PDA

View Full Version : New iMacs in Early 2004?


MacRumors
Dec 10, 2003, 04:36 AM
DigiTimes posts a news report claiming that an upcoming iMac revision will incorporate a Magnesium-Alloy case (chassis?)-- as opposed to a Stainless Steel and Zinc Alloy case that the current LCD iMac uses. This mostly appears to be a cost-cutting move, along with increased use of plastic parts. Whether this will cause a cosmetic change in the iMac's case is unclear based on the article.

Apple's iMac has recently been rumored to see a major revision in early 2004, with questions of a return of the Cube form-factor in later reports

The article also notes:


Apple in September suspended a plan to integrate a Tablet PC and DeskNote into a new line of products, dubbed the “New New iMac,” due to cost considerations.


Presumably this refers to Digitimes' previous claims that Apple was planning to launch a wireless display for a desktop system in early 2004. It appears that this project has been put on hold due to cost considerations -- at least according to this report. Assuming such a project existed, it may be the fuel for the many Apple Tablet rumors that have been recently circulating. Of note, however, Digitimes reports have been of questionable accuracy in the past.

arn
Dec 10, 2003, 04:38 AM
Honestly, this article is hard to follow.

I don't know what to make of the TabletPC/Desknote thing.

In case anyone else is confused from the article:

iMac = CRT iMac
New iMac = LCD iMac
New New iMac = This Tablet/iMac thing

arn

Sabenth
Dec 10, 2003, 04:40 AM
and in the bin this goes

Oirectine
Dec 10, 2003, 04:49 AM
That's just... weird!

Sun Baked
Dec 10, 2003, 05:00 AM
I thought the metal boxes hidden behind the fancy plastic always looked more like galvanized sheet metal than a fancy alloy to me.

Of course that spiffy chunk of stainless steel poking out the iMacs case means ...

rdowns
Dec 10, 2003, 05:32 AM
Just slap a G5 in this puppy so I can get a new computer already. What a sweet computer that would be with a 20" LCD. Saw one at the Apple Store last week and it is a thing of beauty.

eric67
Dec 10, 2003, 06:09 AM
Originally posted by rdowns
Just slap a G5 in this puppy so I can get a new computer already. What a sweet computer that would be with a 20" LCD. Saw one at the Apple Store last week and it is a thing of beauty.
this is what the new iMac is going to be : a G5 iMac,
exactly the same way that recently the iBook became iBook G4.

MacMarino
Dec 10, 2003, 06:16 AM
So i was thinking when i saw the tablet being mentioned and how people are always saying they want an iMac with a detachable screen. How about a screen that clips in and out of a a kind of cradle on the metal arm, but can be used as a tablet PC when disconnected from the main body...and when you reconnect the 2 parts everything just syncs together. Could it work?

MacMarino

Blackcat
Dec 10, 2003, 06:27 AM
I think often these Asian reports get confused, or as with all journalism, over exagerated.

My guess is we will see a SE iMac, maybe in Alu for $lots and a mini-Tablet.

To me, a removable screen has no real benefit as it's passive/dumb, but a full tablet running X has uses and can run ARD which has the client built into Panther.

Let's see what ThinkSecret says...

TomSmithMacEd
Dec 10, 2003, 06:40 AM
Originally posted by MacMarino
So i was thinking when i saw the tablet being mentioned and how people are always saying they want an iMac with a detachable screen. How about a screen that clips in and out of a a kind of cradle on the metal arm, but can be used as a tablet PC when disconnected from the main body...and when you reconnect the 2 parts everything just syncs together. Could it work?

MacMarino

If Apple could pull this off it would be revolutionary.

Nik_Doof
Dec 10, 2003, 06:44 AM
Originally posted by TomSmithMacEd
If Apple could pull this off it would be revolutionary.

Many people have tried and failed with this idea, yes if apple could pull it off then you will have every major PC manfaturer scrabbling to keep up.

I see no REAL benefit to this, but hey its a nice feature :)

Unclezeppy
Dec 10, 2003, 07:08 AM
Since they are starting to produce the iMac here in China I presume the price will be cheaper at least. It's supposed to be the new "all plastic?!" version, what ever that means. It might be just a different model targeting the local schools and not for export.

JW Pepper
Dec 10, 2003, 07:21 AM
I could believe a swivel top lap top with a touch sensitive screen that would make perfect sense, if a little expensive, but it make no sense to do this to an iMac.

As far as a change in design I believe that what they have said is entirely reasonable. Apple would always want to try to reduce costs, they have too. We all know a change is coming to accommodate the G5, it is just a matter of when. Given the recent introduction of he 20" version I find it hard to believe that the new model will debut in January.

Dont Hurt Me
Dec 10, 2003, 07:24 AM
i found the article interesting but notice the comment sales are lackluster because of the price. i disagree sales are lackluster because it has the never advancing G4 and then you cant keep the monitor! Seems like know one ever wants to mention the slow G4 in recent articles. they dont even compare G4 to to the new AMDs or Intel why? because G4 had fallen so so far back. its pathetic.

the_mole1314
Dec 10, 2003, 07:30 AM
Frankly, the amount of money it would take to produce a screen that would update fast enough wirelessly is insane. Forget 802.11b, ou need 802.11g or even a.

eric67
Dec 10, 2003, 07:32 AM
Originally posted by TomSmithMacEd
If Apple could pull this off it would be revolutionary.
YES, but it is faisable

the screen just need to contain the battery, and to be connected via Airport to the dock station; there is nothing unrealistic here.
the only question is more : is Apple going to do it seeing how bad is the Tablet Pc market!!!????
less than 25% of the expected sale volume!!!!!

I think that to remain an iMac, it as to remain a block, but indded the screen could be detacjed from the dock/station/core.

Imagine, at home you have enough staying at the desk, you can go on the sofa, or in the bed, watch a movie or check your email....
brilliant. Apple let's do it, BUT put a G5 in it, otherwise it will be immediately outdated, even if the concept is brilliant.

MorganX
Dec 10, 2003, 07:33 AM
Originally posted by TomSmithMacEd
If Apple could pull this off it would be revolutionary.

This is already done in TabletPC/Notebook form factor. There is no syncing because the processor is in the tablet.

I see no benefit to this in a desktop form factor because you probably want a more sizeable screen in a desktop. You wouldn't want to be lugging it around as a tablet.

I do see this as a possible evolutionary step for Apple's laptop line.

b_riggs
Dec 10, 2003, 07:34 AM
I think a G5 iMac would be a great move for Apple. Many people have expressed the opinion that the powerbook needs to be next with G5s but I disagree. Apple is, and should be, about making money and gaining market share. A G5 powerbook will not be feasible for another 8 months or so. But it seems quite feasible for the iMac so why not do it now? it should sell very well, make money and gain some market share too.

geerlingguy
Dec 10, 2003, 07:41 AM
Has anyone touched the screens on the 20" or 17" iMac??? Those things are already monstrous, without a wireless card, processor, hard drive, RAM, etc. Unless Apple finds a way to make the screens with about 15 lbs. less extra weight in them before doing a tablet, they can't.

But that doesn't stop us from speculating :D

Dont Hurt Me
Dec 10, 2003, 07:42 AM
I noticed the current imac is selling only at 1/3 of the original crt imac. i would like a new aluminum chassis thats is wrapped in see through colored plastic so you can gander at the G5. very interesting that they put a clear plastic cover on the G5 machines so you can admire the interior. i bet see through will be coming back to the imac!

srobert
Dec 10, 2003, 07:44 AM
Is it just me or is the top of the line iMac slowly moving away from my "consumer" type budget?

Let's hope that cheaper materials will also result as a price drop for the consumer and not only a bigger margin of profit for the manufacturer.

Sure G5 would be nice even though it still looks like it's a little soon but since I can't afford a G5 tower WITHOUT the LCD I don't see how I'll be able to affoard a G5 iMac WITH an integrated LCD.

I guess I'll have to swith to the even more budget eMac category. Too bad, I really love the way the iMac looks. And where is my unexpensive headless mac? ^_^

Vanilla
Dec 10, 2003, 07:45 AM
I personally think this is a classic rumour site shenanigan…

Create an exciting rumour to help generate traffic to the website
Run with it
When it starts to get stale kill it with talk of “design issues”, “cost issues” etc.
Replace with new rumour to help generate traffic to the website
Run with it
When it starts to get stale……

All the while Apple themselves say not a word and continue on their [unknown] development schedule.

Apologies for the cynicism, I’ll get me coat
ciao
Vanilla

Photorun
Dec 10, 2003, 07:54 AM
Originally posted by rdowns
Just slap a G5 in this puppy so I can get a new computer already. What a sweet computer that would be with a 20" LCD. Saw one at the Apple Store last week and it is a thing of beauty.

Dare to dream. That would be sweet but only IF they didn't change the pricing, actually if they could pull the pricing to just under two grand ($1999). It seems like Apple had almost figured out the consumer masses when the first iMac came out, even though it too was a little over what consumers wanted to spend. then when the iMac started getting close to the (magical) grand sweet spot you couldn't practically spit in someone's office/house without it landing on an iMac. I personally knew a few companies in Atlanta who bought them because they "looked cool" but also made good machines for certain levels of workers... mind you, these companies were peecee f***wad mentality types previous to this.

Finally Apple was gaining market share, which regardless of what anyone says thinking they're a niche company.. BS!!! Niches shrink, Apple needs to expand their market, end of discussion not open for debate! How do you do that? Sell more units! How do you sell more units? Make 'em affordable. How do you do that? How the heck do I know?!? But finding a way to build super cool machines with parts that may cut corners is one way, don't have to be like Dull who has the cheapest, most piece of crap computers out there and are gaining the world domination pretty much but undercutting everyone, but one does need to price and price well.

$2199 for a consumer machine is laughable. BUT some consumer and prosumers would give it a look if it ducked just under the four digit rollover(s).

Trimix
Dec 10, 2003, 08:07 AM
Originally posted by rdowns
Just slap a G5 in this puppy so I can get a new computer already. What a sweet computer that would be with a 20" LCD. Saw one at the Apple Store last week and it is a thing of beauty.

agreed :D

ITR 81
Dec 10, 2003, 08:15 AM
Good move if they can reduce eMac costs then they can reduce the pricing to say around $500 bucks.

I figure before Apple upgrades the iMac to a G5 platform we will see atleast one more speed bump from the G4 line up.

MacFan-NJ71
Dec 10, 2003, 08:21 AM
To me, the simplest solution would be a version of the 12-inch PowerBook that sported a screen that could be turned over, and that was touch sensitve. Considering that PC tablets have about the same screen real-estate as the 12" PowerBook and are about as thick, this would be a simple way to deliver the product. It would also breathe some additional life into the PowerBook line since G5 PowerBooks are probably about 9 months away. PowerBooks are already very light and I'm sure that Apple engineers could deliver a PowerBook tablet edition under 4.5 pounds.

I've seen people with PC tablets and they usually attach a keyboard and mouse and they sometimes will take it out of its dock. In otherwords, they rarely use the tablet part Perhaps this is one of the reasons that tablet PCs are just not taking off.

I could totally see using an application like Photoshop on a PowerBook with a Wacom-Cintinq screen integrated. Since Apple has traditionally found friends in the graphics industry, this could be another way to make graphic designers drool. (Myself included.)

Dont Hurt Me
Dec 10, 2003, 08:27 AM
Originally posted by Vanilla
I personally think this is a classic rumour site shenanigan…

Create an exciting rumour to help generate traffic to the website
Run with it
When it starts to get stale kill it with talk of “design issues”, “cost issues” etc.
Replace with new rumour to help generate traffic to the website
Run with it
When it starts to get stale……

All the while Apple themselves say not a word and continue on their [unknown] development schedule.

