New Machines on Jan 7th [Archive]

MacRumors

Dec 18, 2002, 07:22 PM

MacBidouille posts (http://www.macbidouille.com/niouzcontenu.php?date=2002-12-18#4153) rumors about upcoming machines at MWSF:

Translated by aramk:

We are normally very hesitant to post rumors and on that note, we want to remind you that a rumor is an unverifyable fact.

Certain large national companies have already entered in this data; there will be a new model of the iMac G4 with a processor speed of 1 Ghz, a hard drive of 120 GB, and the machine will contain 512 mb of ram - nothing surpising yet.

The surprising item will be that the machine will sport a price tag that is 1200 to 1400 euros higher than the top of the line now; bringing the machine in the 4000 euro range; an astronomical price for an iMachine. It is difficult to imagine that the machine wouldn't support a 19" LCD or other new items/technology to justify such a high price.

Another informed source (in another European nation) told me that it was impossible to order 15" LCD iMacs that contained the CDRW or Combo drive and that it was also possible that it might be difficult to order the superdrive equipped 15" LCD model.

[Update] Another person informed that on Jan 8 a conference between european and american staff to present to journalists two sessions; one on hardware, the other on software. The hardware sessions seemed to be oriented towards wireless and mobile items. Leave your mind to imagine things...

jelloshotsrule

Dec 18, 2002, 07:24 PM

let's hope it's more than that. i mean, obviously it'll be more. just hope it's something big.

that said, the powermacs aren't due for much/anything so that huge factor won't be there for them. same with powerbooks.

i'd guess software will be pretty big... we shall see though.

sluthy

Dec 18, 2002, 07:31 PM

When is iSync supposed to be finalised? Could that be a major software announcement?

bennyek

Dec 18, 2002, 07:40 PM

I would think that FCP4 would be a pretty significant announcment on the 7th.
Any thoughts

adamcoop

Dec 18, 2002, 07:46 PM

Originally posted by bennyek
I would think that FCP4 would be a pretty significant announcment on the 7th.
Any thoughts

iTunes 4 would be even bigger.
Seeing as we got iTunes 3 6 months ago...
whatever they call it, I hope it has AAC support.

aramk

Dec 18, 2002, 07:50 PM

Translation - note I've skipped a couple of things not relevant to the machine such as MacBidouille's statistics concerning how many were interested in rumors - note that its also been about 6 months since I was living in France and I might have missed a couple of things. - Aram

---

We are normally very hesitant to post rumors and on that note, we want to remind you that a rumor is an unverifyable fact.

Certain large national companies have already entered in this data; there will be a new model of the iMac G4 with a processor speed of 1 Ghz, a hard drive of 120 GB, and the machine will contain 512 mb of ram - nothing surpising yet.

The surprising item will be that the machine will sport a price tag that is 1200 to 1400 euros higher than the top of the line now; bringing the machine in the 4000 euro range; an astronomical price for an iMachine. It is difficult to imagine that the machine wouldn't support a 19" LCD or other new items/technology to justify such a high price.

Another informed source (in another European nation) told me that it was impossible to order 15" LCD iMacs that contained the CDRW or Combo drive and that it was also possible that it might be difficult to order the superdrive equipped 15" LCD model.

[Update] Another person informed that on Jan 8 a conference between european and american staff to present to journalists two sessions; one on hardware, the other on software. The hardware sessions seemed to be oriented towards wireless and mobile items. Leave your mind to imagine things...

medea

Dec 18, 2002, 08:01 PM

Thanks for translating that for everyone aram. I was not aware that the iMac was hard to order right now....that is also a huge price tag and a 19" screen would just look odd on the current base, not to say it wont happen though, perhaps it will be an even bigger surprise and the iMac will have some changes happpen in the appearance....

Hawthorne

Dec 18, 2002, 08:09 PM

15" iMacs are listed as 1-2 days on Apple's website as of right now.

I can see the higher price if it comes with a 19" HD screen.

Software updates will most likely be a new iMovie and iPhoto, iSync, Rendezvous and wireless support.

And maybe a Mac version of the smart display (http://www.viewsonic.com/smartdisplays/) ?

vniow

Dec 18, 2002, 08:16 PM

I don't believe the part about the price at all.

4000 EU is about the same as 4000 USD (last time I checked the exchange rates) and to have an iMac the same price as a top-of-the-line Powermac doesn't make sense, unless it's an anneversary version or something, then I could see it, but a beefed up iMac for 4k? Don't think so.

MOM

Dec 18, 2002, 08:19 PM

Originally posted by aramk
Leave your mind to imagine things... [/B]

I like this part, maybe I've found my sig? MOM

skunk

Dec 18, 2002, 08:21 PM

$4,000 is a very big price for an iMac of any flavour. If it's true, what on earth is it paying for? Frankly, my mind is boggled! It can't be two processors because of the heat: would a 19" screen add that much? Bear in mind that traditionally any speed bumps alone would not increase the price. Come on guys, this site is for speculation, so speculate already!

MrMacMan

Dec 18, 2002, 08:33 PM

Damn That is a hefty amount for an iMac. I can't stand for such an overpriced iMac.
dammn. :(
Ah and I checked conversion charts...
4000 Euros = $4,097.20 Dollars, ech...
Well inless that iMac is coming equiped with dual processors, an ATI 9700 Pro, that aint worth it. :rolleyes:

aramk

Dec 18, 2002, 08:36 PM

Just a note on the price and the figure of 4000 euros - you need to remember their is a high markup in nations outside the United States. For example, the base PowerBook in the US costs $2299 - roughly equivelent to 2300 euros. In France, buying the same PowerBook costs $2499. Both prices are before tax; so we've already seen a $200 difference. Then, take into account tax - in NYC its 8.25%, in France its 19.6%...

bobindashadows

Dec 18, 2002, 08:48 PM

exactly which imac would be pushed into the €4,000 range? because the lowest model is €1,299. if you add €1200 to the ultimate iMac, you get €3750. That's close, but how on earth could they explain an increase of that much? after all, the ultimate has a 17in. screen, the GeForce 4MX, Superdrive, 256MB of ram (could be upgraded significantly, except SDRAM is dirt cheap) So if they were to take only the ultimate, throw in 1Ghz, a 19in monitor, up it to 1GB of ram, throw in a GeForce4 Ti, even that wouldn't warrant over 1200-1400 Dollars. And since more than one computer will be getting 1Ghz without a price upgrade, we would drop that from the equation. I'm not sure, that sounds like bullcrap to me. It's like the cube. You bought it for 2,200 (? i don't remember, even though my mother has one) and then you needed a monitor. Get a 15in for what was it, 799? 999? so long ago. That would be around the same price range as this guy, even more. Why would apple repeat the past?

