the iMac to Intel/AMD systems. There is no way 90% of them will buy an iMac with a slow G4 over a 2 Ghz PC that cost half as much.

If Apple IS redesigning the iMac, there is a reason for it. Its going to get the G5. Let me reiterate, the G4 will be history. My guess is that by this time next year, the G4 will be extinct on all new Apple systems.

[rt_brained]

Oh please, oh please, oh please...

[srobert]

Originally posted by rt_brained
Oh please, oh please, oh please...

Thanks a lot rt_brained for showing me this ugly as hell... thing. Now I gotta go wash my eyes. ^_^

[BOOMBA]

Originally posted by srobert
Thanks a lot rt_brained for showing me this ugly as hell... thing. Now I gotta go wash my eyes. ^_^

WASH THEM!
oh, that was a better idea.

I actually TORE MY EYES out.
Well, hindsight's 20/20.

And that's the only sight I'll have from now on I guess.

[reyesmac]

Apple has two choices...

Design it so it is cheaper to produce and more people will buy it and like it like the original iMac.

Or make it the most powerful Mac system under $1,800 but sell less because that is still too expensive for a computer that would be less powerful than a G5 powermac.

I think they are redesigning it to make it cheaper to produce. But I don't think the consumer will benefit from that until its 2nd revision.

[pigami]

It seems to me with the current LCD iMac Apple lost their focus on the primary objective of the original iMac:
Gaining market share, which they've obviously failed to do with the LCD imac being way too expensive.

The current iMac is several years too early considering manufacturing costs.

It has an expensive display, an expensive stainless steel arm
and an expensive motherboard being so miniaturized.

They should have learned with the Cube that when it comes to actually SELLING CPU's, price IS the main factor,not sophistication or advanced industrial design.

Not to mention their scarse esoteric ads that are at the opposite of what Dell and Gateway customers expect in a computer ad : VALUE .

I think they should have marketed the current eMac as the "new" iMac with an aggressive ad campain focusing on its incredible value at $800 .

To get the PC masses to switch they also need an inexpensive displayless box ( be it a cube or a pyramid...) so they can use their old CRT or LCD monitors and buy it for $500 using current Emac parts...

With an aggressive down-to-earth ad campaing focusing on the superiority of OS X , iLife apps, G4 speed etc and the incredible value , they could improve their market share substantially.

They could keep the LCD iMac as a second way to draw people in the Apple stores. Just like going to the Chevy dealer to see the new Corvette but ending buying a Cavalier, by the millions...

just my 2 cents

Pierre

[airbag]

WOW!

- Wireless, tablet Display
- Color-changing casing
- G5 prosessor

And all this for less than $1000 ??

Forget it! :D Not going to happen.

I think, and hope, the basic shape of the iMac won't change much ... it's just too brilliant as it is.

[FlamDrag]

Everyone that wants a basic no-frills headless mac that costs less than $1000...

just get an iBook. Plug in your monitor and go.

G4's will not be gone by this time next year. Sorry.

G5 iBooks next year? SURE. :rolleyes: I'm not saying that it couldn't happen, but I seriously doubt it.

THey would have to have 2-3 GHz PM's (alleged to be the plan)
1ish Ghz PB's and iMacs

800mhz G5 iBooks... I find this highly improbable.

[iHack]

Originally posted by jocknerd
Even under a $1000 without a built-in display. Then Apple will have something for the masses.

Apple is not going to make a product for the masses. It may want to double it's market share, but that can be still quite elitist (what, 5-8 %?). The masses are not cool. The Dells of this world are for the masses.

Apples selling point is that it is not for the masses. Think different.

M.

[iHack]

It's going to be a headless iMac: the iBall!!

M.

[plinkoman]

it has got to have a G5 in it, why the hell would they go through all the work of redesigning it, just to have to redesign it again 6 months to a year later to accomodate the G5. it'd certainly be alot earlier for the imac then i expected, but if it is true that they are redesigning it, then it is a G5

[tex210]

So if Nintendo can sell a $99 headless ppc console, why can't we have a $299 unit that runs g3's ? Make it ugly and make it quickly. 600 mhz min for isight. itunes, imovie, and panther. I know Apple makes money off the hardware, but come on, this tech is old.... it should be cheap. I want a G5, but I know i will pay out my nose when I get one, something should be available for joe blo who is not a gamer, and doesn't need to do the work Pixar is doing. O.k. $499? I bought my first crt for about $1400 w/ extras, later bought a second for the office new for around $600 bucks, keep that price moving down! Want market share? Look at nintendo.
A device like this would still make a web appliance look like a toy. You could still photoshop, you would just need to spend quality time with the kids while it works! Come on, we did it in the 90's! Pizza box anyone?

edit: Our ad campaign could be the queen of hearts running around shouting... "Off with her head!"

[FlamDrag]

Originally posted by iHack
Apple is not going to make a product for the masses. It may want to double it's market share, but that can be still quite elitist (what, 5-8 %?). The masses are not cool. The Dells of this world are for the masses.

Apples selling point is that it is not for the masses. Think different.

M.

Hey, finally, someone who understands Apple.

Before people start spewing "THE iPOD IS FOR THE MASSES" no, it's much more elitist and expensive than the other options.

[confusion]

ok, here's another newbie-post :D

i guess the whole thing isn't about a redesigned imac. why? because next year will be a very special anniversary: 1984 - 2004 anyone?

it's going to be the 20th birthday of the mac and i guess apple will have something very nice up it's sleeve to celebrate. i wouldn't be surprised if this is the first sign of it ;)

cheers
confusion

[Dont Hurt Me]

apple screwed up taking the imac upscale,costing more and still unupgradeable and crap butt video card. maybe they will get it one day. the emac should have been the imac, their whole philosophy has been screwed when it comes to marketing imacs,emacs,powermacs hence the 5% market share. maybe this will be a first step to turning it around but again is this article anything more then someones dream?just another rumor

[JediL]

Hi, first post here, will do my best.

I remember an old rumor probably on page 2 about something "big" in early 2004.
It went on to talk about Jan/2004 being the 20th anniversary of the Macintosh and to "think revolutionary".

Perhaps revolutionary new iMac introduced in a Superbowl commericial?

[cubist]

Originally posted by reyesmac
All they have to do is make the base about the size of the cube and put a well engineered rotating LCD mounting bracket type thing on the top. The CD drive would be at the base of the unit like it is now. It would be like a bucket with an LCD display that can rotate 180° around the top.... At least, thats how I think it will look like.

You got it, reyesmac! The big change will be that the display will be optional - the base will be a flat aluminum slab with a place that the display can be attached.

We heard a rumor like this back in the pre-G5 days, and nobody wanted to believe it.

(edit) Argh, I should have read all the other posts, this's already been discussed (altho without the old rumor angle). I'd also like to point out that wireless displays don't have sufficient bandwidth for games or movies.

[kf4wvk]

The only physical improvements I'd make are:

1. Slot-loading CD
2. Small (Film?) Speakers on the sides of the monitor (but keep the external speaker jack).

The reason for #1 is obvious. No tray to break off accidentally or open into your mostly but not all-gone drink.