Apologies for the cynicism, I’ll get me coat
ciao
Vanilla I guess in your mind you would like G4 imac forever? Gag!:eek:

srobert
Dec 10, 2003, 08:35 AM
Pardon my ignorance and this is no way a critic, simply curiosity:

What are the advantages of a touch sensitive screen? Is a touch sensitive screen as strudy as a regular one?what about fingerprints? Are touch senstitive screens easier to clean than regular ones? Do one use his fingers or a stylus. I got an old wacom tablet at home, will the screen look as scratched and stained as my old tablet?

Thanks for educating me.

dragonslive
Dec 10, 2003, 08:42 AM
Sure, maybe previous processor speeds in other models would normally suggest a small speed bump to the current imac line (ie.1.33 -1.42). However, there is no logic in this at all!!!

If apple wants to move forward and compete at a serious and cutting edge level in this industry.......they must stop choking their own products to death.

Donthurtme has posted similar opinions for months......and he is simply right!!

Who cares if the powerbook doesn't have a G5? Only selfish individuals who want to feel "professional" and above the "consumer" scream about the imac getting a G5 first.
In reality........the current powerbook has no real "professional" status over the imac.....performance is basically on par. It is "professional" when compared to the ibook (just) and that is appropriate.

I simply don't understand why a notebook computer should cripple a desktop line!! It is a simple computing fact that desktops are faster......lets not forget that.

If a G5 powerbook is not currently feesable......tough titties. Let's bring on what the technology apple has CAN currently do for the product line!.

That is..........G5 90mn imac at 2.0Mhz or higher, a real graphics chip and USB2.

Leave the duals for powermacs for those that really need the power.

Give the "consumer" a real computer option.

The family and casual computer user has the emac.

We need a middle ground.

End rant;)

Dont Hurt Me
Dec 10, 2003, 08:51 AM
this is the Apple game because they dont compete with other computer companies they compete with themself. for example i cant tell you how many times i wrestled with Imac or Powermac? all i wanted was a fast cpu and great videocard but for the consumer apple wont have that. they give imac a slow cpu and lousy videochip and a monitor you cant keep! so then it means powermac yet i dont need half of what this machine can do and its cost are even higher. so what does consumer do? well they are walking through walmart and theres a brand new PC at half the price of imac? what do you think ends up under the xmas tree? Apple needs to stop competing with Apple and simply give the consumer what he wants.

cubist
Dec 10, 2003, 08:58 AM
Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
i found the article interesting but notice the comment sales are lackluster because of the price. i disagree sales are lackluster because it has the never advancing G4 and then you cant keep the monitor! Seems like know one ever wants to mention the slow G4 in recent articles. they dont even compare G4 to to the new AMDs or Intel why? because G4 had fallen so so far back. its pathetic.

You're right, DHM. The G4 may be acceptable - for now - in a notebook, but a G4 in a desktop has all the appeal of a Pentium III. The Washington Apple Pi journal just printed a review of the single 1.8GHz G5 PM, and it blew the doors off the dual 1.25GHz G4 they had.

dragonslive
Dec 10, 2003, 08:58 AM
So true Dont Hurt me. I feel the answer to this is 3 desktop lines....

emac - basic computer user or family
imac - digital hub user
powermac - cutting edge professionals

Currently we have the emac and imac line too close together. With the only real difference being crt vs. lcd.

The powermac is doing its job well. Keeping at the cutting edge for the truly power hunger user.(well, after pending processor updates anyway).

iMac needs a single G5 to satisfy the average regular computer user for basic video, photo, music and dare I say it.......games.

eMac is also basically where it should be considering the current iMac offering. However, once the iMac moves into true digital hub capabilites......the emac can take over much of the iMacs current specs.ie. faster G4, 64MB video etc.

ipiloot
Dec 10, 2003, 09:10 AM
Well. The problem with PC tablets is that they are stripped-down products with beefed up price (price comes from unnecesary features and M$-s overpriced software).

What Apple basically can do is to make an:
1. Special edition MacOS
2. Take Moto's G3 for embedded markets
3. Take iBook's motherboard and clean it
4. Add same 10 Gb HDD which is in iPod
5. Add 10 inch touch-screen
6. Add stylish bluetooth mouse and keyboard

Mix
Stir

Sell it for $1000 or less. together woth iPod it makes pretty nice thing.

Dont Hurt Me
Dec 10, 2003, 09:11 AM
dragonslive Shame Shame Shame, you have used the nastiest word in the Mac vocabulary---- Games? do you know what you have done? your not supposed to do that on a Mac! if you want to game get a PC or Console! I get so sick of this crap. you spend 2 thousand dollars on a new machine and cant play doom3? what the ! Consumers are gamers but Apples consumer line up forgets this. now we will start hearing all the excuses for Apples slow G4 and reasons why you are not supposed to use a mac with games.:rolleyes:

dragonslive
Dec 10, 2003, 09:19 AM
The more I think about this the more convinced I become that apple can't be as stupid as it has seemed for the past 6 months with the iMac line.

A major reason for this is due to the recent ibook changes.

It was painfully obvious to me for some time that apple were letting the powerbook hold back the majority of their product lines due to the stagnated G4 and build quality issues.

Apple to their eventual wisdom woke up andto the fact that the majority of their products lines were well........just outdated and outperformed when measured against the pc world. This gave birth to the ibook G4.

However, this only muddies the waters in the entire product line.........G4 1.0Ghz BOTTOM of the line LAPTOP???????

This is just crazy when looking at the DESKTOP line. eMac/iMac .....800mhz to 1.24Ghz G4?? Please, god save apple from imploding:p

Sooooo, apple MUST be planning a G5 imac or similar "consumer" desktop solution......lest it be overtaken by the "consumer" laptop.

Wouldn't that be laughable?

legion
Dec 10, 2003, 09:23 AM
Originally posted by Sun Baked
I thought the metal boxes hidden behind the fancy plastic always looked more like galvanized sheet metal than a fancy alloy to me.

Of course that spiffy chunk of stainless steel poking out the iMacs case means ...

I think you answered your own question. Galvanized==Zinc "coating" (it's more complex than a "coating", but simpler to explain that way.) However, you can't galvanize stainless steel. It could be galvanized steel and stainless steel.

x86isslow
Dec 10, 2003, 09:28 AM
Originally posted by ipiloot
Well. The problem with PC tablets is that they are stripped-down products with beefed up price (price comes from unnecesary features and M$-s overpriced software).

What Apple basically can do is to make an:
1. Special edition MacOS
2. Take Moto's G3 for embedded markets
3. Take iBook's motherboard and clean it
4. Add same 10 Gb HDD which is in iPod
5. Add 10 inch touch-screen
6. Add stylish bluetooth mouse and keyboard

Mix
Stir

Sell it for $1000 or less. together woth iPod it makes pretty nice thing.

some would argue that given the turnover from year to year of apple OS, m$ isnt the one overpricing their software

1. wouldn't you rather see them put out software without bugs?
after seeding so many versions of panther, it still had major bugs.
apple should concentrate on making sure its products are top-quality

2. why buy from moto? ibm has its own version of the 750 gx (g3) platform. i think it recently hit 1.2Ghz (edit, 1.1 Ghz by IBM's numbers)

ibm embedded chip products (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/D6E15FAFF8BFB21387256DCC007B2114)


4. afaik, the harddrive in the ipod isnt designed for active use, rather, it feeds info to the flash buffer which plays it.

5. 10"? like powerbook 190cs? i think 10" is too small.

6. (edit, misread you post)

McToast
Dec 10, 2003, 09:51 AM
Increased use of plastic parts?

VERY BAD! BAD BAD BAD!!!

lynnpye
Dec 10, 2003, 10:20 AM
It's interesting...as I read through the comments and consider Apple's marketing strategy, it occurs to me that, as a recent switcher, I have some notion of why I had as difficult a time as I did switching. (Consider it a testimony to the utter sweetness of Apple's product that I did switch)

The problem as I see it is the lack of variability. Want an iMac with a 1.25 Ghz proc but only need 15" of screen? Too bad. Want an iMac configured like the 20" model but with a 15" screen to reduce cost (you want the bigger HD, more RAM, better video card)? Can't do it. Granted, this is part of offering an all in one. But as has been pointed out, the only headless model available is the PowerMac. Which has it's own problems.

Want a dual 1.6? Nope. How about a single proc 1.6 with the faster bus? Not available. Dual 1.8 with the fastest bus? Also not offered.

Essentially, rather than offering a smooth curve allowing the user to gradually increase performance and cost simultaneously, Apple customers are required to jump in discrete performance/cost hops. If I want the next better "thing", I have to pay for several other next better "things" in order to get the one I want. This increases my cost.

As a result, the customer looks over the offerings and sometimes (often?) walks away thinking "I just didn't see what I wanted", even though Apple clearly has the technology to offer just that.

Apple needs to do (in my view anyway) a few things here. First, they need to either divorce the LCD screen from the iMac so that I can use any of several sizes for any given iMac model OR they should allow any size screen to come preconfigured with any processor. I would prefer the LCD be separated (I'm sure they could engineer this) since the cost of the LCD is beginning to play heavily into the final total for the unit. Second, they need to offer a headless low end model. If they can separate the LCD from the iMac, this might do it. However, if they still keep the armature design and simply let you pick the size you want, they need to offer a separate model, too. Third, they should, frankly, remove the distinction between the various levels of PowerMac. Currently, the only difference between the various PowerMacs is the proc/bus configuration. If there is a valid technical reason why a 1.6 G5 can only run at an 800 Mhz bus speed, then let us know. If there is a valid technical reason I can't run a dual 1.6, let us know that too.

Personally, the G5 PowerMac differences are sort of a nit of mine. The price structure might stand some tweaking, but that's a nit, too.

Anyway, you've heard a lot from me. I'll go be quiet for awhile now.

davidwells
Dec 10, 2003, 10:23 AM
Originally posted by eric67

...the screen just need to contain the battery, and to be connected via Airport to the dock station; there is nothing unrealistic here.
the only question is more : is Apple going to do it seeing how bad is the Tablet Pc market!!!????
less than 25% of the expected sale volume!!!!!


True, but my limited experience w/ Tablet PC's shows that they are already 2-in-1 devices: a touch screen and a laptop, right?. If Apple could separate the 'wireless touch screen' from the 'laptop' maybe they could have something revolutionary.

I would love to have a wireless touch screen w/ battery and even fixed memory and no HD. Just minimal CPU enough to 'remote' into my desktop machine so I could do little more that browse sites and answer email w/ a virtual-popup keyboard (ala PocketPC)

I'd be estatic! But that's just me...

spencecb
Dec 10, 2003, 10:23 AM
Is it just me, or does everyone else get really tired of the horrible spelling and use of grammar on these damn message boards???? LEARN TO SPELL AND USE PROPER GRAMMAR PEOPLE!!!!!

srobert
Dec 10, 2003, 10:30 AM
Originally posted by spencecb
Is it just me, or does everyone else get really tired of the horrible spelling and use of grammar on these damn message boards???? LEARN TO SPELL AND USE PROPER GRAMMAR PEOPLE!!!!!