Frobozz

Dec 18, 2002, 08:48 PM

Okay, $4000 is too much, and has to be wrong. Adding $1300 to the existing price puts them out of reach of all but the most elite consumers. I think that this rumor is misplaced and wrong, but that it might have a little truth after all... this could be the first inclination of the wireless rumors. Maybe a modified iMac or a standalone consumer electronics machine that serves as the hub in the living room.

I just don't think that anything over $1500 for something like this is feasable in this economic climate.

daRAT

Dec 18, 2002, 08:53 PM

Originally posted by aramk
Just a note on the price and the figure of 4000 euros - you need to remember their is a high markup in nations outside the United States. For example, the base PowerBook in the US costs $2299 - roughly equivelent to 2300 euros. In France, buying the same PowerBook costs $2499. Both prices are before tax; so we've already seen a $200 difference. Then, take into account tax - in NYC its 8.25%, in France its 19.6%...

I understand about the taxes, tariffs and such, but to go from 2,000$ to 4,000$ (approximately of course) can not be swept away under the taxes and tariffs banner.

Quite frankly I think that 4,000 euro number will get an update this week, if not totally dropped. Sounds like specualtion got a bit twisted.

BTW, there is no such thing as a iMac worth 4 grand :p No matter how it is equipped.

darndog

Dec 18, 2002, 09:14 PM

The 17" display had a pressure surface and could be removed from the stand as a wireless screen.
With airport & inkwell most of this is easy and very apple.

springscansing

Dec 18, 2002, 09:54 PM

Originally posted by darndog
The 17" display had a pressure surface and could be removed from the stand as a wireless screen.
With airport & inkwell most of this is easy and very apple.

Did I miss something, or did you say WIRELESS screen? That's not possible. How the heck would it even power itself? And airport can't send data nearly fast enough.

blueBomber

Dec 18, 2002, 10:04 PM

actually, Microsoft ran a demo of this kind of product on a TechTv infomercial thing they did. It seemed to work pretty well (taking into consideration the magic of tv), I've also seen some other write ups on this elsewhere. It apparantly uses 802.11b, so yes, it's capable of using airport to do this.

blueBomber

Dec 18, 2002, 10:06 PM

hmmmm.... this kind of setup would fit nicely into the "digital hub" plan...

I love rumors ;-)

Daner3

Dec 18, 2002, 10:17 PM

Long time reader first post.

How about Airport 2 that may speed up the transfer to the wireless screen. I do doubt the price too tho. It would have to include a iPhone an iPod wireless mouse and keyboard, mega memory, bluetooth and all the other kewl stuff in it too!

Skandranon

Dec 18, 2002, 11:04 PM

************.

uberman42

Dec 18, 2002, 11:39 PM

All wrong...apple needs to bring the cost down or keep the same price but add a few features to make it salable. No increase in screen size from the 17, but 1.25 Mhz single processors, firewire 2 at 800+ Mbps and airport 2 with airport 2 cards that have GPRS and 802.11b and g, and yes - bluetooth (sans interference). buh bye IR on the Pwrbks. Add in demos on rendevous with the new airports, IP over Firewire, iSync finally out of beta...more demos with outside companies utilizing the technology...feel the love tonight baby.

bretm

Dec 18, 2002, 11:57 PM

I'm really tired of hearing this that a 19" screen would be too big. The base is freakin' huge. Way out of proportion to the tiny 15 or 17" screen. My first job when ever I sit in front of an imac is to hide the base and let the screen appear to float in mid air.

Contrasts are important in good design. The first imac had a base that was just plain enormous with a tiny little screen. That's the reason they addes the huge plastic edge. To give it the feeling of being balanced at least. Still the screen appeared too small. The 17" didn't really help. In fact, since it's not that much bigger, it appears like a mistake. Kind of like mixing a 14pt font with a 16pt. Looks like an error. Like the screen was supposed to be equal to the base but it was accidentally made a little too big.

The 19" would finally put the importance on the screen. The important and eye catching part. The base will finally disappear from perception and the screen will be left as the focus.

jg3

Dec 19, 2002, 12:46 AM

120GB HD?!? $4000?!?
What are they going to put in/charge for pro machines?! It would have to be something nutty (albeit wonderful) like darndog said for any of this to even come close to making sense. /Weird/.

non fiction

Dec 19, 2002, 02:10 AM

I don't find this very believable - at least not the price part. This new iMac would almost rival the base model Powermac for speed and capability. With the recent updates to the laptops with that tasty price drop, I don't think apple will be overpricing any new iMac updates.

In addition, if the specs are correct, we must be seeing some new Powermac as well, or at least an announcement with a few months to shipping. If not, perhaps apple is leaving the Power arena?

I find it this rumor very sketchy

scem0

Dec 19, 2002, 02:54 AM

Originally posted by edvniow
I don't believe the part about the price at all.

4000 EU is about the same as 4000 USD (last time I checked the exchange rates) and to have an iMac the same price as a top-of-the-line Powermac doesn't make sense, unless it's an anneversary version or something, then I could see it, but a beefed up iMac for 4k? Don't think so.