The logic for suggesting #2 goes towards cable reduction. With BlueTooth, I can have wireless keyboard and mouse. With AirPort I can have wireless networking. If I can lose the speakers, the only cable left is the power cable. This would make it incredibily sexy and give it limited mobility around the house / office.

[greenstork]

Originally posted by BOOMBA


I think ALL Apple users should realize that we are paying almost 0.5 to 2 times what it costs for a PC across the board to buy a similar MAC. And aside from the G5 towers, we are still getting spanked in performance.



Whoh now smart guy. I couldn't agree with you more about the iMac. The equivalent Wintel system is much much cheaper. When you start to get into high performace desktops and notebooks, that Macs are the same price or cheaper than the equivalent PC counterpart. You're just flat wrong here. Do your homework first.

[Steven1621]

hopefully this rumor will manifest itself soon. apple needs to continue to raise the bar with its hardware. this reason alone has been a huge factor in its success.

[Lancetx]

Originally posted by greenstork
Whoh now smart guy. I couldn't agree with you more about the iMac. The equivalent Wintel system is much much cheaper. When you start to get into high performace desktops and notebooks, that Macs are the same price or cheaper than the equivalent PC counterpart. You're just flat wrong here. Do your homework first.

You are correct. PowerMacs and PowerBooks today are pretty much on par price and performance wise with PCs out there that have similar specs. The iMacs do lag a little behind currently, but if you price a comparable Dell with a Celeron processor and their best 17" flat panel display, it comes out to over $1,400. So the iMac at $1,799 is still not that much more expensive for what you actually get.

[jettredmont]

New iMacs.

I don't know how many of you all have noticed, but the latest greatest George Foreman Grills have been copping the old iMac colors -- strawberry, blueberry, etc.

Some see this as a blatant attempt at cashing in on a (fading) fad, and sowing user confusion. I mean, we *all* know at least one person who came home with their oh-so-conveniently-sized box, plugged in what they thought was an iBook, sat down on their couch for a little wireless internet surfing, and got the surprise of their life when they found their iBook's keyboard had been replaced with a flesh-searing grill, right?

Well, anyways. That's what they *want* you to think.

You see, that was really just Step One in the Apple takeover of the George Foreman Grill company. Step Two is Total Integration.

The New iMac will sport not one, not two, but *8* G5 processors. No fans, just one gloriously heat-disspating teflon-lined surface. The juices just drip away, leaving lean, mean, and above all nutritious grilled foods in your new iMac.

But wait! There's More!

Not only will you be able to grill with your new iMac, but you'll also be able to burn CDs and DVDs just like the pros! Simply insert your raw CD into the top slot of your new iMac, wait ten seconds, flip the CD, wait ten seconds more, and you'll have one satisfyingly burnt disk, perfect for parties!

Call now! Supplies are limitted!



* Product not advised for computing applications. Contents may be hot; use caution while opening. The George Foreman Apple Computer Inc Company hereby resolves itself of any and all responsibility for lost, cauterized, charred, or otherwise damaged fingers, toes, arms, thighs, and other body parts, not excluding the eyes, nose, and throat. Please avoid computing in your underwear.

[pjkelnhofer]

Originally posted by Moonlight
actually to get a comparable Dell it is about $1479, not $999 and it is butt ugly!
Don't forget to add in the all the Dell equivalents to the iLife software:
iTunes - Dell Jukebox PLUS +$20
iPhoto - Dell Picture Studio, Image Expert Premium +$30
iMovie - Dell Movie Studio Plus +$90
iDVD - MyDVD Dlx +$30
That is an extra $170 in software that comes with the iMac.
Pretty good deal if you ask me.

[airbag]

Originally posted by BOOMBA
I think ALL Apple users should realize that we are paying almost 0.5 to 2 times what it costs for a PC across the board to buy a similar MAC. And aside from the G5 towers, we are still getting spanked in performance.



... and still we can't wait to buy them!:D

I really hate all this talk about Macs vs "similar" PCs.
THERE ARE NO SIMILAR PCs! Maybe performance- and speed-wise, but Mac-buyers are buying much more than just MHz!

Apple knows this, and know how to make money on it.

[greenstork]

Originally posted by FlamDrag
Everyone that wants a basic no-frills headless mac that costs less than $1000...

just get an iBook. Plug in your monitor and go.

G4's will not be gone by this time next year. Sorry.

G5 iBooks next year? SURE. :rolleyes: I'm not saying that it couldn't happen, but I seriously doubt it.

THey would have to have 2-3 GHz PM's (alleged to be the plan)
1ish Ghz PB's and iMacs

800mhz G5 iBooks... I find this highly improbable.

I'm sorry buddy, but without Altivec, you're not even close to competing with what $1000 can buy you on the PC side. Forget about gaming altogether.

[the_dalex]

Random thoughts, out of order...

1) Nintendo can't sell the system for $99 and make money, since it costs them more to build it. Unless Apple wants to charge licensing fees just to create software for the platform, they can't realistically drop hardware prices. They just don't have the iron grip on their software market that Nintendo does, and if they did they would kill it.

2) Wireless displays running Remote Desktop are suitable for applications but can't do any real multimedia (video, games, etc) due to bandwidth restrictions. I use Remote Desktop for OS X at work to log into a Win2k server to run the Windows-only apps that we need, and performance is definitely better than Virtual PC, but the screen refresh is visible even over 100Mb ethernet. In fact, we use one 1.8Ghz Gateway desktop and a dozen old iMacs to do work that would have required us to buy a dozen new PCs. We dodged that bullet...

3) The handheld PDA market is dead. Cellphone convergence is here, which will meet the needs of 95% of all consumers. There will be a niche demand for a handheld multimedia system with some computer functions, but it will not be a mass-market item. There's a point where you just buy a 12" laptop, because it can do so much more. I don't expect Apple to create another device between the iPod and 12" laptop unless they decide to really move into the whole multimedia thing, which brings me to...

4) Maybe they are going to integrate video recording and playback, like with Microsoft's Media Center thingy? Then you can download movies via iTunes or a similar service and keep track of all of your shows, burning them to DVD for storage... That would be a box I would buy, because I know it would just work, unlike the Windows ones which will run into the horrors of open hardware platforms...

[greenstork]

Originally posted by FlamDrag
Hey, finally, someone who understands Apple.

Before people start spewing "THE iPOD IS FOR THE MASSES" no, it's much more elitist and expensive than the other options.

If you don't think that Apple is advertising the iPod for the masses, you haven't seen a billboard recently or turned on your TV. Sure, it's expensive, but make no bones about it, apple is trying to monopolize the mp3 player market, for the masses.

[Heltik]

It would be a major revision if they got them up to speed. The 17" model costs a fortune and although the screen is very nice, it doesn't present a balanced system with its slow processor.

I certainly think that they should spend R&D money on improving performance rather than improving what is already by far the best industrial design of any consumer computer.