Please keep in mind that Apple has an international fan appeal. Many of the macrumors members are from outside the U.S. and english is not our native language. I'm always trying my best when writing in english but sometimes the results might not be up to par. ;)

spencecb
Dec 10, 2003, 10:36 AM
Clearly, you do not know the Apple lineup....you can modify any of the iMacs to change their hardrive size....and to begin with, they all come with 80 GB....so there is no difference to begin with!!! True, you can not change the speed of the processor which is something they should offer. Also, the PowerMac G5 can not run on a bus that is faster than 1/2 the speed of the processor....For example, a 1.6 cannot run on the 1 Ghz system bus....hope you followed my post!!!

b_riggs
Dec 10, 2003, 11:00 AM
I am in complete agrreement about Apple offering a headless iMac, especially with a G5. I think that this is the ideal product with which to gain market share. And they would make money as well.

dongmin
Dec 10, 2003, 11:02 AM
Originally posted by srobert
Please keep in mind that Apple has an international fan appeal. Many of the macrumors members are from outside the U.S. and english is not our native language. I'm always trying my best when writing in english but sometimes the results might not be up to par. ;) no it's because we're lazy, not becuae we're foreigners...

mrsebastian
Dec 10, 2003, 11:10 AM
Originally posted by lynnpye
...The problem as I see it is the lack of variability. Want an iMac with a 1.25 Ghz proc but only need 15" of screen? Too bad. Want an iMac configured like the 20" model but with a 15" screen to reduce cost (you want the bigger HD, more RAM, better video card)? Can't do it. Granted, this is part of offering an all in one. But as has been pointed out, the only headless model available is the PowerMac. Which has it's own problems...

though i understand the argument, that's not apple's basic philosophy. they don't want people to build their own machines and there's a reason why apple is considered the easiest computer/software system to use. it's hard enough to to get all the bugs ironed out of software and hardware of a few models across the line. can you imagine the problems that apple could have, if people started customizing all aspects of the hardware down the the bus speed? this is exactly why we all buy macs in the first place. we don't have to worry about this stuff, because all we have to do is plug and play.

jayscheuerle
Dec 10, 2003, 11:14 AM
Originally posted by srobert
Is it just me or is the top of the line iMac slowly moving away from my "consumer" type budget?


Apple's problem is that the bottom of the line iMac is out of most people's "consumer" type budget.

geerlingguy
Dec 10, 2003, 11:15 AM
If Apple's changing their chassis, it needs to make it good.

One of the best aspects of all Apple products is their engineering and craftsmanship. This is part of the reason more educated and sophisticated people buy Macs. This is also a great purchase point for consumers walking into a CompUSA.

Pick up an iPod. Shake it (go ahead...). Press the Buttons. Do you hear any plastic squeaking. Do you feel any loose parts. No! Apple needs to stay with quality solid construction. If they do use plastic (as they do with iBooks), they use it to enhance a solid chassis.

I sure hope Apple doesn't do something stupid to a great product line - the product line that singlehandedly saved the company in 1997.

eyelikeart
Dec 10, 2003, 11:19 AM
Originally posted by srobert
Please keep in mind that Apple has an international fan appeal. Many of the macrumors members are from outside the U.S. and english is not our native language. I'm always trying my best when writing in english but sometimes the results might not be up to par. ;)

He's got a point there. ;)

Marc the Mac
Dec 10, 2003, 11:26 AM
Steve walks onto the stage.. music playing in background.. talk about ipod and how many itunes have been downloaded.

Nice ripple from the audience.

He's been using a 12" Powerbook for a while he says, as he sits in front of it at a desk. Phil is sitting over on the other side of the stage on a sofa, he's just had a big meal and is tired out. He's using his blue tooth phone to text a friend (using his address book on the phone previously synced with iSync.

Jobs shouts over to Phil, "hey phil have you seen this?' as he looks at his Powerbook screen.

Then he looks at the audience and says 'wouldn't it be great if I could just [as he grabs the screen of the Powerbook] pick this up and walk over to Phil?". Steve walks across the stage carrying the screen from the Powerbook (leaving the lower end behinand sticks it under Phils nose "hey wow! Nemo 2, thats great" says Phil.

The crowd roars, goes mad etc etc. (then they think for a bit...)

What a scene for January. Steve would love it.

Steve then turns to the audience 'But there's one more thing... (silence everwhere). Surely I can just carry my 12" Powerbook over to Phil, it's wireless, light and has a handy keyboard and trackpad' says steve.

"We thought about this and we decided that a Powerbook is a Power BOOK - we think people want to carry the whole thing around. They don't want fiddley hinges that could break after a little while." Steve paces about a bit thinking.

"So, what did we do? Well we thought (steve walks over to an iMac) let' not lose our heads over this but let's create a headless iMac. But, you can have either, a standard screen that can be pulled off and fitted to a newer iMac when you upgrade,,,, Or you can have the 'wireless' screen and just walk about with it. You can sit in bed and browse the net. It charges while on the base."

Steve walks over to Phil and sits next him, stickes the screen under his nose. "Wow you've busted the iMac?" asks Phil. "No" says Steve 'we've just revolutionised the digital hub Phil".

CrackedButter
Dec 10, 2003, 11:26 AM
I would love a tablet from Apple, something which i could pick up and take to college and then attach back onto the base when i get home.

I'd sell this powerbook in a heartbeat if it looks good enough.

But we shall see in Janaury...

JoE950
Dec 10, 2003, 11:43 AM
according to the way apple talks, i think they would do it if they could do it in the form of a laptop, with out the actual computer inside. they think people want keyboards (which i agree with and have looked down upon tablets for not having). So this would just be a display, (huge) battery keyboard, and trackpad. the advantages are acutally worth it. the weight would be the same, but the entire base could be a battery lasting hours, and for once in a long time, a laptop that generates almost no heat.. right?? theoretically if they could do this, by using airport extreme (is that even fast enough to transmit a good quality video signal and handle the keyboard and mouse as well?) it could even be used with any airport equipped mac.. but that would interfere with the networking wouldnt it.. arg

spencecb
Dec 10, 2003, 11:52 AM
I personally see no point in having a tablet pc as they are today...there is nothing more convenient about them than the current laptops...in fact, I think tablets are less convenient because you have no keyboard or mouse for user input...the only way Apple would enter this market is if they could improve upon the tablet substantially...which, is entirely possible because Apple is a revolutionary company. I just dont understand when people are saying that they would love a portable computer that you can take anywhere with you and its so cool because it has wireless internet and bluetooth......well, HELLO!!! that's called a laptop :D

neilw
Dec 10, 2003, 12:04 PM
Has DigiTimes ever been correct about a major rumor? I've started to regard them like MacOSRumors.

I think that Apple needs to be very careful about doing a tablet or remote screen or whatever. Given their current consumer pricing (i.e., ridiculous iMac prices) adding features that would significantly increase the cost seems like a bad move. And don't doubt that making a removable, remotable iMac screen would add *significant* cost. It would also weigh a lot more, making it doubtful they could support it on the same arm the iMac currently uses.

Like many others here, I'd much rather see them address the basic issues with their consumer product line before pursuing very high risk ventures, which any tablet-like thing may be called.

redkore
Dec 10, 2003, 12:08 PM
Originally posted by spencecb
Is it just me, or does everyone else get really tired of the horrible spelling and use of grammar on these damn message boards???? LEARN TO SPELL AND USE PROPER GRAMMAR PEOPLE!!!!!

You forgot the comma after "GRAMMAR".

JW Pepper
Dec 10, 2003, 12:27 PM
I 20" iMac but I just can't put my hand in my pocket for a 1.25ghz G4. Anything below 2ghz is an embarrassment now.

Put the 2ghz G5 in it and I will put my cash on the table.


Power Macs should all go duel processor and let the iMac take the middle ground. With duel processors in the powermacs the iMac won't tread on their toes.

asphalt-proof
Dec 10, 2003, 12:34 PM
ncreased use of plastic parts?

VERY BAD! BAD BAD BAD!!!


I totally agree. This is why Dell computers are so cheap. You get what you pay for.

pjkelnhofer
Dec 10, 2003, 12:39 PM
I think this has been mentioned before, but what if rather than a "tablet" pc, the screen was a touch screen and detatchable but wirelessly "connected" (either Bluetooth or Airport or something similiar - I don't pretend to be very technical) to the box. So I could walk around my house with it, surf the web on the couch, watch a DVD in the kitchen, write an email lying in bed, etc. Maybe it would have a battery that recharged whenever it was plugged into the base.
I think that would be pretty cool.
That being said, I just want a G5 cube (is that really so much to ask).
I did notice the single 1.8 G5's are now $1799 in the Apple Refurb store. I must say that is pretty tempting to me. I do not think it is crazy to believe Apple could put what you need in a smaller box for closer to $1000.
For that I would take my credit card off of hiatus (trying to reduce debt to become a homeowner you see).

pjkelnhofer
Dec 10, 2003, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by asphalt-proof
ncreased use of plastic parts?

VERY BAD! BAD BAD BAD!!!


I totally agree. This is why Dell computers are so cheap. You get what you pay for.

From the outside, my old iMac looks all plastic, and I like it. I think that people automatically equate plastic with cheap.
I have faith that Apple can increase the amount of plastic materials without sacrificing the style and quality we expect.

jmerk
Dec 10, 2003, 12:43 PM
Marc the Mac has something here...

A friend and I have been discussing something like this for some time now.

I DON'T think that we will see a "take anywhere, attach to anything" screen (at least not initially, but it would be cool).
I DO think that Apple would really be on to something if they created an iMac with a screen that would detach and function as a touch-sensitive screen (and preferably allow input of some kind via usb [keyboard for text-heavy tasks]).

Picture this:
The processor in the base handles all of the heavy work and sends out information to the display via Airport Extreme and allowing for control with ARD (as people have discussed).

Marc the Mac described a scenario with (presumably) a Quicktime movie playing. Other people mentioned browsing the web and using e-mail clients. All great.

How about taking it a step further...
Using the tablet to control your iTunes with the iMac hooked up to your stereo? I know there are 802.11g stereos "available" but good luck getting your hands on one (go to Philips website and try finding a retail outlet within 200 miles of you that is selling it
[www.consumer.philips.com>home audio>home theatre systems]).

This could also be the "killer app" that X11 (devices controlled by computer remotely) needs to become more ubiquitous. You are getting ready for bed and you grab your iMac screen, turn down the heat, turn on the security system, shut off all the lights in the house, turn on the outside light, and set it into it's charging cradle next to your bed where it would go into sleep mode to wake up at 6:30, turn the heat up, turn off the motion detectors on the security system and wake you up with your favorite song gradually getting louder over your stereo!

If this thing weren't exorbitantly priced, I'd buy one in a minute because my "computer desk" is upstairs with a 17" lcd, scanner, printer, firewire hard drive, iSight, digital video camera, etc. I only use that setup for "hard core" computing. 75% of the time, I'm not editing digital video, backing up to firewire hd, scanning, etc. I just want to check e-mail, browse the web and listen to music.

Instead, I have a 12" powerbook that I plug into my stereo downstairs with an 1/8" mini-stereo cable in my living room to listen to music (effectively prohibitting me from using it for anything else). Unplug, (no music in the house but the radio [puke]) and sit downstairs at the kitchen table and check e-mail, browse web, etc. (over Netgear 802.11g).

Last thing...don't expect a G5 iMac for 1+ years if history tells us anything about processor cycles on the Mac...

j

rdowns
Dec 10, 2003, 12:45 PM
Originally posted by JW Pepper
I could believe a swivel top lap top with a touch sensitive screen that would make perfect sense, if a little expensive, but it make no sense to do this to an iMac.

As far as a change in design I believe that what they have said is entirely reasonable. Apple would always want to try to reduce costs, they have too. We all know a change is coming to accommodate the G5, it is just a matter of when. Given the recent introduction of he 20" version I find it hard to believe that the new model will debut in January.