That is what makes me disbelieve this rumors despite wanting it
to be true. The iMac is in need of an update, but I think it is also
in need of a price-drop. Maybe they will pull off something like the
last powerbook and iBook upgrade.... hopefully ;) .

8thDegreeSavage

Dec 19, 2002, 03:00 AM

I think they are going to have much more impressive hardware than the 1GHZ iMac

With them announcing UT2003 and posting it on their website(Apple had the annoucement for two days)...then subsequently removing that announcement makes me think they are going to annouce the game and hardware at the same time...possibly with the game being displayed on stage using some new hardware. Possibly the 9700 mac edition or the announcement of the Geforce FX being piloted on the Mac(Similar to the Geforce 4) Maybe even the new 970 Processors being announced and fawned over......

We will see...but it seem they are gearing up for a big annoucement and bumped up iMacs wont do UT2003 justice...so im assuming a much heavier piece of hardware.

Just a thought....though them pulling the announcement on their website is the clincher for me....as Apple usually likes to give its surprises in bunches. And i can see UT2003 on new hardware as a big announcement.

Marvenp

Dec 19, 2002, 03:46 AM

That kind of money is not worth an iMac in any configuration. I'd buy a PowerBook with slotloading DVD-R drive before I'd dish out that kind of money for an iMac. And I have a 17' iMac. I paid ´230,000 Japanese yen for it. The difference between it and this rumored new machine? 200Mhz of processor speed, 40GB of HD space and 2' of screen space. I don't think that's worth double the price.

What the hell is Apple thinking if they release an iMac in that price range? That would mean that PCs are getting FASTER and CHEAPER while Macs were just getting more expensive. I thought the iMacs were supposed to be the consumer model to appeal to those who don't want to morgage the house to buy a computer. Has Steve's arrogance once again gone into overdrive? If someone in the higher ranks at Apple is reading this, please try to reason with him because to release an iMac for that price will be utterly STUPID!

In the eyes of PC users Macs have a reputation of being overpriced with little to offer in the way of performance. Why the hell would anyone "switch" if Apple proves that to be true?
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

ntg

Dec 19, 2002, 04:41 AM

Maybe the price IS right, if you think what it COULD include as a digital hub. After all, with a 19" screen, all you need to do is include a remote. With a new digital tuner for TV and Radio, and with the new carbon sound/midi for true stereo surround sound, nice soundstick-style speakers, a dvd-r for tv recording/DVD playback and the iPod for stereo jukebox functions, what else would you need in the living room?

I'd probably pay for one...:cool:

darndog

Dec 19, 2002, 04:51 AM

i'm new here so i have no idea how reliable (or good guesser) the source is, does anyone keep track of who has the best rumours (turn out mostly true), and how this one rates?

iwantanewmac

Dec 19, 2002, 06:37 AM

Originally posted by Macrumors
MacBidouille posts (http://www.macbidouille.com/niouzcontenu.php?date=2002-12-18#4153) rumors about upcoming machines at MWSF:

Translated by aramk:

I don't believe that the "new" imacs will sel at 4000 EURO's.
That only for a HD that's a bit bigger and 200 MHZ extra? no way.
Cmon even a dual 1.25 with 512 MB doesnt even sell here for that kind of money.

usersince86

Dec 19, 2002, 07:13 AM

We're talking a lot about the price, which we assume is either wrong or it's something way beyond the iMac we know.

The key point, to me, is that we're doing speed bumps for the next several months to a year. (Hopefully price bumps won't accompany that.)

Apple is handcuffed by processor makers right now. If speeds were equivalent, imagine how many more "switchers" there would be (don't make this into a G4 is faster than a P4 MHz argument -- we all know Apple needs faster machines; yesterday).

Apple is doing a great job moving the technology forward, innovating, etc. I just hope the next generation processor isn't anything but a plus to the Mac line.

bignumbers

Dec 19, 2002, 07:53 AM

Obviously $4K for an iMac wouldn't fly, and Apple knows that. There won't be a $4K iMac. And with the economy the way it is, Apple isn't about to introduce something as pricey as a wireless screen. Yeah it would be cool, but nobody would buy it (at least not enough to justify).

My predictions (not based on any knowledge other than past Apple history):

-iMacs bumped up in speed. Middle model gains 17" monitor, low-end keeps 15", high-end keeps 17". I predict no 19" iMac for at least the next 12 months.

-PowerMacs might get a speed bump, but I'm leaning towards that being a March-or-so announcement. If there is a speed bump, nothing else will change (no USB2, no FW2, no Bluetooth). Those updates will come in Spring or Summer. I wish they were sooner, but I don't see it happening. Possibly now using the 4X DVD burner though, although I see that happening quietly without a major announcement.

-iBooks, eMacs get a speed bump, and nothing else.

-PowerBooks get nothing (previous announcement too recent).

-iTunes 4, and some iDVD update shipping. iPhoto 2 discussed or shown, not ready yet.

-FCP 4 shipping.

-Major iPod revision. 5GB gone, 10GB and 20GB drop in price. Ability to connect CF cards and preview photos on screen. Sync new iPod with iPhoto 2.

-XServe speed bumped, maybe getting FW2.

-Lots of Rendezvous demos, announcements of compatible third-party products. Other than hardware announcements this will be the focus of the keynote.

-Promise that "at least some" of Mac models for 2003 (full year) will still boot OS 9. In the long run this will mean the lowest-end model of each machine. First machines not bootable in 9 will be the revised XServe (are they bootable now?) and new G4's to be announced in March.

-Quark will demo Quark 6 for OS X, claim how much they love Macs, and will get boo'd. No delivery date promised. Intuit will demo QuickBooks for X, although it'll be a crappy upgrade other than being carbonized.

And my "going out on a limb" predictions (with no basis in fact):
-iSync (with related changes) will sync with Exchange Server (Mail, iCal, Address Book).
-AppleWorks 7 (or whatever next version is) will use Word/Excel file format as native format. Not shipping for a while, but announced.