[sedarby]

Originally posted by plinkoman
it has got to have a G5 in it, why the hell would they go through all the work of redesigning it, just to have to redesign it again 6 months to a year later to accomodate the G5. it'd certainly be alot earlier for the imac then i expected, but if it is true that they are redesigning it, then it is a G5

If the iMac is going G5 then the G5 Powerbooks must be around the corner. I do not believe for a second that Apple would move the iMac to a G5 and leave the Powerbooks with G4's for any appreciable amount of time.

[Dont Hurt Me]

i would say next year will be the year of the G5 --after all this is the future of apple, we will see a shift of all product lines. Moto is on the way out, this isnt a secret and its only logical that powerbooks and imacs move to the g5 in 2004. the g4 isnt bad at 1.25 but since apple charges top price it needs a top cpu and the g4 isnt getting the job done at these slow slow motorola speeds. they really should have had that chip at 2 gigs by now and if they did there would be no complaints but Moto has been napping and dreaming of telephones,cars & appliances while its competitors have been building faster & faster cpu's for computers. Bring on the G5!

[roy_dan]

Actually, it would be possible for iMac to go G5 and leave PB’s at G4 for the next 9 months (which were just upgraded). The iMac is no longer Apple’s lower end desktop, eMac is. I would place iMac as a mid-grade product. Next generation chips usually trickle down from high-end desktops to mid-grade and then onto laptops. It’s a compromise between heat and consumer demand. What else will carry iMac for another two years, G4? When this new iMac is released it will need 2-3 years of product life. Plus a 20" LCD built-in, G5 all for under $1,999 would be killer!

[Dont Hurt Me]

a 20 inch lcd on top of the g5 would be killer, then move a flat panel 17inch not wide screen into the emac with faster g4 and everyone will be happy--- but will you be able to upgrade the imac question again!

[Danger! Will]

I think the prices should be redesigned. Low is good.
For the love of god bring back some colour.

And offer an alternative to potential pc switchers like me that allready have a monitor.
The eMac imo is just ugly compared to the CRT iMac.

Make some kinda quick g3 cube thing that looks cool and has a decent video card. I don't need a g4 much less a g5. I surf the web and use email. A g3 has enough power for me to do that.

[Eviga]

I like the white designs very much.
Just had a conversation about the AirPort Extreme Base Station, the design is awesome !

Put two of them side by side, and they look like a pair of boobs !
We were talking about Air-Nippel Extreme, and Wireless erection ( iRection ) !

;)

[vitaboy]

The iMac is all about style and form factor. It doesn't need the fastest processor or system bus, nor the best video card. But it needs to be able to turn heads and make people want to pay a slight premium to have an iMac sitting on their desk instead of an iBook or PowerBook they can tote around.

So my prediction for the new iMac design is that it'll have a screen that can swivel into horizontal or vertical mode (like the ancient Radius displays). Or as some people have already suggested, a detachable screen like Microsoft's Active Displays, although I think that is less likely. It would be nice if the new iMac had a TV tuner built-in and PVR software that makes Windows Media PCs seem antiquated by comparison.

But a redesign of the iMac should be quite exciting, as right now, the iMac is sorta being squeezed by the PowerBooks and the G5s.

[cubist]

Originally posted by greenstork
I'm sorry buddy, but without Altivec, you're not even close to competing with what $1000 can buy you on the PC side. Forget about gaming altogether.

Right! Maybe people don't game on the iBook (huh?) but the iMac is supposed to be a contender for the home users -- at MWNY last year there was a row of iMacs running games -- so it's got to be performance-competitive. Not only does the iMac need to get a G5 - and the price maybe go down a little - but the iBook is going to need to get Altivec somehow. The performance differential across the Apple line these days is far too great.

[kerryb]

the iMac is not the consumer mac that Apple had planned. It's too damn well designed for starters. It is the computer that those with a little more money and sophistication can afford and appreciate. I don't think apple is capable of selling a low brow computer that will appeal to the masses the emac is another example of this. Bad taste sells, cheapen the look of the next imac and watch them sell along with a six pack, 2 litter soda and a shotgun.

[scat999999]

Macs are more competetively priced than you think. I worked at Dell's call center earlier this year. I could probably count on one hand the number of systems I sold that went out the door for under $1000.




Originally posted by greenstork
Perhaps it's simply a matter of marketing but I would argue that the perception is that Macs are really expensive.

I know that when you price out systems side-by-side Macs are comparably priced, if not cheaper but that doesn't change the fact that the front of the Dell catalog has EVERY SINGLE COMPUTER PRICED BELOW $1000. Now I know it says starting at $399 and that is far from your average price computer heading out the door but they have created a perception.

I mean, it doesn't take a rocket scientists to compare the two. iMac, starting at $1299 vs Dell starting at $399. For what you get, I know it's cheap but I still think they're not going to gain market share with this marketing strategy. Maybe that's not the goal. I could care less if my PC friends buy a Mac. I am simply saying that if the goal is to increase market share, they have to be more aggressive slashing prices and on entry level systems like the iMac.

[geerlingguy]

I've always loved the look of the new iMac, but there are a few problems with it in terms of functionality that make me not buy it (my Mom has one, and these are my problems with it):

1) Expansion: I know that Apple is making this cheap, but I would like it to be easier to upgrade RAM or hard drive; to do either, I must flip over the whole computer, screen and all (a dangerous proposition), then perform many surgical operations to change anything.

2) Port-ability: I hate having all the ports on the back; I use a mini-USB flash drive (128MB), and it requires a powered port, so I cannot plug it into the keyboard - I must maneuver around the iMac to get at one of it's ports.

3) Dimensions: The SuperDrive is hard to access if you have limited desk space and must have the keyboard in front of the computer; the little flap comes down and hits the keyboard, jamming up the tray-loading mechanism. I have to hold the keyboard aside whenever I want to put in a disc.

Don't get me wrong; it's a great computer, but it is only truly functional in places like the Apple Store, where they have nice display-tables set up.

[GregA]

Since we're wildly speculating :-)

I'm voting for a Mac that has 2 parts. 1 part sits under the TV - it looks like a DVD player on the front (and ofcourse plays DVDs to the TV), but with an iPod screen for playing music through the stereo system. It contains a regular mac setup and also has 4 network/firewire ports on the back. Bluetooth remote and a deal with Tivo.

Then comes the monitor in a different room.
Originally posted by lmalave
This is basically exactly how the Viewsonic smart display works. It's basically just a small computer that is running Windows Remote Desktop. The Windows remote desktop has amazing compression, though - I've gotten it to work pretty well even over a 56K modem. Maybe Apple will release a new version of its own Remote Desktop that improves the compression to be more in line with what Windows can achieve now. Yep. There could be 2 (or more!) types of terminals
1) wired screens & peripherals (almost identical to current iMac in look but much smaller base!)
2) wireless tablets or laptop-esque designs (require an airport base station?)

Oh did I mention having multiple displays simultaneously?

:-)

[roy_dan]

Hmmm, interesting now that Apple LCD’s will be going to 30”. My wife’s initial thought about a 30” computer display was our TV is already 35”, I’ll mount it to a wall! Convergence is the next BIG thing between computing and entertainment. Gateway is selling 42” plasma TV’s, Microsoft is making a HTPC OS…Apple has a responsibility to the industry to get in there and show them how it’s done! The next iMac could fill this market with the wireless ideas in the last post but should be rebranded to perhaps tMac (total Mac).