Why? The 20" is hardly a new model, just a differnet monitor. No research and development there. Might have decided to get the 20" out there and not wait until the new G5 models were ready.

davidwells
Dec 10, 2003, 12:46 PM
an iMac-less head?

rdowns
Dec 10, 2003, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by Photorun

$2199 for a consumer machine is laughable. BUT some consumer and prosumers would give it a look if it ducked just under the four digit rollover(s).

I'd pay $2199 if they gave me 512MB RAM and a better video card. Bluetooth would also be nice.

rikers_mailbox
Dec 10, 2003, 01:08 PM
What is this whole thread about. . . some kind of wireless display pretending to be a tablet PC?

Check this out. . .
http://www.viewsonic.com/pdf/airsyncV210datasheetfinal.pdf

Just wanted to throw that in the mix.

pjkelnhofer
Dec 10, 2003, 01:23 PM
Originally posted by jmerk
...
Last thing...don't expect a G5 iMac for 1+ years if history tells us anything about processor cycles on the Mac...

j

But isn't the G4 -> G5 transition very different from the G3 -> G4 transition (which I had been led to believe are basically the same chip but the G4 has Altivec).
And the iMac vs. PowerMac lines have only existed since the G3. I just don't know if we can assume the change to all G5 will be as slow. When Apple went to PPC chips originally how long did they keep making x80 chips? It is just a different computer market out there then the old G3. To many people (not me) MHz is everything and Mac's just sound slow.
I bought my G3 iMac when G4's where in PowerMacs, but the G3 wasn't nearly the "outdated" chip that the G4 is now in the minds of many consumers.
I think it is very important to get the G4 out of new computers and differentiate between "low-end" (iMac and iBook) and "high-end" (PowerMac and PowerBook) lines in other ways.

pjkelnhofer
Dec 10, 2003, 01:24 PM
Originally posted by rdowns
Why? The 20" is hardly a new model, just a differnet monitor. No research and development there. Might have decided to get the 20" out there and not wait until the new G5 models were ready.

I totally agree, I still wonder if the 20" iMac wasn't more about getting rid of 20" LCD and less about increasing the iMac line.

Dont Hurt Me
Dec 10, 2003, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by spencecb
Is it just me, or does everyone else get really tired of the horrible spelling and use of grammar on these damn message boards???? LEARN TO SPELL AND USE PROPER GRAMMAR PEOPLE!!!!! ef yuar wried bout spelin & gramar go reed a papor ore mgzine!

fpnc
Dec 10, 2003, 01:37 PM
I don't believe that 802.11g (Airport Extreme) could handle a high-resolution bit-mapped display at any decent frame rate. You could probably do a VNC-like encoding for text and simple graphics, but forget about video games or movies or any high-resolution motion graphics. I don't think such a device would be practical, since when operating in the wireless mode you'd be restricted to a simplified graphics display and even then you'd probably need two processors, one in the "main" computer and another in the display (the latter to process the compressed/encoded video sent from the main processor).

In any case, you would not have the same graphics experience with a wireless display as you currently have with a dedicated AGP port and a fast, local graphics processor.

rdowns
Dec 10, 2003, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by spencecb
Is it just me, or does everyone else get really tired of the horrible spelling and use of grammar on these damn message boards???? LEARN TO SPELL AND USE PROPER GRAMMAR PEOPLE!!!!!

For all intensive purposes, your right. They're must be a better way. I could care less.

:D

rdowns
Dec 10, 2003, 01:41 PM
Originally posted by lynnpye
It's interesting...as I read through the comments and consider Apple's marketing strategy, it occurs to me that, as a recent switcher, I have some notion of why I had as difficult a time as I did switching. (Consider it a testimony to the utter sweetness of Apple's product that I did switch)

The problem as I see it is the lack of variability. Want an iMac with a 1.25 Ghz proc but only need 15" of screen? Too bad. Want an iMac configured like the 20" model but with a 15" screen to reduce cost (you want the bigger HD, more RAM, better video card)? Can't do it. Granted, this is part of offering an all in one. But as has been pointed out, the only headless model available is the PowerMac. Which has it's own problems.

Want a dual 1.6? Nope. How about a single proc 1.6 with the faster bus? Not available. Dual 1.8 with the fastest bus? Also not offered.

Essentially, rather than offering a smooth curve allowing the user to gradually increase performance and cost simultaneously, Apple customers are required to jump in discrete performance/cost hops. If I want the next better "thing", I have to pay for several other next better "things" in order to get the one I want. This increases my cost.

As a result, the customer looks over the offerings and sometimes (often?) walks away thinking "I just didn't see what I wanted", even though Apple clearly has the technology to offer just that.

Apple needs to do (in my view anyway) a few things here. First, they need to either divorce the LCD screen from the iMac so that I can use any of several sizes for any given iMac model OR they should allow any size screen to come preconfigured with any processor. I would prefer the LCD be separated (I'm sure they could engineer this) since the cost of the LCD is beginning to play heavily into the final total for the unit. Second, they need to offer a headless low end model. If they can separate the LCD from the iMac, this might do it. However, if they still keep the armature design and simply let you pick the size you want, they need to offer a separate model, too. Third, they should, frankly, remove the distinction between the various levels of PowerMac. Currently, the only difference between the various PowerMacs is the proc/bus configuration. If there is a valid technical reason why a 1.6 G5 can only run at an 800 Mhz bus speed, then let us know. If there is a valid technical reason I can't run a dual 1.6, let us know that too.

Personally, the G5 PowerMac differences are sort of a nit of mine. The price structure might stand some tweaking, but that's a nit, too.

Anyway, you've heard a lot from me. I'll go be quiet for awhile now.

I think Apple would have a winner if they had complete BYO iMac at their site as well as a few standard models.

Build your iMac:

Select processor speed- G5 1.6, 1.8, 2.0
Select RAM- 512MB, 1GB
Select HD size- 40, 80 or 120
Select video card- 32, 64 or 128
Select LCD size- 15", 17" 20"
Select Airport/Bluetooth

dracoleb
Dec 10, 2003, 01:42 PM
Any one remember the powerbook duo dock? You had a desktop and at the push of a button you had a portable, that idea didn't stay around long, why would they think an evolution on that idea would work?

mojowantshappy
Dec 10, 2003, 02:29 PM
One thing, in order to transmit uncompressed video at 1024x768 you would need bandwith that could support transfer speeds of roughly 3 MB/sec, or 24.5 Mbps. That is a lot of bandwith, and I don't think that 802.11g can really handle it despite the fact that it can theoretically handle 54 Mbps.

Dont Hurt Me
Dec 10, 2003, 02:46 PM
i like what rdowns said, how about the ability to have your imac the way YOU want it rather then Having things forced on you such as slow cpu's and monster size hard drives and the least powerful videochip in the industry made meaning fx5200. Apple is not burger king that is for sure, its apples way or the pc highway.

DGFan
Dec 10, 2003, 02:57 PM
Originally posted by MacMarino
So i was thinking when i saw the tablet being mentioned and how people are always saying they want an iMac with a detachable screen. How about a screen that clips in and out of a a kind of cradle on the metal arm, but can be used as a tablet PC when disconnected from the main body...and when you reconnect the 2 parts everything just syncs together. Could it work?

MacMarino

Heck, that would be worthwhile even if it couldn't be used as a tablet. It would be nice to be able to disconnect the iMac (err, new iMac according to Arn's list) screen and use it with another computer.

DGFan
Dec 10, 2003, 03:07 PM
Originally posted by rikers_mailbox
What is this whole thread about. . . some kind of wireless display pretending to be a tablet PC?

Check this out. . .
http://www.viewsonic.com/pdf/airsyncV210datasheetfinal.pdf

Just wanted to throw that in the mix.

Ars just did a review that I can sum up in one word: slow.

If Apple could get the speed issue solved they would have a winner. But still, it would be a winner of a very, very tiny market so I doubt it would be worth it.

Spock
Dec 10, 2003, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by rdowns


Build your iMac:

Select processor speed- G5 1.6, 1.8, 2.0
Select RAM- 512MB, 1GB
Select HD size- 40, 80 or 120
Select video card- 32, 64 or 128
Select LCD size- 15", 17" 20"
Select Airport/Bluetooth

Come on lets do a reality check here, How long did we wait for a G4 iMac?? The G5 Just came out, Apple will not put this in the iMac until the newness on the Powermac dies down. And a Tablet come on who is the CEO?? Steve would hate seeing finger prints and pen marks all over his screens

iwantanewmac
Dec 10, 2003, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by cubist
You're right, DHM. The G4 may be acceptable - for now - in a notebook, but a G4 in a desktop has all the appeal of a Pentium III. The Washington Apple Pi journal just printed a review of the single 1.8GHz G5 PM, and it blew the doors off the dual 1.25GHz G4 they had.

Very strange.
I have seen lots of reviews that said the opposite. In lots of tests the 1.8 g5 isn't faster than the dual 1.25. Especially the model with 2mb l3 cache per processor.

pjkelnhofer
Dec 10, 2003, 03:34 PM
Originally posted by rdowns
I think Apple would have a winner if they had complete BYO iMac at their site as well as a few standard models.

Build your iMac:

Select processor speed- G5 1.6, 1.8, 2.0
Select RAM- 512MB, 1GB
Select HD size- 40, 80 or 120
Select video card- 32, 64 or 128
Select LCD size- 15", 17" 20"
Select Airport/Bluetooth

I think rdowns brings up an excellent point. Apple needs more customization especially in the iMac line. You cannot get the 15" with a Superdrive for example. I remember not even a year ago this sort of thing was an option.
Are more BTO options too much to ask?

jmerk
Dec 10, 2003, 04:02 PM
fpnc wrote:
...and even then you'd probably need two processors, one in the "main" computer and another in the display (the latter to process the compressed/encoded video sent from the main processor).

In any case, you would not have the same graphics experience with a wireless display as you currently have with a dedicated AGP port and a fast, local graphics processor.

mojowantshappy wrote:
One thing, in order to transmit uncompressed video at 1024x768 you would need bandwith that could support transfer speeds of roughly 3 MB/sec, or 24.5 Mbps. That is a lot of bandwith, and I don't think that 802.11g can really handle it despite the fact that it can theoretically handle 54 Mbps.

mojo:
since i'm not a hardware superpro i'm not sure but 802.11g couldn't sustain 24.5 Mbps when it's hypothetical speed is more than double that?! that sucks!

fpnc:
here are a few options (i'm not sure if the second is possible since i don't have anything to compare to):
1. scale back the resolution.
if you scale back the resolution i imagine that you wouldn't need quite the bandwidth and thus you MAY be able to run it over 802.11g.

2. put a dedicated graphics chip in the screen as you suggested. i am not an industrial engineer but considering they can cram a G4, motherboard, harddrive, superdrive, graphics chip, bluetooth module, and all the according ports and fans, keyboard and screen into a 1" thick, 5 lb. device; i am inclined to think that if you can build an lcd screen that could run off a standalone graphics card with an 802.11g card, antenna and one usb port in it, thinner than 1", and lighter than 5 lbs.
how about this, throw a G3 in there to handle some processing as well? cheap, fast "enough" for processing video, etc...

i see the point that "this would only fit a small market" but it is my opinion that this would CREATE a market. one of those things that would make people say, "that is something that i really need!"

who knows, maybe until the next version of 802.11 can support uncompressed video at high resolution, X11 becomes a common thing, and TiVo functions could be built in and other features to add even more value it won't see the light of day.

oh well, here is one person that would buy one!

j

tny
Dec 10, 2003, 04:29 PM
Originally posted by spencecb
Is it just me, or does everyone else get really tired of the horrible spelling and use of grammar on these damn message boards???? LEARN TO SPELL AND USE PROPER GRAMMAR PEOPLE!!!!!
If you're going to troll like that, at least get your grammar right. "Damn" is a verb; the adjective is "damned".