Those last two will seriously pi$$ off Micro$oft, who will threaten to stop updating Office for Mac. (I see a serious Apple/MS rift approaching in 2003; just a gut feeling.)

Again, just random thoughts.

jayscheuerle

Dec 19, 2002, 08:00 AM

For that money I'd expect a 23" cinema display to be attached....

pkradd

Dec 19, 2002, 08:04 AM

Of course it's all wrong. It is a RUMOR not fact. I believe that there will no longer be a 15" iMac in any event. All will be 17" as the current top of the line. Look for major iApp announcement, possibly iPhone, along with updates on iMovie, iTunes, iPhoto, et al. I finished. :)

Megaquad

Dec 19, 2002, 09:27 AM

15" iMac no more.. That's a very good thing.
19" could be a good thing but it would only bring confusion to iMac line and people who need 19" will probably get PowerMac anyway.

lmalave

Dec 19, 2002, 09:34 AM

Originally posted by pkradd
Of course it's all wrong. It is a RUMOR not fact. I believe that there will no longer be a 15" iMac in any event. All will be 17" as the current top of the line. Look for major iApp announcement, possibly iPhone, along with updates on iMovie, iTunes, iPhoto, et al. I finished. :)

I think they have to keep the 15" iMac model. I don't think they should be eliminating the lower-end models - instead they should be lowering prices on them to remain price competitive. For example, they could keep the 15" model and lower the price to $999. They would also have to lower the lowest-end eMac to maybe $799. Which means maybe they could possibly lower the CRT iMac to $599 (and even put in the new G3 chip and ATI Radeon 7500 16MB that are in the $999 iBook).

All of the above are still great machines. At the Apple store I tested Mac OS X on the 700MHz iBook with only 128MB and it was still zippy - probably thanks to the Radeon 7500 and Quartz Extreme. So a G3 CRT iMac with similar hardware inside is still a great little machine, and a $599 would make it viable for educational institutions that are flocking to $500 Dell machines in droves.

Not that I think Apple should compete on price as a strategy (there's no way they can beat Dell), but if they can lower prices and still make a profit, I think it would only be to their benefit. And I don't think it would steal sales from higher-end models since most low-end buyers start with the price point they are willing to pay and then see what they can get for that price, rather than being rigid about what they want in a computer and then paying whatever that costs (that would more accurately describe the buying behavior of a higher-end buyer).

BJNY

Dec 19, 2002, 09:43 AM

Originally posted by bennyek
I would think that FCP4 would be a pretty significant announcment on the 7th.
Any thoughts

I would say that NAB is a more likely venue for the introduction of FCP4.

Hawthorne

Dec 19, 2002, 10:08 AM

Regarding the alleged price increase, it goes against Apple's most recent product update, which was to boost speeds and lower prices to the point the iBook became one of the best values in compact notebooks out there.

Look for more of the same at MWSF, I'd wager.

pejobass

Dec 19, 2002, 10:20 AM

This is nonsense! There's no way Apple is gonna have 4K iMac, unless is a special edition.

:confused:

3777

Dec 19, 2002, 10:20 AM

Maybe Apple should get its head out of its @$$, make a 1.7-2.0 G5 ASAP, and offer these new Macs with a redesigned 19-21 inch CRT Monitor and stop making only overpriced, underpowered LCD crap.:o

insidedanshead

Dec 19, 2002, 10:40 AM

Originally posted by springscansing

Did I miss something, or did you say WIRELESS screen? That's not possible. How the heck would it even power itself? And airport can't send data nearly fast enough.

umm... you guys are outta the loop. of course with the fury of technological advancements today it's pretty easy to be.. but yeah wireless screens are possible. In fact they now exist. Merry Christmas.

http://www.viewsonic.com/products/airpanel_airpanelv150.htm

MacBandit

Dec 19, 2002, 10:41 AM

Looks like everyone has missed the 2nd most obvious answer. The first answer being that the rumor is false. The second answer being that Apple wants the iMac to be the center of a digital hub. Well if you buy an iMac and you don't have any devices to plug into it it isn't exactly a digital hub is it? So maybe Apple is going to make a package with the high end iMac, printer, scanner, digital camera, iPod and what ever other device they might include.

network23

Dec 19, 2002, 10:48 AM

darndog mirrored my thoughts...

IF Apple does release a $4000 iMac, then it has to appear worth that much to the consumers.

For me, a detachable, wireless monitor with touchscreen iMac, using Airport 2 / Bluetooth / ? would just about fit the bill.

If you are a careful observer, you will see that Apple almost always "tests the waters" before diving in, maybe to test the manufacturability or acceptance of a concept. The Power Mac 9600's had a small bit of translucent Bondi blue plastics in the door release catch before the iMacs debuted. The 9600's also had a very easy opening case, which was improved upon with the "latchdoor" Power Macs. The LCD Studio and Cinema displays predate the LCD iMacs. Upon hindsight, nearly all the clues are there to hint at the latest thing released by Apple.

Taking that into account, one could see clues in recent releases that point to some kind of detachable face iMac -- the big push in several areas by Apple; wireless, syncing, chat, inkwell. The integration of an LCD with the iMac while still "distancing" them through the metal neck.

To me, the biggest clue is inkwell. You need a writable surface to use it, so why rely on third parties to provide that? It's nearly impossible to write on a vertical screen. Keyboarding is much easier and efficient than writing with a stylus. The only logical use for inkwell is in a tablet-based environment. Microsoft has beaten Apple to the table with their tablet offerings and they have been met with lukewarm response. Now here comes Apple iPodding the tablet design. They do it right, reviews go agog over it. Everyone wants one. Throw in a TiVO style PVR (saaaay? how much programming could you fit on the rumored 120GB drive with MPEG4) and you've got a personal video delivery system.

Also possible in the wings (more clues from recent offerings): wireless everything. Apple tested the market with its bluetooth adapter, now maybe we'll see, along with the detachable screen, wireless keyboard and mouse for when the screen is attached.