[tex210]

what if it's just an imac that is portrait viewable?

[rdowns]

Originally posted by choogheem
LED/OLED display? G5 processor? I'm just bummed, waiting for a new computer and then finally settling on the new iMac and now a NEW, completely revamped one in 2004. Oh well - I'm happy with what I've got.

This rumor is killing me. I planned on ordering a new 17" iMac when Panther was pre-installed but now....

I really want a G5 but I have no room for that beast. A G5 iMac would make me very happy and I could die in peace.

Now contemplating waiting to see what MWSF brings.

[rdowns]

Originally posted by jocknerd
The G4 is dead. It just can't compete with the Intel/AMD crowd. The consumer market is different than the professional market. Most of the G5 owners are saying that the G4 is perfect for the iMac. Thats BS! Just because its smokes the G4 doesn't mean it should be exclusive to the Power Macs.

Consumers are comparing the iMac to Intel/AMD systems. There is no way 90% of them will buy an iMac with a slow G4 over a 2 Ghz PC that cost half as much.

If Apple IS redesigning the iMac, there is a reason for it. Its going to get the G5. Let me reiterate, the G4 will be history. My guess is that by this time next year, the G4 will be extinct on all new Apple systems.


I agree, good post. No way is Apple going to redesign the iMac and put a, what??,. a 1.42GHz G4 in it? It's got a 1.25 in it now, a G5 is natural if they want to sell into the consumer market.


Damn this rumor, I would have been happy just ordering my 17" 1.25 next week knowing Panther would be pre-installed.

I guess I'll have to keep myself happy with my new 15GB iPod. 1,259 songs ripped to my iMac and still going.

What can I expect to sell used CDs for? I expect to dump all 350 or so after they're all ripped and backed up.

[spygrad2003]

There's been a lot of talk to do with the iMac detaching the monitor. Personally I've always been a fan of the all in one design of the iMac. I have very little desk space, and my 600mhz G3 iMac has done the trick.

I don't have room for a computer and a monitor, that's the price of living on campus...So I love the fact that my computer and my monitor occupy the same space. And I really love the new design, just wish I could afford it. All I want is a dropped price, unless Apple can fit the whole bundle into an even smaller space:)

[rdowns]

Originally posted by sedarby
If the iMac is going G5 then the G5 Powerbooks must be around the corner. I do not believe for a second that Apple would move the iMac to a G5 and leave the Powerbooks with G4's for any appreciable amount of time.

I disagree.

Apple, finally, seems to be poised to make some inroads in growing market share. The iPod is a huge success and they aren't making the same mistakes they did with the Newton. (yes, I know Apple didn't invent the portable MP3 market).

The iPod is selling like hot cakes. iT for Windows is tomorrow. If they get this right, and I think they will, it's only natural for Windows iPod users to seriously consider a Mac. An iMac with the latest processor that effectively competes with PCs (speed and price) would be just what these switchers are looking for. Not a $3K G5 tower with monitor. And G5 PowerBooks are a ways off. I think it would be stupid for Apple, poised to make some market share inroads, to bastardize the iMac becasue the G5 PB is probably a year off.

Besides, I would be first on line to buy a G5 iMac.

[greenstork]

Originally posted by scat999999
Macs are more competetively priced than you think. I worked at Dell's call center earlier this year. I could probably count on one hand the number of systems I sold that went out the door for under $1000.

It's not about being competitively priced, it's about what the public perceives. Marketing 101. I know they end up going out the door at more than $1000 but I would venture to guess that when that guy called up the store, he thought he was going to pay $599. When he had the conversation with his buddies the day before, he told them he was going to get a $599 computer. When people think Mac however, they think $$$$.

That said, I realize that most PC's are over $1000 and that Macs are competitively priced but until they shake the perception of being expensive and incompatible, they will have a tough time gaining market share. I think an inexpensive headless system could accomplish this. Then they could say, starting at $$699 ro something like that.

I'll give it to Apple, they can market the hell out of their products to the trend setter, hipster, early adopter market but they have failed to grasp marketing for the mass market. Wtih these iPod ads however, things appear to be changing.

[asphalt-proof]

Oh com'n everybody... its time to think outside of the box. I have it on good authoritty (i brewed some 'shroom tea and channelled Steve) he came to me in a dream and told me that the CPU will actually be an ibook that fis in a slot. So far sounds like your typical docking station. But wait their is more. The hard drive is actually an iPod. the ibook, when docked is connected to a 17" widescreen lcd with all the periphrals attached at the back. Cost: about the same. Oh and one other thing... the docking station contains an additonal GPU tjat turns off the GPU on the ibook when docked, same witht the second processor on the docking station. th docking station contains a DVD-R, a free PCI slot, and some extra ram.
Two computers in one. Now how much woul you pay?? But wait there is more. With each purchase you get 100 tracks from the ITMS!!

(I really need to lay off the caffeine before going to bed.)

[kangaroo]

Originally posted by greenstork
It's not about being competitively priced, it's about what the public perceives. Marketing 101. I know they end up going out the door at more than $1000 but I would venture to guess that when that guy called up the store, he thought he was going to pay $599. When he had the conversation with his buddies the day before, he told them he was going to get a $599 computer. When people think Mac however, they think $$$$.

That said, I realize that most PC's are over $1000 and that Macs are competitively priced but until they shake the perception of being expensive and incompatible, they will have a tough time gaining market share. I think an inexpensive headless system could accomplish this. Then they could say, starting at $$699 ro something like that.

I'll give it to Apple, they can market the hell out of their products to the trend setter, hipster, early adopter market but they have failed to grasp marketing for the mass market. Wtih these iPod ads however, things appear to be changing.


To be fair...if that [guy] were purchasing a Mac he'd probably end up spending more too! At the online store, for example, Apple entices you with enumerable opportunities to separate you from your money by the time you begrudingly submit your credit card! ;)

[GregA]

Originally posted by the_dalex
2) Wireless displays running Remote Desktop are suitable for applications but can't do any real multimedia (video, games, etc) due to bandwidth restrictions. I use Remote Desktop for OS X at work to log into a Win2k server to run the Windows-only apps that we need, and performance is definitely better than Virtual PC, but the screen refresh is visible even over 100Mb ethernet. In fact, we use one 1.8Ghz Gateway desktop and a dozen old iMacs to do work that would have required us to buy a dozen new PCs. We dodged that bullet...So 100Mb ethernet has visible screen refresh if you have a dozen terminals. What's it like with only 3 or 4 terminals running? Also remember Apple was working on Firewire over ethernet which is an option, as is gigabit ethernet. I think you are right though - any screen you wanted to watch a movie on would have to be connected directly.
Originally posted by the_dalex
4) Maybe they are going to integrate video recording and playback, like with Microsoft's Media Center thingy? Then you can download movies via iTunes or a similar service and keep track of all of your shows, burning them to DVD for storage... That'd be nice. Somebody mentioned an Apple 30" screen too! Anyway, while downloading movies may not be ready yet - they could start right now with music-videos (and movie previews). How many competitors do that? Burn your favourite clips to DVD.
Originally posted by tex210
why can't we have a $299 unit that runs g3's ?If they are doing a complete redesign and it's not a G5 then maybe this is about IBM's new G3 with Altivec rumored for early next year.