AirUncleP
Dec 10, 2003, 04:39 PM
Originally posted by MacMarino
So i was thinking when i saw the tablet being mentioned and how people are always saying they want an iMac with a detachable screen. How about a screen that clips in and out of a a kind of cradle on the metal arm, but can be used as a tablet PC when disconnected from the main body...and when you reconnect the 2 parts everything just syncs together. Could it work?

MacMarino

Sounds good. Just slide in a tv tuner card and then it could double as a flat panel tv screen.

AirUncleP
Dec 10, 2003, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by spencecb
Is it just me, or does everyone else get really tired of the horrible spelling and use of grammar on these damn message boards???? LEARN TO SPELL AND USE PROPER GRAMMAR PEOPLE!!!!!

Multiple punctuation at the end of a sentence.....tsk, tsk, tsk.

close
Dec 10, 2003, 04:51 PM
Just wanted to thank Marc the Mac for his post! Great! :)

captain kirk
Dec 10, 2003, 05:26 PM
Originally posted by spencecb
Is it just me, or does everyone else get really tired of the horrible spelling and use of grammar on these damn message boards???? LEARN TO SPELL AND USE PROPER GRAMMAR PEOPLE!!!!!

SORRY TO POINT THIS OUT BUT WRITING AN ENTIRE SENTENCE IN CAPITAL LETTERS IS ALSO VERY POOR. YOUR ENGLISH TEACHER MUST BE TURNING IN HER GRAVE.:p

Sailfish
Dec 10, 2003, 05:56 PM
Well I have a one year old emac and it came with a larger keyboard so I can keep a pencil and a pen on it.

Now I got a Dual G5 and the keyboard seems it has been trimmed of all plastic around the edges, the adjustable riser underneath is missing.

The emac mouse had a adjustable dial underneath, the new mouse doesn't.


oh well, as long as my iPod has a stand

Psychic Shopper
Dec 10, 2003, 06:05 PM
Magnesium is not cheap, and it's hard to work with, Airplane wheels are made of magnesium
I would think galvinized sheet metal would be cheaper.

the_dalex
Dec 10, 2003, 06:06 PM
The amount of data that flows from a system to a monitor is incredible. We need that data rate to run a display with the resolution and refresh that we are used to, and wireless technology isn't even CLOSE. I won't even go into the problems with the concept of transmitting video data in packets over 802.11g, just give that up right now.

The consumer doesn't really want a detachable display. The consumer doesn't really want a tablet computer. The consumer doesn't really want their computer to record television. They may think that these are neat ideas, but they aren't all rushing out to buy these things. These are niche products that the average consumer isn't really asking for, or when they actually take them home, they are disappointed by the lack of other features that they are accustomed to. Great, my computer can record TV? What do I do while it's busy encoding and writing the stream, and any interruption will cause it to drop frames? Go watch live TV? I should have bought a Tivo, then I could do whatever I wanted whenever I wanted...

There will be a day when we can fit an entire computer system on a few chips for reduced space/heat output/power usage, with a solid-state data storage system all in a slim package that is about the size and weight of today's regular LCDs. At that point, it won't be an issue. Until then, R&D money spent on tablet PCs and wireless displays based on current technology is going to be wasted. I, and most consumers, will not give up our fully-featured laptops for reduced-quality tablets that cost more and do less. There is virtually no consumer market for these items, because the technology isn't going to deliver what people expect, or at a reasonable price. Tablets are designed for the kind of data-entry you see in warehouses, with more checkboxes and drop-down menus. Handwriting is about the worst possible human interface option, maybe second only to speech. I don't see it as a benefit in any way, shape, or form in my life.

My solution to screen-sharing so far has been much cheaper... I turn or hand my laptop to someone else to show them something. It weighs less than 5 pounds so it can be one-handed, and can burn DVDs to boot. It cost less than any tablet PC out there, and the screen is bigger than most of them. The 12" Powerbook packs more into its tiny form factor than any tablet PC out there, and I defy you to tell me that it is more cumbersome to use.

fpnc
Dec 10, 2003, 06:13 PM
Originally posted by DGFan
Ars just did a review [...on the Viewsonic wireless display...] that I can sum up in one word: slow.


Yes, they even tried Microsoft's remote desktop with a 1Gbps WIRED network and they found that AVI (i.e. movie) playback was largely unacceptable. So, I don't see any way that Airport Extreme (54Mbps theoretical, in typical applications maybe only 20 to 30 Mbps) could handle a rich graphical user experience, certainly not movies or video games and they'd also probably have to scale back on the Quartz and Aqua candy.

It would probably be okay for web browsing and text, but that might be about it.

Besides, any decent wireless display would require its own processor and local memory which would make iMacs (or PowerBooks) even more pricey.

Gyroscope
Dec 10, 2003, 06:19 PM
Hm magnesium! Would it be able to burn like this?

http://www.simson.net/photos/hacks/cubefire.html

rdowns
Dec 10, 2003, 07:10 PM
Originally posted by Spock
Come on lets do a reality check here, How long did we wait for a G4 iMac?? The G5 Just came out, Apple will not put this in the iMac until the newness on the Powermac dies down. And a Tablet come on who is the CEO?? Steve would hate seeing finger prints and pen marks all over his screens

The reality check is people are not buying the G4s in desktops. The G4 is old and now has the stigma as Apple's old chip. I want a new Mac and I want a G5. I do not want the beast that is the PowerMac. Money is not my concern.

wilco
Dec 10, 2003, 07:27 PM
Originally posted by mojowantshappy
One thing, in order to transmit uncompressed video at 1024x768 you would need bandwith that could support transfer speeds of roughly 3 MB/sec, or 24.5 Mbps. That is a lot of bandwith, and I don't think that 802.11g can really handle it despite the fact that it can theoretically handle 54 Mbps.

Let's discuss this. What impedes 802.11g to the point where it can't handle 50% of its theoretical rate?

luffe
Dec 10, 2003, 08:28 PM
After reading some of the posts I get the impression that a lot of people would like to see the iMac with a tablet screen that is wirelessly connected to the iMac "base".

I can't really see this being a major revolution. Technically... maybe. But for the mass consumer market I don't really see the product utility. It would proably be more expensive and I don't think the mass market would be likely to invest in such feature. Personally,

1) I would find it difficault to sit or lay in a good position where the screen is upright in front of me. Either I would have to hold the screen in front of me or I would have to watch the screen from above.

2) The product utility that a tablet would provide for me, would be things that I wouldn't be able to do on a laptop as easily. Eg. taking notes and drawing graphs... Situations where I need these features would be away from home, making the tablet iMac solution somewhat impossible.

As MacFan-NJ71 earlier mentioned, a 12" PB that could be turned into a tablet would be nice: Ultra-mobility, the tablet features when needed, laptop features when needed... But unfortunately only a PC-copy, just with a little more style :p

pjkelnhofer
Dec 10, 2003, 08:44 PM
Originally posted by luffe
After reading some of the posts I get the impression that a lot of people would like to see the iMac with a tablet screen that is wirelessly connected to the iMac "base".

I can't really see this being a major revolution. Technically... maybe. But for the mass consumer market I don't really see the product utility. It would proably be more expensive and I don't think the mass market would be likely to invest in such feature.
I don't see why this would be so expensive. Is the cost of a tablet in the touchscreen or in the form-factor? Airport and BlueTooth technology are becoming standards that people will soon expect in their computers.

Personally,

1) I would find it difficault to sit or lay in a good position where the screen is upright in front of me. Either I would have to hold the screen in front of me or I would have to watch the screen from above.


Again, I would I think it would be cool if it were a touchscreen. You could hold it in your lap to surf, email, etc. It would not be designed to upright in front of you.


2) The product utility that a tablet would provide for me, would be things that I wouldn't be able to do on a laptop as easily. Eg. taking notes and drawing graphs... Situations where I need these features would be away from home, making the tablet iMac solution somewhat impossible.


I think we are talking about too different things. One is a tablet computer. The other is a computer with a wireless touchscreen for a monitor.

~Shard~
Dec 10, 2003, 09:34 PM
If Apple releases a G5 iMac so soon (relatively) after the chip's introduction, I'm afraid the cost might be rather high when combined with new hardware, new form factor, etc. I could be completely wrong on this, but if so, then this kind of defeats the purpose of having an affordable consumer model.

Steven1621
Dec 10, 2003, 09:40 PM
apple is missing a mid range desktop computer. the 15in imac is good and so is the emac, but some type of computer like the cube might fill in a mid range nicely.

mojowantshappy
Dec 10, 2003, 09:43 PM
Originally posted by wilco
Let's discuss this. What impedes 802.11g to the point where it can't handle 50% of its theoretical rate?

Well, firstly, I believe that is just throughput, how much can actually go through the base station. So, if you had someone else using your Airport it would be very possible to encounter bandwith congestion.

Now, I admit I don't know much about the discrepancy between raw data throughput vs. real life bandwith, but I have read many articles that the actual bandwith you will get on an 802.11g card is around 11 Mbps on an uncongested network. There are plenty of articles to quote from, but I don't want to be spewing out facts that mean little to me. Here is a great discussion on slashdot that can shed some light on the subject where I can't. http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/08/09/172214&mode=thread&tid=137&tid=193

Lastly, have you ever used a 802.11b network? You know that the throughput is 11 Mbps, but the minute you walk five feet away from the base station you are knocked down to 5 Mbps or so. The stability of high bandwith on an 802.11g network will be a big issue. I am not knocking it, but 802.11g just isn't suited for video transfer.

kangaroo
Dec 10, 2003, 09:50 PM
Originally posted by the_dalex
The amount of data that flows from a system to a monitor is incredible. We need that data rate to run a display with the resolution and refresh that we are used to, and wireless technology isn't even CLOSE. I won't even go into the problems with the concept of transmitting video data in packets over 802.11g, just give that up right now.

The consumer doesn't really want a detachable display. The consumer doesn't really want a tablet computer. The consumer doesn't really want their computer to record television. They may think that these are neat ideas, but they aren't all rushing out to buy these things. These are niche products that the average consumer isn't really asking for, or when they actually take them home, they are disappointed by the lack of other features that they are accustomed to. Great, my computer can record TV? What do I do while it's busy encoding and writing the stream, and any interruption will cause it to drop frames? Go watch live TV? I should have bought a Tivo, then I could do whatever I wanted whenever I wanted...

There will be a day when we can fit an entire computer system on a few chips for reduced space/heat output/power usage, with a solid-state data storage system all in a slim package that is about the size and weight of today's regular LCDs. At that point, it won't be an issue. Until then, R&D money spent on tablet PCs and wireless displays based on current technology is going to be wasted. I, and most consumers, will not give up our fully-featured laptops for reduced-quality tablets that cost more and do less. There is virtually no consumer market for these items, because the technology isn't going to deliver what people expect, or at a reasonable price. Tablets are designed for the kind of data-entry you see in warehouses, with more checkboxes and drop-down menus. Handwriting is about the worst possible human interface option, maybe second only to speech. I don't see it as a benefit in any way, shape, or form in my life.