Stuff like that? Yeah, I could see Apple charging $4000 for it, take the cash from early adopters, and see the price fall over the next two years as LCD and other technology costs drop.

Just a theory.

lmalave

Dec 19, 2002, 11:19 AM

Originally posted by insidedanshead

umm... you guys are outta the loop. of course with the fury of technological advancements today it's pretty easy to be.. but yeah wireless screens are possible. In fact they now exist. Merry Christmas.

http://www.viewsonic.com/products/airpanel_airpanelv150.htm

This Viewsonic is not a wireless monitor - it's a Tablet PC. I think recents posts are confusing the two. To have a Tablet PC is straightforward - just stick a G4 in a slim case (certainly possible if you look at the TiBook, add a touchscreen, and you're done. And that could certainly bump up the price of the iMac to $4000, since you'd be buying two computers! (unless the base station didn't have a CPU at all?).

What would be an entirely different product (but definitely not worth $4000 since it has even less functionality than a Tablet PC) is a true wireless monitor with touch screen, which wouldn't have a CPU but would act as a combination wireless display / input device. I'm not sure what kind of bandwidth sending the full-screen video would take, though. My guess is the 11Mbps Airport is not enough. And forget Bluetooth - remember, folks, it's only 724Kbps!! And even if they used 802.11a that's only 72Mbps, I think. But maybe it only updates part of the screen? Maybe it's like when you use Remote Desktop typ technologies... That would imply that the display would have to have at least a small CPU, since it would be more than just a "dumb display".

Or maybe it's a combination iMac / Tablet PowerBook, and when you have it docked it can use both CPU's!!!

Still - I hope this is all a bad rumor. I don't think Tablet PCs add that much value, so I hope when Apple introduces them, it'll just be an added "feature" of a new iMac, iBook, or TiBook model, and won't come at an added price premium...

Thirteenva

Dec 19, 2002, 11:22 AM

Is it possible that they could market this iMac as a workstation for DV pros. Wait i'm not crazy hear me out.....

It could have an HD display, 120gb hard drive and be bundled with FCP....this could explain the high price...

I know, I know, unlikely, just thought i'd throw it in there...

porovaara

Dec 19, 2002, 11:24 AM

Originally posted by lmalave

This Viewsonic is not a wireless monitor - it's a Tablet PC.

Uh, no it isn't. Read it again.

zedwards

Dec 19, 2002, 11:29 AM

Originally posted by bennyek
I would think that FCP4 would be a pretty significant announcment on the 7th.
Any thoughts

Why I don't agree: FC is a pro-sumer software. iCal, iTunes, etc. on the other hand, are hot ("free") items that are going to boost Apple into the homes of our parents.

zedwards

Dec 19, 2002, 11:35 AM

First thought: MacBidwho?? Any history on MacBidouille accuracy? As most everyone is singing, sounds like a crock. This isn't even entertainment.

jettredmont

Dec 19, 2002, 12:05 PM

Originally posted by lmalave

This Viewsonic is not a wireless monitor - it's a Tablet PC.

Unless you're talking about a different device than I've seen linked here ( http://www.viewsonic.com/products/airpanel_airpanelv150.htm ), you are mistaken. The ViewSonic "airpanel" is a Mira device. It uses 802.11b to view your desktop on an unattached device which acts essentially as a dumb terminal to your PC (using XP Pro's Remote Desktop ... hence the included upgrade to Windows XP Pro and the 802.11b wireless gear included in the package). It does have a CPU and an OS, but the CPU/OS are just enough to drive the Remote Desktop client (XScale processor and Win CE), and the memory supplied (64MB) is far below spec for Windows XP.

Viewsonic also makes tablet PCs: http://www.viewsonic.com/products/tablet_pc_viewpad1000.htm

But those aren't under discussion here, I don't think.

What would be an entirely different product (but definitely not worth $4000 since it has even less functionality than a Tablet PC) is a true wireless monitor with touch screen, which wouldn't have a CPU but would act as a combination wireless display / input device. I'm not sure what kind of bandwidth sending the full-screen video would take, though. My guess is the 11Mbps Airport is not enough. And forget Bluetooth - remember, folks, it's only 724Kbps!! And even if they used 802.11a that's only 72Mbps, I think. But maybe it only updates part of the screen? Maybe it's like when you use Remote Desktop typ technologies... That would imply that the display would have to have at least a small CPU, since it would be more than just a "dumb display".

Yes, Mira uses Remote Desktop technologies, which only send the WinGDI commands for updates across the wires, not a full-screen snapshot 30 times per second. However, of course, note that some applications (games and screen savers) might do massive-bandwidth GDI calls (ie, send a full-screen bitmap to the screen a few times a second) which Mira and its kind would never be able to handle well.

If Apple were to do this, I'd expect they'd substitute their Remote Desktop technology for MS's, etc. Don't know how the relative bandwidth requirements compare, but I'd suspect they're pretty similar one to the other.

That having been said, Apple would have to eliminate the bad design aspects of Mira. It would be really neat if Apple allowed an attached monitor to be used in addition to the remote desktop, but I don't see that happening (I don't believe their Remote Desktop tech allows for such a thing, just as MS's RD tech doesn't). An advantage for Apple would be if the detachable monitor was large enough to be used attached as well, so users don't have a "dead" monitor on their desktop while the detached monitor is in use (this bothers Mira testers to no end ...)

rmac

Dec 19, 2002, 12:11 PM

This wireless monitor discussion seems interesting. Certainly would be a nice thing for graphic designers (assuming it would have a pen and was pressure sensitive). What about for typical household use?

If it really costs that much, then even this solution doesn't seem to add up. In terms of the flexibility to move where you work around, a portable would do as good a job AND it can be used anywhere, not just in a limited radius around your home computer.