If the iMac has a total redesign which is significantly different for Jan 04, I'm sure they'll be keeping the existing look somewhere! Love my iMac.

[mxpiazza]

honestly... where can apple take the iMac design? The all in one was sweet, now the LCD craned above the base is amazing. But what design options for an all-in-one system are there left that haven't been done? that's my question.

[roy_dan]

That's the exciting part. Who imagined the crane-LCD from the CRT? I can't wait!

[mxpiazza]

Originally posted by roy_dan
That's the exciting part. Who imagined the crane-LCD from the CRT? I can't wait!
true... johnathon ives is a genius, so i'm sure whatever it is, it will be amazing.

[Dont Hurt Me]

he may be smart but the G5 powermac still looks like crap and is big as a tank thank you

[mxpiazza]

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
he may be smart but the G5 powermac still looks like crap and is big as a tank thank you
looks like crap? find me a window machine that's as aesthetically pleasing as the G5. and i'll gladly take the size of the tower for the power inside of it...

[roy_dan]

It's still a tribute to Apple when our worst looking Mac is better then the best looking Wintel box!

[ssurgeman]

The way I see it the best way for Apple to provide a great machine but at the same time not threaten its pro line is to incorperate those new G3's (G3e anybody?) From what I hear they provide proformance thats better than MotoG4s. The key to these new chips would be to sell them under a new name. G3 makes people think 1997/98 and G4 makes us all think....well lets not go there. A new name would also make the give Apple alot of marketing clout. They could benchmark it against Celerons and lowend Athlons and not have to worry about losing benchmark battles to Athlon3200+'s. Even if the new chip wasn't a speed demon it would not effect apple's proline. Back prior to G5 Apple had to dumb down iMac G4s to make powermacs look better. If Apple adobted an AMD type of naming (AMD rocks) such as using numbers to represent speed not mhz then they would not even have to worry about having similar mhz to the G5s. For me there are alot of reasons why this is a great way to go. Now don't get me wrong I love the idea of an iMac G5 but I'm more worried that Apple maintain a viable platform and price than having the latest and greatest chip. A headless machine is also a great idea but naming it an iMac would be a huge mistake. The iMac is a supposed to be an easy to setup consumer machine that is all-in-one. Anyways I'm another newb so if you dissagree w/ me I'm always open to suggestions.

[coolfactor]

Originally posted by BOOMBA
So aside from the MAC operating system and iApps, ...rest clipped...

Here we have it folks... a true blue MAC user. We all know that if someone prints Mac in all-caps, they're not in the game.

I think ALL Apple users should realize that we are paying almost 0.5 to 2 times what it costs for a PC across the board to buy a similar MAC.

So the first time wasn't an accident.

We are paying for 2 things
1) design/looks
2) the OS and "free" apps

GREAT design, GREAT looks
GREAT OS, GREAT "free" apps

Now, I say "free" because we have to pay EVERY YEAR $129 for the new OS and FREE apps, so ....

Have to pay? Who's making you?

We get looks, and as shallow as I am, I am not paying twice as much for an iMac as a similar PC.

So, don't get me wrong. I agree that the up-front cost of more expensive, but come on, Mr. Shallow, the real costs lie in cost-of-ownership, and we all know that Macs are the same or cheaper when looking at that.

I got the G5 because for price and performance it is about as good as you can get on either side.

Oh, you bought a G5? No kidding. A G5 MAC? :D

[roy_dan]

He's got a good point. Why would IBM be prepping an Altivec G3? Who would the primary customer be? Um, Apple, duh. So Apple must have plans for it, but will it be iMac.3 or new life for iBooks? I will lean towards iBooks and eMacs for this new chip. When G5 goes to 2.5GHZ and 3.0GHz the iMac will be prime for the same chip (shrink from the current rev 1 G5) with lower clock, like 1.5GHz, and with that will be a cooler (temp wise) chip. That would solve the physical problems of a G5 in the smaller form factor. Didn't IBM say they were already shrinking G5 to 90nm?

[ssurgeman]

Originally posted by BOOMBA

I think ALL Apple users should realize that we are paying almost 0.5 to 2 times what it costs for a PC across the board to buy a similar MAC.


Wow .5 times the cost I ALWAYS TOLD MY MOM MACS WERE CHEAPER!.

But seriously I don't think BOOMBA is a troll. His points are valid though maybe not right on the money. The iMac is a great deal for alot of people. But at its current price it only fits a certain crowd. The eMac is a nice machine but a tad underpowered. THere is a place for an iMac that focuses more on features than asthetics and style. Maybe its shouldn't be sold under the iMac name, but the market is there nonetheless. a headless iBox would fit the perfectly. a 750GX 1.2ghz, 256mbs ram, radeon 9000, 60gig drive, firewire 400, USB2, Mac and PC monitor connectors, 3PCI slots, CD-RW with no frills for $699. And perhaps an option with only the processor and box for $399. THat way users could add ram, drives, ect. This machine could satisfy the need for netboot machine that could be customized with no HD, as well as a great way to convert PC users and take some steam out of those 500$ eMachines. I realized that the profits would be slim but I do belive that if produced in enough quantity that Apple could make a teeny profit and add millions to their consumer base who then upgrade OS, by Apple apps and hardware and get to enjoy somewthing that we are all lucky enough to be using right now.

[GregA]

Originally posted by ssurgeman
A headless machine is also a great idea but naming it an iMac would be a huge mistake. The iMac is a supposed to be an easy to setup consumer machine that is all-in-one. Anyways I'm another newb so if you dissagree w/ me I'm always open to suggestions. At first glance I agreed iMac must be all-in-one... but I don't think Apple ever defined the iMac line that way(??)
Originally posted by mxpiazza
honestly... where can apple take the iMac design? The all in one was sweet, now the LCD craned above the base is amazing. But what design options for an all-in-one system are there left that haven't been done? that's my question. Way back, they made 4 lines split by consumer/pro, and laptop/desktop. The iMac and eMac are the consumer-desktop line. The consumer line is easy to setup, and not expandable (modelled more on your home stereo or vcr than on a computer). That leaves many possibilities.

[Bluefusion]

Originally posted by jholzner
show me a windows pc that includes a 17" lcd and teh design of the imac that can do what a mac can do with the ilife suite for 800 buck. get real

If you build it yourself, it's incredibly not-difficult. :P You won't get the design, but you'll get a faster machine with better specs.

And no, I don't intend to flame. I'm a Mac user first and foremost.

[ssurgeman]

Originally posted by GregAussie
At first glance I agreed iMac must be all-in-one... but I don't think Apple ever defined the iMac line that way(??)
Way back, they made 4 lines split by consumer/pro, and laptop/desktop. The iMac and eMac are the consumer-desktop line. The consumer line is easy to setup, and not expandable (modelled more on your home stereo or vcr than on a computer). That leaves many possibilities.