My solution to screen-sharing so far has been much cheaper... I turn or hand my laptop to someone else to show them something. It weighs less than 5 pounds so it can be one-handed, and can burn DVDs to boot. It cost less than any tablet PC out there, and the screen is bigger than most of them. The 12" Powerbook packs more into its tiny form factor than any tablet PC out there, and I defy you to tell me that it is more cumbersome to use.

Good post!

Spock
Dec 10, 2003, 10:03 PM
Originally posted by rdowns
The reality check is people are not buying the G4s in desktops. The G4 is old and now has the stigma as Apple's old chip. I want a new Mac and I want a G5. I do not want the beast that is the PowerMac. Money is not my concern.

The G4 is a old chip and so was the G3 and we just recently seen the last of it. The G5 also generates heat, the current iMac case would have to be revised to acomodate a larger heatsink and fans. But, that could explain the rumored case revisions. On the other hand, why would Apple update the iMac to 20" if they are reforming the thing in less than a month? The Xserve is probaly going to be Apple's next G5 if not a Rev.B pMac G5. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see a iMac G5 BUT we do have to think about this. Oh well we will find out soon.

sjk
Dec 10, 2003, 10:22 PM
Originally posted by rdowns
I'd pay $2199 if they gave me 512MB RAM and a better video card.I'd like to see 1-DIMM 512MB RAM standard, with a 1-DIMM 1GB BTO option.

sjk
Dec 10, 2003, 10:32 PM
Originally posted by close
Just wanted to thank Marc the Mac for his post! Great! :) Yep, that was fun!

iMeowbot
Dec 10, 2003, 11:14 PM
Originally posted by Psychic Shopper
Magnesium is not cheap, and it's hard to work with, Airplane wheels are made of magnesium
I would think galvinized sheet metal would be cheaper.

??? Magnesium costs roughly the same as aluminum, and it's used to make very ordinary things like car engine parts and lawnmower shells.

Gyroscope
Dec 10, 2003, 11:33 PM
Originally posted by Photorun
Dare to dream. That would be sweet but only IF they didn't change the pricing, actually if they could pull the pricing to just under two grand ($1999). It seems like Apple had almost figured out the consumer masses when the first iMac came out, even though it too was a little over what consumers wanted to spend. then when the iMac started getting close to the (magical) grand sweet spot you couldn't practically spit in someone's office/house without it landing on an iMac. I personally knew a few companies in Atlanta who bought them because they "looked cool" but also made good machines for certain levels of workers... mind you, these companies were peecee f***wad mentality types previous to this.

Finally Apple was gaining market share, which regardless of what anyone says thinking they're a niche company.. BS!!! Niches shrink, Apple needs to expand their market, end of discussion not open for debate! How do you do that? Sell more units! How do you sell more units? Make 'em affordable. How do you do that? How the heck do I know?!? But finding a way to build super cool machines with parts that may cut corners is one way, don't have to be like Dull who has the cheapest, most piece of crap computers out there and are gaining the world domination pretty much but undercutting everyone, but one does need to price and price well.

$2199 for a consumer machine is laughable. BUT some consumer and prosumers would give it a look if it ducked just under the four digit rollover(s).


Who said that Apple wants to bring the price of iMac down? If this rumor is true,they probably want to deploy cheaper case components just to offset for more expensive G5 CPU/Combo. New iMacs are gonna probably remain in same price bracket. I highly doubt that you' ll see an decently configured Mac computer below $1000 US in near future.

Regards

Phillip
Dec 11, 2003, 01:34 AM
imagine this:

the new imac G5... no its not just a computer with a g5 but a computer that goes where eva u want to go...

rite now, the g5 is a real big chip with the heatsinks so why don't to "hind" it somewhere. the screen is lite and goes whereeva u want to go... when ur finished, put the screen back on the imac... this would be pretty revolutionary...

this would also pose problems, likedo have to go to the system go get the cd rom out? or will the 20" imac be just abit to heavy to go whereva u want to go...

if apple creates this (they won't) then heres there lineup

emac - cheap family computer -g4
imac - mid product between consumer and pro. the digital hub with a difference
powermac... dual g5s, no single g5s because that would get ppl confuse with an imac

ibook - cheap laptop for students - g4
powerbook - powerful laptop - g5

Phillip
Dec 11, 2003, 01:36 AM
i don't like the sound of apple using cheapo stuff.... too much like pcs...

TwitchOSX
Dec 11, 2003, 01:41 AM
What if they were able to mount the motherboard and processor somehow behind the iMac screen and then run cables down the neck into the rest of the computer where it could access extra ram and optical devices and things like that. Then when you detached the monitor, it continued to work, detached from the rest of the ram and other things in the base, and had a small foot on the back that could clip out so that you could set it up like the current stand alone LCD's from Apple. Then, Apple ships wireless.. er wait, they already are.. so then you take your wireless keyboard and mouse or use a pen and your off. The monitor of course would be much thicker than it is now, but you could have ram, even optical and even a small HD built into the monitor with the motherboard. So.. then you could take it wherever. I have a Dual 800 G4 and I so wish sometimes that I had a laptop. Imagine the future. I can almost gurantee this to be the future: Desktop / Laptop combo computers. That will be awesome when that comes and I hope Apple brings it.

u2mr2os2
Dec 11, 2003, 02:28 AM
I'm a waiting switcher. The iMac is basically almost there for me, except for still having the G4. Not only that, but not even the newer, 512K L2 cache version. This is likely due to low availability all going to PowerBooks, but it is just one for thing that keeps the higher-end iMac from being a really awesome machine that it can be. Since it is not expandable other than RAM and AE, it needs to come with good stuff. The G5 at even low speeds should be in there tomorrow - screw the PowerBooks.

The damn Apple product pecking order has to go. The idea that processor power has to monotonically decrease down from the top Powermac, through the PowerBooks, then the iMacs, eMacs then iBooks is not good when you need some flexibility. This really constrains when model updates can happen. I think people don't expect laptops to have the fastest CPUs for power and heat reasons. Allowing the top iMacs to at least have the same CPUs as the PowerBooks would be reasonable. However, given the G4 situation that's stagnated for so long, this has now become unacceptable. Apple has to go G5 across the board as soon as posible. This means that if the PowerBooks can't make it yet, then don't hold back the iMacs. iBooks would be the only ones that would make sense to keep as G4 until the PowerBooks had G5s. The eMac could stay G4 using the faster ones.

However, the idea that the iMac needs some sort of detachable display is a bad one. One reason is to be able to "reuse" the display when the computer becomes obsolete because that expensive 17 or 20 incher would otherwise go to waste. But by the time that comes to pass, a 17 or 20 inch display will be much cheaper, and you won't care about reusing the old one. Besides, what are you going to attach it to? A powermac? Newer iMac with a very different design? You'd still need a base to hold it. The only practical solution there is to have a monitor in port to use the whole base+monitor as just a monitor. Having an iMac with a detachable screen is not good because, that screen would have a lot of bulk with the addition of a battery, WiFi, touch screen layer, maybe hard drive, etc. When docked on the arm, it would be bulky and ugly. The other thing is that it would cost much more than the now overpriced iMacs. People complain about the price as it is. Clearly, this tablet/remote screen role is better suited to a separate computer, and Apple would get to sell you two machines. You would have two usable machines (also think about needing to use the computer and having to track down where the screen is) for probably not much more money in the end. Now, that said, I think there most definitely is a market for an iBook with a form factor of the twist and folding screen to play the tablet role. Not just a PowerBook with this feature. As a consumer, I'd have an iMac as primary, with a separate iBook/tablet to do light work via WiFi mostly in tablet mode surfing with a stylus or my fingertip. When I get creative, I'd flip the keyboard into action. It would be nice if my login from the desktop could be used on the tablet so my mail, bookmarks, etc. are there and sync back. An interesting idea might be an Airport/tablet combo where the base station had a dock slot for the tablet that could be used to prop it up as a monitor while it connected to the wireless keyboard and mouse next to it.

I do think a consumer headless Mac is a good idea. I think it needs to have the specs of at least the low end iMac, with one AE slot, one PCI slot and a replacable video card in an AGP slot. It should have a built-in VGA port or come with the adapter for switchers with PC monitors. It should have USB 2 with two ports on the front and a lot more than three ports total. It would be very good to also have a BTO option of at least one 3rd party two button mouse with scroll wheel. The case should be nice simple box with an integrated carry handle designed to be sturdy with a footprint to function as a stand for switcher's CRT screens this will be used with. Don't restrict the BTO options - let them get a superdrive and built in Bluetooth with a smoking video card and monster hard drive. Basic unit should start at no more than $699.

MarkCollette
Dec 11, 2003, 02:34 AM
First off, about the remote display / tablet device: it wouldn't have to receive full 1024x768 bitmapped frames. Instead it would receive a compressed display postscript ( Quartz ) stream.

Secondly, Apple must definitely give an option between all-in-one, and headless for the low end. I say this because I have personally experienced the dissatisfaction of getting used to a 17" monitor, then getting a 15" iMac (secondhand), and found that I prefer working on my older, slower PC that can hookup to a 17" monitor. 17" CRTs cost $100, so being able to slap one onto a Mac would give it a new lease on life.

Nemesis
Dec 11, 2003, 02:39 AM
Originally posted by ITR 81
Good move if they can reduce eMac costs then they can reduce the pricing to say around $500 bucks.

I figure before Apple upgrades the iMac to a G5 platform we will see atleast one more speed bump from the G4 line up.

Why? G4 roadmap is just dry desert ahead. G4 has its peak performance in current iMacs/PowerBooks, and that's it.

A speed bump of 0.08 GHz (from 1.25 to 1.33) really makes no sense.

Next iMachines are G5s, everything else makes no sense and WILL LOOK STUPID AND DISGRACEFUL!

iMeowbot
Dec 11, 2003, 02:48 AM
Originally posted by TwitchOSX
. . . I can almost gurantee this to be the future: Desktop / Laptop combo computers. That will be awesome when that comes and I hope Apple brings it.

That's kind of the past. Remember the DuoDock?

luffe
Dec 11, 2003, 03:14 AM
Originally posted by pjkelnhofer
I don't see why this would be so expensive. Is the cost of a tablet in the touchscreen or in the form-factor? Airport and BlueTooth technology are becoming standards that people will soon expect in their computers.

Again, I would I think it would be cool if it were a touchscreen. You could hold it in your lap to surf, email, etc. It would not be designed to upright in front of you.

I think we are talking about too different things. One is a tablet computer. The other is a computer with a wireless touchscreen for a monitor.

1) I guess it's primarily the R&D of such a system that makes it expensive... Bluetooth can't be used since it's too slow and the bandwith of 802.11g is maybe enough at its peak, but is easily interfered with other devices or other users on the network. Not to mention the limited area from the accespoint to the tablet in which there is sufficient bandwith. To find out how to get around these problems is expensive... And the battery for the screen is expensive as well. I guess 802.11a is not really an option, since the frequency is not available for networking in all countries.

2) This touchscreen will be pretty big, probably 15"? Not that handy... However, it would be nice with a touchscreen to surf the net, but think it would be a mess for writing mails... I think that laptops are a better substitute then; the screen can be in a vertical position without holding it with your hands, it is faster to write on a regular keyboard and has still works outside of the limited area in which there is a sufficient bandwith.

3) I'm not really sure. Given that you are in your wlan, what is the difference of the functions of a tablet computer and a touchscreen wirelessly connected to an iMac?

Just seems more reasonable for me to start focusing on turning the 12" PB into a tablet. I know that the succes of tablets so far has been very low (if at all excisting), but it would be nice to could take advantage of new programs such as MS OneNote in a future release of Office for Mac.