Now what if the computer part was dual processor and could serve multiple input/output devices. Now this is probably a little early for such a system, but follow a few trends and it makes sense:

1. For a large majority of people, speed is no longer the biggest concern when getting a computer. In the future, it will probably be even less of an issue.

2. OS X seems to be better at throughput than speed for individual applications. From my limited experience, those of us that run lots of apps at the same time seem to be more impressed with OS X "speed" than those running one critical app.

3. Higher speed networking.

4. Many homes now have multiple computers and many people using them (offices and labs have been this way for a while, I guess).

OK, so if OS X is great at running lots of applications at the same time for one person, why not do it for multiple users at the same time. Dual processors in a system (maybe only one in the future) could be enough. Or Apple could make a sleek, sexy consumer version of the server rack; simply slide in more computing power for your home/lab/office and share it among multiple users. If you happen to be the only one using it at any given time, rather than have lots of computers doing nothing, the one main computer makes everything you do happen many times faster.

This idea is quite old (older than the personal computer concept), but trends in computer science/engineering go in and out of fashion (kinda like clothing).

Anyway, this seems to be an interesting variation on some of the clustering rumors going around....

lmalave

Dec 19, 2002, 12:13 PM

Originally posted by jettredmont

Unless you're talking about a different device than I've seen linked here ( http://www.viewsonic.com/products/airpanel_airpanelv150.htm ), you are mistaken. The ViewSonic "airpanel" is a Mira device. It uses 802.11b to view your desktop on an unattached device which acts essentially as a dumb terminal to your PC (using XP Pro's Remote Desktop ... hence the included upgrade to Windows XP Pro and the 802.11b wireless gear included in the package). It does have a CPU and an OS, but the CPU/OS are just enough to drive the Remote Desktop client (XScale processor and Win CE), and the memory supplied (64MB) is far below spec for Windows XP.

Viewsonic also makes tablet PCs: http://www.viewsonic.com/products/tablet_pc_viewpad1000.htm

But those aren't under discussion here, I don't think.

Yes, Mira uses Remote Desktop technologies, which only send the WinGDI commands for updates across the wires, not a full-screen snapshot 30 times per second. However, of course, note that some applications (games and screen savers) might do massive-bandwidth GDI calls (ie, send a full-screen bitmap to the screen a few times a second) which Mira and its kind would never be able to handle well.

If Apple were to do this, I'd expect they'd substitute their Remote Desktop technology for MS's, etc. Don't know how the relative bandwidth requirements compare, but I'd suspect they're pretty similar one to the other.

That having been said, Apple would have to eliminate the bad design aspects of Mira. It would be really neat if Apple allowed an attached monitor to be used in addition to the remote desktop, but I don't see that happening (I don't believe their Remote Desktop tech allows for such a thing, just as MS's RD tech doesn't). An advantage for Apple would be if the detachable monitor was large enough to be used attached as well, so users don't have a "dead" monitor on their desktop while the detached monitor is in use (this bothers Mira testers to no end ...)

Ahhh, I stand corrected - I knew that Viewsonic was one of the manufacturers in Microsoft's Tablet PC push - so I assumed that this was the same device. I would definitely be interested to see this Mira device in action! $1300 bucks for it, though. Ouch! This would certainly account for the $4000 price tag, especially if it's a 17" version. And, hey, it would bring together Apple's investments in Inkwell, Airport, and Remote Desktop. It's starting to look more like a possibility....

LethalWolfe

Dec 19, 2002, 12:16 PM

Originally posted by porovaara

Uh, no it isn't. Read it again.

Since when does a monitor need a proc, OS, and RAM? It looks more like a "light" tablet PC that just networks w/yer rig wirelessly.

Lethal

EDIT: It's amazing how many posts can go up while I'm looking over that link and then typing my reply...

Bregalad

Dec 19, 2002, 12:17 PM

As most have already said I can't see any addition to the iMac (short of a 22" display) that could boost the price that much.

I find it disappointing that people are still talking about how much more they would pay for a Mac. Yes OS X is a great operating system and yes the designs are great, but Apple doesn't sell in a vacuum. Gateway is selling a 2GHz machine with a 15" LCD display for US$699 (after $100 mail in rebate). So add Apple's usual heathy margin and you get a 15" LCD iMac for $999. That would probably make a bigger splash at Macworld than another much higher priced iMac.

What I find difficult to believe is that anybody would pay for a high quality 19" or larger LCD display that was permanently stuck to a computer. That display is still going to look great 10 years from now, but the iMac base it's connected to will be obsolete in less than half the time. No, for me the 19" iMac makes no sense at all.

Where's the iPizzaBox? It's a small LC III inspired design with an ADC connector on the back. That would force buyers to go with an Apple display or purchase an adapter, but they would be free to choose anything from a 17" model to the 23" Cinema HD if their heart (and wallet) desired. I consider it a winning strategy, but Apple doesn't seem to care what I think.

mpest

Dec 19, 2002, 12:22 PM

Originally posted by lmalave

This Viewsonic is not a wireless monitor - it's a Tablet PC.

The viewsonic thing is a wireless monitor. It uses Microsoft's remote desktop protocol, which transfers data much more efficiently than apple remote desktop or VNC, the only two present options Apple would have if they wanted to create something similiar.
There's a ms rdp client for osx, I use it all the time with my xp box over my wireless network. Its waay faster than using virtual pc.

bignumbers

Dec 19, 2002, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by porovaara

Uh, no it isn't. Read it again.

It's both. And neither.

It is two things:

It's a regular, wired, LCD monitor when you buy the optional $200 dock.

It's also a WinCE-based tablet-type "computer" with an 802.11b (wireless) card. It has the ability to "control" a nearby host WinXP Pro PC, using WinXP Pro's ability to be controlled (similar to Timbuktu).

To say this is a "remote display" is akin to calling my PowerBook a "remote display" to my G4 because (as I'm doing now) it can controlthe G4 by Timbuktu over AirPort. My PowerBook is, of course, a real computer unto itself while the Viewsonic Airpanel is just an oversized PDA.