I didn't mean to imply that Apple defined the iMac that way, but we the consumers have. And by implying that a headless Mac is a good idea I did not mean to say it would be a consumer machine. More like a switcher machine. Although I realize that you are pointing out history I belive that the very reason APple hasn't made more inroads into the Pc world is the lack of expandibuility on its middle price range machines 1000-2000 (monitor price included). I think that such a machine could be left with too few slots and a processor that was inadequite to compete with the G5 so that it wouldn't be a problem for the pro-line.

[Potus]

The metal look G5 looks cheap. Which is weird when you consider that the powerbooks have a metal look and look sleek and new and that the iMacs and iBooks are plastic and look sleek and new. And yet the G5 looks tinny and cheap.

[kangaroo]

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
he may be smart but the G5 powermac still looks like crap and is big as a tank thank you

When I was in the Apple store a couple of weeks ago, the salesman was pitching the various machines to a woman. When he got to the PowerMac she cut him off and said 'why would I want that big ugly box?' Now, that's just her opinion, of course, but she's probably representative of what alot of people think about it. There's no doubt Ives & Co. worked very hard to dress it up, but there's only so much you can do with a big a$$ box.:(

[rt_brained]

Hmmm, If I were redesigning the iMac...

[rt_brained]

...Move over Jonathan Ive!

[ryaxnb]

Originally posted by moosecat
I have to say I have trouble imagining a change as radical as the last iMac change. I believe they have to keep using built-in LCD screens, and it seems like the current iMac is pretty much the pinnacle of design for a computer that includes such a built-in screen. Anyway, my speculation:

What they'll keep: Built-in LCD display; arm that pivots out of a CPU-inclusive base; limited expansion options.

What they'll change: Shape of base (maybe going cube); feature set (CPU; graphics card; port configuration)

What they may or may not change: Color scheme. (It's tempting to say they'll go aluminum, but Apple likes their consumer and pro lines to have distinct looks.)

As for the headless iMac, I agree that it sounds like a good idea. They won't call it an iMac though. Perhaps that could be a fourth model line ... The iMac is the continuation, in form and function, of the original Mac, and I don' t think they'll mess with its general theme of simplicity and all-inclusiveness.
I love talking about the cMac! cMac, cMac all the way! cMac = Cheap Mac.
$504 with G3 1Ghz
$589 with G4 1Ghz
One PCI slot. Modifyable video. Otherwise no more expansion than the iMac. And I won't cry if you take out the PCI slot.:) No monitor. Down to roughly $500. That's the cMac.

[savar]

Originally posted by tex210
Want market share? Look at nintendo.

Err, Nintendo is slowly and surely getting edged out. Even back in the days of SNES vs. Genesis, where the SNES was very clearly superior, Genesis still had more games and more consoles sold.

If anything, Nintendo (ca 1994) represents what Apple should not be doing: trusting consumers to buy the best technology for the money.

That's why they've put so much effort into making the new macs pretty.

I personally think that the new "revolution" is going to be centered around color. Apple has gone to some effort to make its product lines look "pure"...at the same time it has lost some of the appeal of the original, gum-drop iMacs.

Look at the new iPod commercials. Color is going to be very important in the 3rd generation for iMac. I suspect that patent thingy mentioned earlier will be the revolutionary part. I imagine apple will also continue to concentrate on natural aesthetic metaphors, incorporating color in organic manners.

<begin crazy rant...>
What if Apple puts the display back down on the desktop, mounts the computer to the behind, then reverse mounts an iSight, so that when the computer goes to sleep, it shows the iSights image and the screen becomes "invisible"!!
<end crazy rant...>

har har

[Dont Hurt Me]

to have the pro line go all sterile surgical aluminum just sucked, I was thinking of getting a g5 but it looked like hell and wouldnt fit in my desk so i upgraded that cpu and am good to go for a year or so or untill Apple makes a powerful consumer machine. anyone remember the picture /movie that was floating around of a computer with slide out hard drives and larger flat screen that just sat in front of you? so big no need to swivel or tilt it or anything. it had the Enya soundtrack to it and to me just looked to cool. They need to give the prosumer a powerful machine that isnt gigantic and has 1 2 gig g5 in it and ati 9800xt & maybe 1 pci slot. call it whatever but apple forces people to decide imac vs powermac and most of those people end up with pc's. APPLE WHY CANT YOU BUILD A UPGRADEABLE HIGH POWER G5 CUBE FOR THE MASSES????they throw all this stuff in the powermac that most consumers will never need,they strip down imac,give it a crappy fx5200 chip and wonder why lcd imac sales never matched the crt's. Who ever is in charge of what goes into model lines is out of touch with the real world.

[Potus]

Originally posted by roy_dan
It's still a tribute to Apple when our worst looking Mac is better then the best looking Wintel box!

True!

[Potus]

But the iMac changed to a pizza box or square would be butt ugly. period.

[nick.hill]

I think that Mac's are the computing equivalent of BMW cars, premium priced, but so attractive people pay the extra.

So here in Europe they end up being as common as muck, but still being "classy"

The iMac looks and feels special, and gives me a warm feeling inside me pants, which my PC doesn't (I must remember to earth the iMac)

I have both on my desk and use the 17" iMac, just cos it;s more satisfying all in all.

Just my two eurocents.

[BOOMBA]

Originally posted by ssurgeman
Wow .5 times the cost I ALWAYS TOLD MY MOM MACS WERE CHEAPER!.

But seriously I don't think BOOMBA is a troll.

Thanks.
But in coolfactor's defense, I DO eat small children.

[BOOMBA]

Originally posted by coolfactor


Here we have it folks... a true blue MAC user. We all know that if someone prints Mac in all-caps, they're not in the game.

Oh, you bought a G5? No kidding. A G5 MAC? :D

WOW.

I used to think I was the biggest MAC (sorry, Mac) geek I knew, but you totally surpassed me.

Anyone who thinks like you makes me look like Bill Gates.

[sketchy]

I only read a few pages of the five that are out there. Did anyone mention HDTV? The new 30" apparently is HD compliant. How bout making the new iMac with a HD screen and a built in HD tuner with TiVo software.

wireless monitors are seem impractical. -- how would you charge them? It would have to be plugged in, then it is no longer wireless.

dual flat panel lcd's would be cool,... so would a plasma screen

the screens would have to be larger then 15" ...

[u2mr2os2]

Originally posted by rdowns
I agree, good post. No way is Apple going to redesign the iMac and put a, what??,. a 1.42GHz G4 in it? It's got a 1.25 in it now, a G5 is natural if they want to sell into the consumer market.


Damn this rumor, I would have been happy just ordering my 17" 1.25 next week knowing Panther would be pre-installed.

I guess I'll have to keep myself happy with my new 15GB iPod. 1,259 songs ripped to my iMac and still going.

What can I expect to sell used CDs for? I expect to dump all 350 or so after they're all ripped and backed up.