TwitchOSX
Dec 11, 2003, 03:29 AM
I dont really think that adding things to the monitor for a detachable monitor will be that bulky or ugly. Sure, it wont be just the screen, but look at a Powerbook. Its 1" thick. Imagine the detachable area being a all in one computer such as a laptop with the screen bent backwards like tablet PC's. This unit would contain all the necessary parts to run the computer just like a powerbook does. BUT, you can then dock it into your iMac or other headless Mac and either the processor on the headless Mac can take over and also allow you access to the HD's CD/DVD Rom, video card, more Ram whatever. When you undock it, and take it with you, it would be reduced to the components within the detachable monitor, which could also include video, CD/DVD, HD, RAM and be self contained. Give it a few years. Remember when all this **** was so expensive years ago?.. Its not now and its only going to get cheaper to have todays standards being used tommorow. I wouldnt mind a 1.5ghz detachable iMac. See what I mean? Even the iMac could have a faster processor in the base which could take over when the monitor is attached. I think it would be sick. But then, im just "Thinking Different"

gopher
Dec 11, 2003, 06:19 AM
Good for Apple to try to get the costs of the project under control. Last thing we want is those costs to be passed on to the user.

CmdrLaForge
Dec 11, 2003, 07:51 AM
From my perspective the current iMac form factor is just great.

On my wishlist for the next generation would be a re-usable screen, because I don't want to throw the screen away every 4 years just because the computer is outdated and a G5 at 2GHz + Radeon 9600 graphics.

The tablet for me seems to be a useless idea.

Cheers

iMeowbot
Dec 11, 2003, 07:58 AM
Originally posted by CmdrLaForge
From my perspective the current iMac form factor is just great.

On my wishlist for the next generation would be a re-usable screen, because I don't want to throw the screen away every 4 years just because the computer is outdated and a G5 at 2GHz + Radeon 9600 graphics.

This would be a good spot for a third party to jump in, when the iLamps start to get old: some kind of adapter kit/board thingy that lets the monitor be used with an external CPU, and maybe change the CD/DVD bay so it can be used an external FW unit. Gotta do _something_ with those things when the CPU gets outpaced, I can't see a fish tank conversion happening with a flat panel ...

~Shard~
Dec 11, 2003, 09:10 AM
I didn't want to blatantly double-post, so I thought I would include a link to an original thread I started, presenting my (crazy) thoughts on the G5 iMac, to stir up some more lively discussion. Check it out below and have a read:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=50782

jmerk
Dec 11, 2003, 09:22 AM
apparently my other post was too long for people to read...(sorry)

i mentioned the following options:

1. reduce the resolution or, as other people have mentioned compress the video.

2. put a graphics chip and a processor in there w/256 MB RAM and one usb port (to attach a keyboard). no optical drive, no other ports. the G3 has shown that it can push OS X. G3 chips are cheap, available and run fairly cool. like i said in my lengthy post, if they cram all the stuff into the 1" thick, 12" Powerbook that i'm typing on, why couldn't they greatly reduce that size with a G3, motherboard, graphics chip, one RAM DIMM, 802.11g card, antenna and one usb port and a battery?

control iTunes library playing through your stereo, control X10 devices (heat, lights, etc.), browse web and e-mail from ANYWHERE in your house...attach the screen for "heavy lifting" (design work, scanning, etc.

hell, i'd buy one just so i wouldn't have to plug in my Powerbook to the stereo everytime i wanted to listen to my music!

the "tablet pc" in it's current form sucks, i'm talking about a paradigm shift (in lengthy posts elsewhere in this thread).

my $.02

j

Spock
Dec 11, 2003, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by ~Shard~
, to stir up some more lively discussion.


Just remeber the Rules, and no Apple will not have a G5 iMac soon.

Qunchuy
Dec 11, 2003, 09:24 AM
Originally posted by wilco
Let's discuss this. What impedes 802.11g to the point where it can't handle 50% of its theoretical rate?

I think the 802.11 spec works out to give just under half the bandwidth in each direction, with a bit of overhead for "control" packets that aren't part of the actual network traffic.

painandgreed
Dec 11, 2003, 10:55 AM
More of a 20th aniversary Macintosh item, I want a 20" or 23" cinema display with stripped down G5 on the back to make an all in one. Upgradeable hardrive and RAM and maybe one PCI slot for aditional monitor.

sjk
Dec 11, 2003, 01:23 PM
Originally posted by jmerk
... control X11 devices (heat, lights, etc.) ...Uhh, that would be X10 (http://www.x10.com).
X10. Hmm, the forum seems to filter www(dot)x10(dot)com UBB code.

~Shard~
Dec 11, 2003, 02:08 PM
Here are my crazy predictions, which are somewhat questionable (and I realize that!) :

The next iMac announcement will not be a speed boost to 1.33 GHz or 1.42 GHz or whatever, it will be a move to the G5. Jobs will wait on this until the G5 iMac is ready. As for when it will be announced, probably not until spring (so not @ MWSF). This is because Jobs will not want to release the G5 iMac too much ahead of the G5 PowerBooks, which will be ready next summer/early fall. (Another guess on my part.)

It will have a completely redesigned form factor, and although the base will resemble the current iMac, it will be smaller, sleaker and more elonngated. The LCD will come off an arm, but the arm will not be positioned right in the middle of the base, but come from the back of the base (almost blending into it as a single peice) and curve inwards. The guts will be significantly upgraded, with up-to-date video card, DDR400 RAM, SATA HD, etc., and a nice 1.6 or 1.8 G5.

Now here's an interesting one I thought I would throw in - due to the G5 being a relatively new processor, and due to the new form factor, upgraded guts, etc., the new G5 iMac will actually cost ~$2500. It will be very expensive compared to the G4 iMac, and this will of course present some issues with regards to Apple's pro/consumer model philosophy, as the iMac would no longer be a consumer-level machine, but be an in-between model, between the eMac (sole consumer machine) and the PowerMac (pro machine). Big shift!

Anyways, just some thoughts and theories I thought I would submit and see what everyone thinks. I realize not all of these ideas make sense, etc., but hey, what the hell - just thought I'd throw them out there for some fun discussion material!

pjkelnhofer
Dec 11, 2003, 03:10 PM
Originally posted by Nemesis

Next iMachines are G5s, everything else makes no sense and WILL LOOK STUPID AND DISGRACEFUL!

I hear you. Now we just have to yell it loud enough for Steve Jobs to hear...
Anyone going MWSF and want to volunteer to get a "No More G4" chant going?

pjkelnhofer
Dec 11, 2003, 03:32 PM
Originally posted by ~Shard~
Here are my crazy predictions, which are somewhat questionable (and I realize that!) :
...
Now here's an interesting one I thought I would throw in - due to the G5 being a relatively new processor, and due to the new form factor, upgraded guts, etc., the new G5 iMac will actually cost ~$2500. It will be very expensive compared to the G4 iMac, and this will of course present some issues with regards to Apple's pro/consumer model philosophy, as the iMac would no longer be a consumer-level machine, but be an in-between model, between the eMac (sole consumer machine) and the PowerMac (pro machine). Big shift!
At $2200 the iMac is not a "consumer" machine right now! It is consumer quality at pro prices. Heck at the AppleStore.com I can get a refurb 1.6 GHz G5 and a 17" LCD for $100 less (or get the single 1.8 GHz for $200 more).
The iMac is about look and style more than it is about computing power or value. When I bought my iMac DV SE for $1300, I was getting a decent computer with a built monitor for the price. Now you pay an extra $500 for style, and IMHO it is no longer worth it.

noel4r
Dec 11, 2003, 05:14 PM
i tell you what SJ, i got 2K burning a hole in my pocket. release a G5 iMac and its yours.

sjk
Dec 11, 2003, 07:41 PM
Originally posted by noel4r
i tell you what SJ, i got 2K burning a hole in my pocket. release a G5 iMac and its yours. Yeah, that would sure be a no-brainer for me right now. There are reasons the iMac's all-in-one design is appealing even if I know a G5 Powermac + separate display is a better value. A sufficiently powerful 20" iMac could serve me well until I upgraded and gave it to my wife, who's better off using an all-in-one system. Tho' if I owned a good hi-res LCD display I'd probably see things differently and might have already bought a G5. And maybe I still will if there aren't any significant HW announcements within the next couple months.

mojowantshappy
Dec 11, 2003, 09:35 PM
The only way you could send compressed PostScript to the wireless monitor is for the video card to route the video signal back to either the GPU or the CPU for compression, then send those packets off on a network card. Trying to compress video is a lot harder then it sounds, and the current architecture couldn't do it very well, if at all.

pjkelnhofer
Dec 11, 2003, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by sjk
Yeah, that would sure be a no-brainer for me right now. There are reasons the iMac's all-in-one design is appealing even if I know a G5 Powermac + separate display is a better value. A sufficiently powerful 20" iMac could serve me well until I upgraded and gave it to my wife, who's better off using an all-in-one system.

I like the look of the iMac. I like the all-in-one idea. (I currently have a G3 iMac I am typing on right now).
I just think it is horribly overpriced right now for what you get compared to the PowerMac line. When the flat panel iMac came out the high end had an 800 MHz chip and cost $1800. At the same time, the PowerMac was around 1 GHz and around $2500. So by the time you bought a monitor the prices were similiar and the processing speeds were not that different.
I think there used to be a lot more value in the iMac.

micropop
Mar 16, 2004, 11:44 AM
I'm considering purchasing a new IMac and trying to figure out if there is a new release around the corner that I should wait for...

mklos
Mar 16, 2004, 11:52 AM
I'm considering purchasing a new IMac and trying to figure out if there is a new release around the corner that I should wait for...

I know this would be a longer wait than you probably want to, but I would wait until the World Wide Developers Conference in the first part of June. If they don't announce any new iMacs by then, your probably ok to get one without have Apple announce a new iMac in the near future.

I keep saying to other people that Apple has to have a new iMac this year sometime. The question is when? I'm almost positive that it will have a G5 in it and because of that I'm also positive that it will probably have a form factor change. I hope its a mini version of the PowerMac G5. Then you can get any display you want with it. You'll have a little more expandability, have twice the power as the previous iMac G4's, and when you want to upgrade your iMac in a couple of years you can just get a new tower instead of having to give up that beautiful 17 or 20" display everytime.

Now...I don't work for Apple (but I would love to!), and I really don't know what Apple is going to announce, but these are just my feelings and I feel that Apple will announce new iMacs this year with a G5 and a new form factor change.

Borg3of5
Mar 16, 2004, 01:14 PM
After Apple introduced the G5 last year, I've visited the Apple Store several times (7-8) to spend 10-20 minutes on each G5 model. I am currently on an 800 mHz G3 iBook; needless to say I am speechless at the G5's performance. I have also tried going from the 'lowest' G5 to the highest G4-based iMac & PB. There's no question about it: why spend money on a system with an old chip? I was told a long time ago by my parents, "never go back, even to get greater impulse." True I am on a G3-based machine; and what I use it for it's adequate. I *DO* however, want to get into making 'archival' copies of my DVDs, and higher-level digital photography, learn Photoshop, etc. This cannot be done effectively with a G3, and the G4 is reaching the end of its power for these tasks.

I have put my order in, and cancelled a G5 system twice already, all because of trying to justify the cost involved. I recently took vacation in San Francisco, and the iBook was a great traveling companion. Fired it up in flight on the Atlanta-San Francisco leg. After every day of shooting about a hundred digital pictures with my new Canon Powershot G5, I uploaded the pictures to the iBook. But after I got back, I noticed that iPhoto is *very* slow.