At $1000-$1300 for the Airpanel, I'd much rather buy an iBook.

Flickta

Dec 19, 2002, 12:32 PM

$4000 - BS
The rest can be true...

But if the price goes up, we definitely need a 19" screen... And a better video... oh...

Stike

Dec 19, 2002, 12:52 PM

Heyho, finally the rumors are starting to cook up slowly!

While all that 4000$ thing floats around, maybe you were overlooking the (more likely than CF) possibility of an OLED Display on the iPod along with movie playback capabilities. This could be the next wireless thing.

According to another thread, Kodak (was it?) are already shipping 2" OLEDs to an unknown customer. Those screens have a VERY high resolution and consume less power than a backlighted LCD - ideal for movie playback and no need to further alternate the iPods hardware...

eric_n_dfw

Dec 19, 2002, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by jettredmont
Yes, Mira uses Remote Desktop technologies, which only send the WinGDI commands for updates across the wires, not a full-screen snapshot 30 times per second. However, of course, note that some applications (games and screen savers) might do massive-bandwidth GDI calls (ie, send a full-screen bitmap to the screen a few times a second) which Mira and its kind would never be able to handle well.
Something the X-Window system on Unix/Linux has been doing for 10+ years? Or is Mira something more?

Originally posted by jettredmont
If Apple were to do this, I'd expect they'd substitute their Remote Desktop technology for MS's, etc. Don't know how the relative bandwidth requirements compare, but I'd suspect they're pretty similar one to the other.
When you say "substitute their Remote Desktop for MS's", I'm reading that as, "Use the remote desktop/display capabilities that OPENSTEP had instead of implementing MS's Mira on OS X"
If that is what you meant, I'd agree - I was somewhat surprised when Quartz was released to find that the remote displayability of the old DPS engine was absent - I'd love to see it come back.

Originally posted by jettredmont
It would be really neat if Apple allowed an attached monitor to be used in addition to the remote desktop, but I don't see that happening (I don't believe their Remote Desktop tech allows for such a thing, just as MS's RD tech doesn't).
I'm not so sure that would be too difficult, I could see it working easily if the portable screen was just a separate login to the OS X box, but sharing one login session accross the two displays would take some thought.

fleetwood

Dec 19, 2002, 01:40 PM

I see bluetooth keyboard and mouse.

Can you?

jasonbw

Dec 19, 2002, 01:57 PM

Originally posted by ntg
Maybe the price IS right, if you think what it COULD include as a digital hub. After all, with a 19" screen, all you need to do is include a remote. With a new digital tuner for TV and Radio, and with the new carbon sound/midi for true stereo surround sound, nice soundstick-style speakers, a dvd-r for tv recording/DVD playback and the iPod for stereo jukebox functions, what else would you need in the living room?

I'd probably pay for one...:cool:

I think this is the only way to make this price work. Try this:
1 ghz....at least, if not more-512 ram...at least...ddr probably-120 HD...wait for it...

19" lcd...again, at least. the earlier comment about the cinema display seems more likely at the price.

geforce 4mx...nope...too wimpy. Im thinking a radeon 9700...AIW. (we are talking $4k here)

think about it. you've got a nearly 20" lcd (about the size of a 22" tv), a buttload of ram, a graphics card that can push a game at a decent framerate at the lcd's native resolution, plus a hd that would allow tivo-like services. Hopefully, you also have tv-out ability as well.

Such a thing would compete vs the HP media center machines (high end $2k, sans monitor), although its still way too expensive. And the HP has the crappier geforceMX card, but does include THX 5.1 speakers.

If they can do that, they may have a market, but still a limited one.

jettredmont

Dec 19, 2002, 02:09 PM

Originally posted by eric_n_dfw

Something the X-Window system on Unix/Linux has been doing for 10+ years? Or is Mira something more?

Well, yeah, you could say that all remote display technologies are roughly analogous to X-Windows in that there is a server (the X-Windows server or XP Pro) and there is a client (the X display or WinCE device) and there is a GDI protocol (X windowing commands, whose name I forget, or Remote Desktop Protocol). Kinda, sorta. But the details of the two protocols (RDP and X's) are quite different if I recall correctly, much as X UI calls and Windows GDI calls are quite foreign to one another.

When you say "substitute their Remote Desktop for MS's", I'm reading that as, "Use the remote desktop/display capabilities that OPENSTEP had instead of implementing MS's Mira on OS X"
If that is what you meant, I'd agree - I was somewhat surprised when Quartz was released to find that the remote displayability of the old DPS engine was absent - I'd love to see it come back.

Seems to me there was an Apple Remote Access program released last year. I haven't run it myself, but it was released with a bit of fanfare, and with glowing comparisons to MS's Remote Desktop technology (which was as yet unreleased at the time). I think it was at MWNY 1.5 years ago come to think of it.

Ah, found it. Apple Remote Desktop: http://www.apple.com/remotedesktop/

Not cheap, though, at $299 for the 10-client (heretofore regarded as "servers" in the X-Windows sense) package. Although, cheaper than the $99/client XP Home-to-Pro upgrade required on the Windows side of the fence.

I'm not so sure that would be too difficult, I could see it working easily if the portable screen was just a separate login to the OS X box, but sharing one login session accross the two displays would take some thought.

Hmmm. It would be nice if you could do it, but I'm a bit sceptical. It would mean two separate WindowManager instances running on one box, or a single instance able to decipher calls from User A (remote) from calls from User B (at the computer). This is the major reason that Mira will not allow you to use both the detachable screen and the front screen at once. I don't recall Apple's Remote Desktop alternative allowing two completely separate windowing systems active at once; seems the remote client just got a mirror of what the local user was seeing.