I sympathize with you on being all set to pounce on a 17" iMac with Panther installed, then this rumor comes along. However, I have to point out that selling your used CDs then makes the copies on your hard drive illegal.

[whooleytoo]

Originally posted by coolfactor
Have to pay? Who's making you?

Apple are. By revving the iApps so they require newer versions of the OSX. If you want to use the "free" iApps, such as iCal and iSync, you have to keep the OS up to date, which costs money.

[Bluefusion]

Originally posted by roy_dan
It's still a tribute to Apple when our worst looking Mac is better then the best looking Wintel box!

You honestly believe the eMac is better than the best-looking PC? Either you need to get out more, or your sense of aesthetics are worse than Microsoft's.

The eMac is an ugly piece of crap, and I refuse to acknowledge that Ive designed it. There's a reason I have an iMac.

[BOOMBA]

Originally posted by whooleytoo
Apple are. By revving the iApps so they require newer versions of the OSX. If you want to use the "free" iApps, such as iCal and iSync, you have to keep the OS up to date, which costs money.

EXACTLY.

coolfactor is a little too in love with the Mac to ever admit that Apple could EVER do ANYTHING wrong.

Apple rocks, but they are only 90% perfect.

[FlamDrag]

Originally posted by greenstork
If you don't think that Apple is advertising the iPod for the masses, you haven't seen a billboard recently or turned on your TV. Sure, it's expensive, but make no bones about it, apple is trying to monopolize the mp3 player market, for the masses.

I guess that I wasn't clear - they're advertising for the masses, but it's still in the elite price range for similar devices and it's the elite device in it's category. My point being that regardless of the ads / popularity - it's not the "every-mans" MP3 player.

I disagree - to a point - about Apple trying to actually monopolize the market. If they really wanted to do it, they would still have a low end 5 or 10 GB sub $200 model. They've monopolized the "techno-lust" for MP3 players in my opinion. From where I sit, that's they're goal.

"The only MP3 player worth having is an iPod - too bad I can't afford one."

[Dahl]

Originally posted by Bluefusion
You honestly believe the eMac is better than the best-looking PC? Either you need to get out more, or your sense of aesthetics are worse than Microsoft's.

The eMac is an ugly piece of crap, and I refuse to acknowledge that Ive designed it. There's a reason I have an iMac.
Que ?
The eMac is not bad looking.

[Dave_B]

Originally posted by Bluefusion
You honestly believe the eMac is better than the best-looking PC? Either you need to get out more, or your sense of aesthetics are worse than Microsoft's.

The eMac is an ugly piece of crap, and I refuse to acknowledge that Ive designed it. There's a reason I have an iMac.

Sorry. Can't let this go.

The eMac is NOT "ugly".

The eMac is very, very, very ugly.

[Dahl]

I eMac is still better looking than most PC boxes, it's very easy to see.
Most PC's look like a cheap Dodge with crap plastic panels here and there.
The eMac looks great compared to those machines, like a cool WV bug.

[aldo]

I think that a $699 (£500?) headless Mac would be the best thing Apple has ever done, for 'switchers'.

So many people would love a Mac, but they have a nice, perfect working CRT or TFT monitor sitting with their PCs. They will not just junk it.

A great headless box (I'm thinking maybe a smaller, 'white plastic, iMac/iBook style' G5 case would be great). This would catch the mass of PC-advanced people who just drift on as faster hardware as they can get there hands on. This would be a perfect machine.

One more point: if Apple doesn't stop looking at the bottom line, they will not make much inroads with their market share, sadly. The machines need to go down in price, and focus more on software and OS.

[strangelogic]

Originally posted by aldo
A great headless box (I'm thinking maybe a smaller, 'white plastic, iMac/iBook style' G5 case would be great). This would catch the mass of PC-advanced people who just drift on as faster hardware as they can get there hands on. This would be a perfect machine.


Tie that in with the rumors of the re-birth of the Cube - and you may be on to something. The new iMac Cube...

[GregA]

Originally posted by strangelogic
Tie that in with the rumors of the re-birth of the Cube - and you may be on to something. The new iMac Cube... What about the iMac Igloo. A little door at the front that you push your bluetooth mouse in to recharge.

[ffakr]

Originally posted by whooleytoo
Apple are. By revving the iApps so they require newer versions of the OSX. If you want to use the "free" iApps, such as iCal and iSync, you have to keep the OS up to date, which costs money.

Riiight...
iCal 1.5.1 for OS 10.2.3+ FREE
iTunes 4.1 for OS 10.1.5+ FREE
iSynch 1.3 for OS 10.2.5+ FREE
iPhoto 2 for OS 10.2.5+ FREE
iMovie 3.03 for OS 10.1.5+ FREE

iDVD is NOT offered for download because it's only offered on Macs with DVD players, not all machines.

iChat AV is a paid update for 10.2 users, but older versions are still fully functional.


so, about half of the iApps require an OS X release from 2 years ago, and the other half require a patched version of last year's OS X release. Boo Hoo.

10.2 was a significant update over 10.1 and 10.3 is just as significant over 10.2. This is true not only from a fit and polish standpoint, or from a speed standpoint, but also based on the vast number of 'under the hood' changes and improvements in OS X.

The OS X updates are a bargain for what you get. Look at what XP Pro costs you, and it's a lot of eye-candy on top of the old Win2K core. The difference between OS X 10.1 and 10.3 is the difference between FreeBSD 3.4 and FreeBSD 5!

Apple could make all the iApps run on 10.0, but they wouldn't be able to take advantage of the architectural changes, the SIGNIFICANT architectural changes that Apple has made over the last couple years.
What's it gonna be? Apple's a bastard for writing great apps that leverage the features they are adding to the OS? Or Apple is great because they continually give us valuable updates to the apps we love?
Personally, I prefer the Apple the keeps innovating.

ffakr.

[jap4n]

i reckon they should go oldskool and make it look like an Apple Classic..

and you know, Beige is the new black... so...

:P (jokes)

i just hope they get rid of the curved CRT... it is so old...

The new iMacs with the LCD screen are cool - but the screen gets in the way of the CD draw sometimes. I've heard a couple of complaints about the LCD iMac - but not towards to eMac..

perhaps something of a hybrid? an eMac but with LCD?

[ffakr]

Originally posted by jap4n

The new iMacs with the LCD screen are cool - but the screen gets in the way of the CD draw sometimes. I've heard a couple of complaints about the LCD iMac - but not towards to eMac..

perhaps something of a hybrid? an eMac but with LCD?
I've never ever seen the LCD get in the way of the cd drawer. It doesn't move low enough to interfere.

The keyboard DOES occasionally interfere, as the flap extends down low enough to hit the keyboard.
It's only a problem for me because I ocassionally put an LCD iMac on my desk towh a tower and 17" lcd and there isn't much space left for the iMac.

[Thanatoast]

I dunno about an LCD-style eMac. All the all-in-one LCD PC's I see are butt-ugly.

[Bengt77]

Originally posted by Dahl
The eMac looks great compared to those machines, like a cool WV bug.