That being said, I'd love a 15" or 17" PB, albeit with a G4 as my sputnik, and know that at home I have a G5 with a 20" Cinema display. I may not be a scientist, graphic design artist, whatever...I crave the power. Some may cringe saying, "that's a waste of money for that sucker who's not a 'professional' to buy a G5, he's depleting the world of G5 for someone who ACTUALLY needs one."

iMacs are good, but why buy one if it uses 'older' technology? I will keep with my reasoning and when the G6's, G7's, and G8's are released, I will say the same about the previous models.

Today's technology is tomorrow's trash-heap.

aswitcher
Mar 16, 2004, 01:47 PM
I'm considering purchasing a new IMac and trying to figure out if there is a new release around the corner that I should wait for...

Yep, an new iMac is likely to be on the way. When...well its overdue, the old model is underpowered and current sales are poor - so the sooner the better. Maybe Steve will release new Macs for all the lines at the end of June WWDC. :D

Lloyd Intalan
Mar 16, 2004, 02:58 PM
Yep, an new iMac is likely to be on the way. When...well its overdue, the old model is underpowered and current sales are poor - so the sooner the better. Maybe Steve will release new Macs for all the lines at the end of June WWDC. :D


I hope your right aswitcher, Apple needs to refresh its consumer desktop line fast. Also, a headless G5 iMac would be great as it would be cheaper and may help people switch. :p

~Shard~
Mar 16, 2004, 09:34 PM
The timing is right - bring on the PM G5 updates, and then slap some 1.6 GHz G5s in a new iMac! This will allow for both models to have G5s, yet due to the speed differences (and obviously many other hardware differences), this will still allow for adequate product differentiation.

Can't wait to see the new G5 iMac design when it is released! :cool:

jsw
Mar 17, 2004, 10:42 PM
I hope your right aswitcher, Apple needs to refresh its consumer desktop line fast. Also, a headless G5 iMac would be great as it would be cheaper and may help people switch. :p

Agreed, but Apple seems intent on the consumer line having an attached monitor, which I think is too bad. Perhaps they'll change their minds - I, for one, hate thinking that my iMac monitor is effectively obsolete once the iMac gets to be too slow for everyday use. Too bad, because the monitor itself is pretty nice (not as nice as the 20" ones, but not too bad, either).

sjk
Mar 17, 2004, 11:59 PM
I, for one, hate thinking that my iMac monitor is effectively obsolete once the iMac gets to be too slow for everyday use.But I'm sure you'll find some use for it, like that IIci of yours? ;)

What defines "everyday" computer use? If necessary, my ~10-year-old Sun SPARC systems are still capable of being used for a majority of "everyday" sysadmin work I'd do. And easily functional as servers for personal mail, web, and other services. The 20" CRT monitors for those systems now seem as "obsolete" as the systems themselves. So those are essentially all-in-one configurations, which is pretty much irrelevant now.

I see plenty of old G3 iMacs still in everyday use so to think a G4 iMac will be be obsolete any time soon seems a rather unresourceful viewpoint.

~Shard~
Mar 18, 2004, 06:45 AM
But I'm sure you'll find some use for it, like that IIci of yours? ;)

What defines "everyday" computer use? If necessary, my ~10-year-old Sun SPARC systems are still capable of being used for a majority of "everyday" sysadmin work I'd do. And easily functional as servers for personal mail, web, and other services. The 20" CRT monitors for those systems now seem as "obsolete" as the systems themselves. So those are essentially all-in-one configurations, which is pretty much irrelevant now.

I see plenty of old G3 iMacs still in everyday use so to think a G4 iMac will be be obsolete any time soon seems a rather unresourceful viewpoint.

I agree - for my needs, my 1.25 GHz 17" iMac w/ 1 GB RAM will last me for a long time to come. And even after I buy a new G6 in a few years, my iMac will still be just as good as it is right now for everything I need it to, as I am by no means a "power user". Calling it obsolete in the near future is a bit extreme in my opinion.

jsw
Mar 18, 2004, 01:21 PM
I agree - for my needs, my 1.25 GHz 17" iMac w/ 1 GB RAM will last me for a long time to come. And even after I buy a new G6 in a few years, my iMac will still be just as good as it is right now for everything I need it to, as I am by no means a "power user". Calling it obsolete in the near future is a bit extreme in my opinion.

Oh, I agree that it'd take a while to truly obsolete the iMac. But, on the other hand, if the iMac body and monitor were separable, I'd be MUCH more likely to buy a new iMac body in the near future than I am now, since I'd connect the current one to an older monitor.

Hey, I still use a 400MHz G3 PowerBook. I know Macs stay useful for a long time. I'm just saying that Apple might sell more systems if the upgrade cost were less.

jsw
Mar 18, 2004, 01:23 PM
But I'm sure you'll find some use for it, like that IIci of yours? ;)....

Yeah, give it to my 3.5-year-old to play with, just like the ci. Of course, by then, she'll be old enough to complain that the system's too slow. Now, she just has fun with it. :)

chasingapple
Mar 18, 2004, 02:03 PM
What is wrong with the current G4 iMac? I just joined the Apple side of the fense 3 weeks ago and have since bought 2 macs. This thing is anything but slow!

sjk
Mar 18, 2004, 07:50 PM
Nothing's "wrong" with the G4 iMac and I don't think it's slow (I'll trade ya for my 2.5-yr-old 600MHz G3 iBook :)). Sure, it has some limitations (e.g. one user-accessible SO-DIMM slot) but if they really mattered I think you'd have looked elsewhere. You're satisfied, right?

Forum users tend to be more critical and opinionated than the remaining majority of Mac users, for better or worse. ;)

Anyway, congratulations on getting two G4's and diving into OS X... enjoy!

RichardCarletta
Mar 19, 2004, 08:50 AM
iMac G5 to follow new PowerMacs, at or before WWDC. The latest from Cupertino: iMac G5s are nearly ready to roll and the only things holding back the new PowerMacs are supplies of new motherboards and higher-clocked PowerPC 970FX CPUs.

If the new PowerMacs ship on schedule in mid to late April, sources believe that a new iMac family with 1-2 G5 models and 2-3 G4 models will follow 5-8 weeks after that -- definitely no later than Apple's Worldwide Developer Conference at the end of June. More details soon...

cschilderink
Mar 19, 2004, 01:19 PM
G5 Cube is coming! This is going to be so sweet!

aswitcher
Mar 19, 2004, 01:30 PM
G5 Cube is coming! This is going to be so sweet!


:D Yep. Its the one design that prompts names from its shape...Sugar...Rubix...D (as in D6)...Orac...Ice...

MarkCollette
Mar 19, 2004, 03:31 PM
I have put my order in, and cancelled a G5 system twice already, all because of trying to justify the cost involved. I recently took vacation in San Francisco, and the iBook was a great traveling companion. Fired it up in flight on the Atlanta-San Francisco leg. After every day of shooting about a hundred digital pictures with my new Canon Powershot G5, I uploaded the pictures to the iBook. But after I got back, I noticed that iPhoto is *very* slow.


You might want to look into buying the newer and faster iPhoto if that's your main concern. Apparently it's been significantly optimised. For $50 you'll get the whole iLife suite, etc.

micropop
Mar 24, 2004, 11:24 AM
Thanks for your replies.

I'm going to go ahead and order the iMac today. My rationale is that it's for my father, and it's not a big issue for him to have the very latest version, and it'll be plenty fast for anything he needs to do. If someone was able to cite a specific date for a new release, it would have been a more complicated decision - it's just that no one really knows - it could be December for all we know! I appreciate everyone's input!

jsw
Mar 24, 2004, 11:30 AM
Thanks for your replies.

I'm going to go ahead and order the iMac today. My rationale is that it's for my father, and it's not a big issue for him to have the very latest version, and it'll be plenty fast for anything he needs to do. If someone was able to cite a specific date for a new release, it would have been a more complicated decision - it's just that no one really knows - it could be December for all we know! I appreciate everyone's input!

Excellent decision! Even if new iMacs are announced, it could be months before they are available. I doubt your Dad spends his days in Apple Stores or at apple.com, so he won't likely notice - or care if he does notice - anyway.

The latest iMacs are great - my brother has a 20" and loves it. My 18-month-old 800MHz 17" one works fine. Yes, it is slow. But not too slow, and not for most people doing non-gaming/non-development work.

Plus it looks cool. It will always look cool. The old Apple PowerBook 170? Too slow to do anything at all on now. But, man, it still looks good. The iMac's a fellow classic design. And it's fast enough to do anything your Dad will do for years to come.

micropop
Mar 25, 2004, 01:07 PM
Excellent decision! Even if new iMacs are announced, it could be months before they are available. I doubt your Dad spends his days in Apple Stores or at apple.com, so he won't likely notice - or care if he does notice - anyway.

The latest iMacs are great - my brother has a 20" and loves it. My 18-month-old 800MHz 17" one works fine. Yes, it is slow. But not too slow, and not for most people doing non-gaming/non-development work.

Plus it looks cool. It will always look cool. The old Apple PowerBook 170? Too slow to do anything at all on now. But, man, it still looks good. The iMac's a fellow classic design. And it's fast enough to do anything your Dad will do for years to come.

Thanks. It's on the way - very excited. :)

mrgreen4242
Mar 25, 2004, 03:35 PM
he only practical solution there is to have a monitor in port to use the whole base+monitor as just a monitor.

I was readign thru the old posts in this thread and that idea stuck out to me... (it was refering to having the iMac keep its attatched monitor, but having a pass thru mode to plug in a newer system to).

This'd be great! Imagine being able to setup your old iMac as a web/file/print/whatever server, and use its 17 or 20" display for your new powermac or whatever. Not to mention using it as a compiler/video conversion/number cruncher/etc (all the tasks that just take time, but you don't need done as fast as possible) while not bogging down your PM as you play a game of Halo ;-). Also being able to quickly switch the display over to the iMac so that you could easily troubleshoot problems with it would be nice.

Anywho, seemed like a neat idea. Would be a worthwile/profitable hack if someone could figure out how to do it...

jsw
Mar 25, 2004, 03:56 PM
Thanks. It's on the way - very excited. :)

Congrats! You won't be disappointed.

jsw
Mar 25, 2004, 03:59 PM
....I was readign thru the old posts in this thread and that idea stuck out to me... (it was refering to having the iMac keep its attatched monitor, but having a pass thru mode to plug in a newer system to)....

This would be a nice feature on the new iMacs, but, of course, you can always use Apple Remote Desktop, or something similar, to make it seem like the iMac is the display for the other Mac.

MarkCollette
Mar 25, 2004, 04:58 PM
he only practical solution there is to have a monitor in port to use the whole base+monitor as just a monitor.

I was readign thru the old posts in this thread and that idea stuck out to me... (it was refering to having the iMac keep its attatched monitor, but having a pass thru mode to plug in a newer system to).

This'd be great! Imagine being able to setup your old iMac as a web/file/print/whatever server, and use its 17 or 20" display for your new powermac or whatever. Not to mention using it as a compiler/video conversion/number cruncher/etc (all the tasks that just take time, but you don't need done as fast as possible) while not bogging down your PM as you play a game of Halo ;-). Also being able to quickly switch the display over to the iMac so that you could easily troubleshoot problems with it would be nice.

Anywho, seemed like a neat idea. Would be a worthwile/profitable hack if someone could figure out how to do it...

Yes, and how about making the video in be able to take TV stuff as well, so with zero CPU load I could switch to watching TV while waiting for a compile or whatever.

Urdam
Apr 10, 2004, 02:38 PM
I agree