But, like I said, this is not coming from having used Apple's remote tech, just from year+-old press reports that I only halfway paid attention to. It may be possible. It would be "neat". But, if not possible, then Apple can at least make it not seem like it should be possible by making the primary display be the same as the remote display (so you don't have a "disabled" display sitting at the local machine).

beez7777

Dec 19, 2002, 03:18 PM

Originally posted by MacBandit
Looks like everyone has missed the 2nd most obvious answer. The first answer being that the rumor is false. The second answer being that Apple wants the iMac to be the center of a digital hub. Well if you buy an iMac and you don't have any devices to plug into it it isn't exactly a digital hub is it? So maybe Apple is going to make a package with the high end iMac, printer, scanner, digital camera, iPod and what ever other device they might include.

I agree. I don't think that any hardware bump can justify a 100% price increase. But, I think that with a small speed increase, apple included say, a digtal elph, printer, scanner, and a 10 gig iPod as you said, i can see people paying 4 grand for a package like this, especially if these are things that the average prosumer will use, but might not have. i like this idea.

XBluechip

Dec 19, 2002, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by zedwards
First thought: MacBidwho?? Any history on MacBidouille accuracy? As most everyone is singing, sounds like a crock. This isn't even entertainment.

Well, they had the pictures of the new MDD PowerMacs first. This was pretty accurate, wasn't it?

eric_n_dfw

Dec 19, 2002, 04:39 PM

Originally posted by jettredmont
Seems to me there was an Apple Remote Access program released last year. I haven't run it myself, but it was released with a bit of fanfare, and with glowing comparisons to MS's Remote Desktop technology (which was as yet unreleased at the time). I think it was at MWNY 1.5 years ago come to think of it.

Ah, found it. Apple Remote Desktop: http://www.apple.com/remotedesktop/

Not cheap, though, at $299 for the 10-client (heretofore regarded as "servers" in the X-Windows sense) package. Although, cheaper than the $99/client XP Home-to-Pro upgrade required on the Windows side of the fence.
I don't know much about that product, but I had thought it was more of a Timbuktu or VNC on steroids. What I'm talking about is more akin to the X-Window way of doing things: The X-Server actually exists on the machine where the window is displayed. The X-Client is the application running elsewhere (or not) asking the X-Server to display the windowing stuff. OPENSTEP's DPS worked much the same way. I had OPENSTEP Enterprise on my NT machine which included a DPS window server and I could, from another OPENSTEP machine, display windows on it across the network.

Originally posted by jettredmont
Hmmm. It would be nice if you could do it, but I'm a bit sceptical. It would mean two separate WindowManager instances running on one box, or a single instance able to decipher calls from User A (remote) from calls from User B (at the computer). This is the major reason that Mira will not allow you to use both the detachable screen and the front screen at once. I don't recall Apple's Remote Desktop alternative allowing two completely separate windowing systems active at once; seems the remote client just got a mirror of what the local user was seeing.
Wouldn't the 2nd WindowManager instance be running on the "thin client" machine though? Like the X-Server comments above.

MacBandit

Dec 20, 2002, 01:18 AM

Originally posted by XBluechip

Well, they had the pictures of the new MDD PowerMacs first. This was pretty accurate, wasn't it?

Yes they were. Right to the point that the person who supplied the info to them is now being sued by Apple.

Multimedia

Dec 20, 2002, 02:59 AM

I can't imagine Apple wanting to or trying to sell iMacs for more than $1999. It's susposed to be a people's computer not an elite untouchable line. This rumor doesn't make any sense. I say 17" iMacs will fill out the current 15" price points with the bonus of Bluetooth Keyboards and Mice, more RAM and bigger hard drives. Nothing over $2K in the line will continue to be the iMac rule.

gotohamish

Dec 20, 2002, 03:05 AM

All of you talking about the price, USE SOME COMMON SENSE!

As one of the four points made is unrelated to the iMac, maybe the new priced machine is too - maybe it's a Cube for God's sake - maybe something entirely different! We'll just have to wait and see.

Megaquad

Dec 20, 2002, 03:49 AM

Originally posted by gotohamish
All of you talking about the price, USE SOME COMMON SENSE!

As one of the four points made is unrelated to the iMac, maybe the new priced machine is too - maybe it's a Cube for God's sake - maybe something entirely different! We'll just have to wait and see.
maybe its just a speed bump and few software updates

jettredmont

Dec 20, 2002, 12:37 PM

Originally posted by eric_n_dfw

I don't know much about that product, but I had thought it was more of a Timbuktu or VNC on steroids. What I'm talking about is more akin to the X-Window way of doing things: The X-Server actually exists on the machine where the window is displayed. The X-Client is the application running elsewhere (or not) asking the X-Server to display the windowing stuff. OPENSTEP's DPS worked much the same way. I had OPENSTEP Enterprise on my NT machine which included a DPS window server and I could, from another OPENSTEP machine, display windows on it across the network.

Wouldn't the 2nd WindowManager instance be running on the "thin client" machine though? Like the X-Server comments above.

Interesting, yes. That would be a bit different from what is currently in Apple Remote Desktop (and in Windows Remote Desktop). The application itself would be powered on the desktop, but you'd still have to have enough horsepower in the display device to run the window server there. For OS X, that means, I would guess, a pretty hefty processor and memory requirement (Quartz is an absolute memory hog, keeping a full bitmap for every window on the system, even if that window is minimized or obscured by other windows! I'd expect 128MB minimum memory just to have Quartz happy on the remote device! Note that the Windows GDI architecture would be more forgiving for memory requirements here, but as each app has to redraw when it comes into view has a larger bandwidth requirement instead ...) for the remote device, which would, yes, make it pretty darned expensive.

Sorry for the run-on thought above ... Your suggestion sounds interesting, and might be doable ... and, if done, would be more efficient than the Mira concept network-wise, and allow for a better overall user experience (along with someone sitting at the desktop working while the remote display is active, which Mira can not do). On the other hand, the plumbing for this, as far as I know, is no longer in OS X (Quartz, I mean), so it might take some serious development work at Apple to get it going ... But, you never know.