What's a WV bug? :D

[Dahl]

Originally posted by Bengt77
What's a WV bug? :D
Darn finnngerrrs... See there they go again... :D

[scat999999]

For Headless Mac. Marketing 101...never use the word "cheap".:D

[iMeowbot]

Originally posted by ffakr
I've never ever seen the LCD get in the way of the cd drawer. It doesn't move low enough to interfere.

Are yours 15" models maybe? It's a constant problem with the 17".

[edit: translate to english]

[Potus]

I have an XtremeMac U.F.O. Highly recommend: deals w/ the problem and gives additional ports. Great solution and very cool. Price has dropped since I bought mine. May get another as I will defintely get a 17" iMac if they discontinue this form factor.
http://www.xtrememac.com/formac/ufo.shtml

[Corpus_Callosum]

I think that a $699 (£500?) headless Mac would be the best thing Apple has ever done, for 'switchers'.


This is not only a good idea, it is a great idea.

If Apple could manage a $600-$900 headless G5 iMac, switching would definitely hit high-gear.

Although, I believe we need QEMU to get ported to OS-X before switching hits for real. QEMU is a dynamic translation project that allows PPC to run x86 programs. Combined with WINE, it currently allows PPC linux to run Windows programs at near-native speed. Once ported, we will be able to run a large variety of Windows software on our Macs. The only weirdness? They will run through X11 :D Check out QEMU here. (http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemu/)

-----
Please sign the petition requesting sony support MicroMV camcorders on the Mac Petition here (http://www.petitiononline.com/osxmicmv/)

[iMeowbot]

Yep, UFO fixes the keyboard clearance and port positioning, but the Superdrive tray still gets blocked on the 17" if you keep the screen low. The blue light thingy is pointless but kind of cool, only wish that it had a dimmer.

[Dont Hurt Me]

all you dreamers who think mac will have a 400-500-600 dollar machine are crazy or just ignorant or yet stupid on things apple, if apple releases a g5 imac first of all they aint going to give it away, 2nd of all they are going to charge an arm & leg and even more this is apple not dell,compaq,hp or joes computer, look for about $1500 bucks starting and if you think not then you arent thinking! all you dreamers of a 400 dollar mac might as well take yourself to walmart and settle down in the pc weenie world. Apple is the cadillac of the computer world and they dont give those away and they wont be giving apple away. :o look for a emac if you want cheap! not Imac you crazy clowns and if you think the brand new G5 is going into a 600 dollar machine then its time to get off the crack!:eek:

[yamabushi]

I don't think anybody really expects a G5 in an inexpensive Mac anytime soon. I do think a G5 Mac has the potential to be very inexpensive in the long run because of lower unit costs as the G5 becomes more mature and the die process shrinks and wafers grow. It's up to Apple to transfer those lower costs unto consumers or not.

Better low end Mac options could translate into more switchers since they have to invest less money in what they might perceive as a risky move to a less popular platform. The eMac isn't terrible for power but it certainly isn't cute like the early iMacs were. That cuteness translated into huge growth in sales and increased market share for a short time.

More recently consumers have been more interested in value but Apple has only been a good value in terms of hardware in some of their high end products. Motorola certainly is to blame for much of this weakness, but Apple needs to take some responsibility as well. Since the G4 is no longer very competitive, why cripple the low end systems further with too little RAM in their standard configurations? The answer might be to encourage the current user base to upgrade to a G5. But this is stupid because a G5 is only available in the big expensive tower right now. I believe that every Mac should come with at least 512MB of RAM in their standard configuration.

[AppleManEric]

Maybe they will have like an organic LCD or something, that'd be cool.
(whoa that was a shorter post than I expected, i had this whole list of things, then I forgot everything)
eric

[Prom1]

I expect to see with the same form-factor:
1) landscape/portrait mode LCD
2)OLED display or at least DLP LCD (if they can keep the later thin).
3) Back to ATi video cards that give great performance!

Optional 4) The ability for using a stylus on the display for pen input and document signatures say a $40 US option.

In a new form factor....
I still want OLED yet only if colours are fully supported in 32-bit mode at high resolutions.

[Prom1]

got cut off using this stupid PC Arrgh.

Now also in the new form factor
I'd like to see the G4 maybe pumped up with 2MB of L3 cache to improve performance.

A new design maybe reminisent of the 20 Anniversary Mac; maybe a swivel base so that the whole HD/CD/DVD/LCD panel can be swiveled to a new user opposite of the "round" table.

ok maybe im off beat with new design ideas -> reason I'm not an artist, hehe.

BUt something stunningly Marvelous with implementation of technology, yet Magnificent in terms of design.

Arguements of Apples design.
I think that either in an office, medical lab, photo lab, or in your home: decor is part of functionality. They go hand in hand! Steel fridges are more durable and 'industrial' but also build quality is better than one's you find in a low cost apartment. Now some of us may want to buy a cheap house and put nice furnishings inside to get that "Value" for our dollar but I'm not moving outta my Apartment to live in a "Leaning" house just to save $100 per month. One family did right near my daughters school and none of kids at school will visit that familys house! They even insult its appearance except on Hallowe'en. They got great furniture but the house is Harrible.

IN retrospect sounds like what Gateway tried to do with their consumer market PCs along with Dell's great technology or better yet OK technology inside but looks cheap and is cheap on the outside -> I know I'm on a Dell right now; God save me!!

[gooddog]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bousozoku
[B]They simply need to redesign the base so that they can fit a G5 in there and keep it from melting everything on the desk.
*********************************

Here it is ...

They add the missing Southern hemisphere to double the volume without changing the footprint nor the ergonomics.

The sphere stands on four blended cylindrical legs , like the moon lander in "2001".

They put in a G5, fans, and twin slot-loading Super or empty second bay.

The 19" ORGANIC LED monitor moves like
the current model PLUS it swivels to portrait.

The entire case is translucent and can be had
in an opalescent carbon fiber / glass with
deep purple throbbing Apple logo that doubles as a touch-sensitive power switch.

The pale "Silver Ghost" version can be colored with LED's from within.

All wireless modalities standard.

Printer, key, mouse, speakers, ALL bluetoothed.

From the bottom of the sphere -----

piping hot café is dispensed :

now you know how they cool the G5 :)

---gooddog

[iMeowbot]

Originally posted by gooddog
The 19" ORGANIC LED monitor moves like the current model PLUS it swivels to portrait.

OLEDs for desktop computers are a little way off yet. The better processes stil result in a lifetime of about 10,000 hours. That would be about 5 years assuming a 40-hour work week and that people turn off their monitors at night, quite a bit less (under 2 years) if a screensaver is left running, or ther display used for long hours in a shared space. They're also still iffy for professional work, because the LEDs decay over the display's lifetime.

If the longevity problem doesn't improve by leaps and bounds really soon, I think these displays will be limited to being used in things like portable devices for a while yet.

One bit of encouragement: OLEDs can be printed on film (but they have an even shorter lifetime). If the sheets can be produced inexpensively, displays with replaceable elements wouldn't be too far-fetched. I know I have a small collection of notebooks and PDAs with cracked screens where such a feature would have been neat, and I'm guessing that the owners of spotty 15" PowerBooks wouldn't hate such a feature either.