20" and 24" iMacs Due Mid-to-Late Summer

[irahodges]

How many inches is the iPhone screen? That's right, 3.5". A 24" screen will be a lot more expensive.

And writing usable software to be used with multitouch isn't done over night. Where would Apple get the resources to do that when they can't even get Leopard released in time?

I agree that a larger screen size for TS will be much more expensive than what Apple would be willing to offer as price points.

What makes you think multitouch is not already built into leopard. I don't think we will see the whole TS idea in computers any time soon, and I sure don't think it would be implemented well this soon. BUT if apple were to do something like that, wouldn't it be built into the OS in the first place, not the computer. The computer just needs to grid the screen. I may be wrong?

 

[BenRoethig]

I agree that a larger screen size for TS will be much more expensive than what Apple would be willing to offer as price points.

What makes you think multitouch is not already built into leopard. I don't think we will see the whole TS idea in computers any time soon, and I sure don't think it would be implemented well this soon. BUT if apple were to do something like that, wouldn't it be built into the OS in the first place, not the computer. The computer just needs to grid the screen. I may be wrong?

Judging by what HP charges a touch screen would add around $500 to the iMac's price.

 

[irahodges]

Judging by what HP charges a touch screen would add around $500 to the iMac's price.

That was less than I was assuming, but I still think that more than apple wants to add for the iMacs target of mid-range computers.

 

[rainydays]

Each major new design for the iMac was a radical departure from previous designs. I just can't figure out how Apple can keep that up. Seems like the current design is about as good as you can get (just fine-tuning, like removing the chin, making it slimmer, etc.).

Yeah, the thinner it is the harder it will be to make the design radically different. Well, actually it won't, but if you want to stick to traditional Apple design it will be hard. The change would pretty much have to be different materials and colors. Perhaps a more rounded shape.

I also have a problem imagining how they could make a new radical design and keep the current concept. Unless they decide to split up the screen and computer again, but I very much doubt that.

Perhaps it won't be such a revolutionary design, but rather an evolutionary.

 

[Thomas2006]

Thanks - read my post above as well which further elaborates on this.

Perhaps a mid-range tower is the answer for gamers? The Mac Pro is too much power and cost for many, an AIO such as the iMac isn't ideal, so perhaps a headless iMac and/or a Mac with some upgradeablity like the Mac Pro is needed to fill the gap between iMac and Mac Pro. Alas, I don't believe such a machine would fit Apple's current model.

I think with EA and id software making appearances at WWDC Apple will add another Mac to the lineup that will be geared towards gamers. I am not talking about an Alienware type of gaming machine, but one with parts that can be upgraded such as RAM (4GB max), hard drives (2), video card, and maybe a sound card. I do not see Apple making the processor upgradeable, but I seem to recall reading you could swap out the dual-core for quad-core in the Mac Pro so unless Apple solders the processor to the motherboard then even the CPU can be upgraded.

Not only do I think a Mac (non-Pro) with a changeable graphics card would give Apple more sales, but ATI and NVIDIA would most likely make more of their cards compatible with the Mac.

 

[Counter]

Howdy everyone... I've been so sick of hearing about new iMac rumors and nothing actually materialising! It's made me think quite philosophical about the whole thing. One guy from these forums mentioned last week that at the end of the day, it's only a computer and nothing to get so stressed about. Well, whoever you are, you have set me free.

Whilst it's fun to speculate and rumorise (new word!) about new Apple products you have to draw a line somewhere, otherwise no-one would get anything done! Personally I love the current iMac design. I also get 10 days to decide if I want to keep it or not.

So anyhow, I just purchased the following:

20 inch 2.16GHz C2D iMac
2GB RAM
ATI Radeon X1600 graphics with 256MB RAM
250GB Hard drive

And all for the fine sum of £1,098 as opposed to £1,169. A saving of £71!

No need to enter a coupon code, just be nice to the person on the phone and they will do you a deal. I'm sure others may have better deals to talk about but I'm more than happy with this. This iMac will last me a while hopefully.

So, free yourselves from the grasp of the "must have latest/greatest" brigade and just go out and buy yourself the computer that suits you and your budget.

--
brill

Very good point. It's so easy to get lost in rumor land. Very easy to forget how good the current machines are at any point.

What is the coupon code you speak of? I could use it, l'll be buying this week. (from the UK also)

 

[Dimwhit]

Perhaps it won't be such a revolutionary design, but rather an evolutionary.

That's more what I'm thinking. I don't think the technology is here yet that will allow for a truly revolutionary design.

 

[Stridder44]

Apple has not delayed the revision of the iMac just to put it in a fancy new shell and upgrade with the latest processors! They could have done that months ago.

Remember their mantra "to change the world". Look closely to many of the graphical changes to Leopard. They all say touch screen interface!

Here are a few examples:
- stacks from the dock give you one click (touch) access, the grid set-up looks just like the iPhone!
- the sidebar in the new finder gives one click (touch) access
- cover flow allows you to flip through selections.
- spaces has "button" type icons to jump between screens, birds eye view lets you select the screen with one click (touch).
- quick look gallery spreads out like a series of buttons to select documents
- time machine rolls through the records that can be brought up with one click (touch)
- etc..

I know that many of you say that a touch screen would be a waste of time or that it would be a pain to use, but you looking at it from the current state of touch screens. Apple would make it an elegant, intuitive and easy to use interface.

Let's face it, the mouse is a awkward, 30+ year old interface. Granted, most of us have gotten use to it (remember how it took some time to get use to moving that stupid mouse around when you first started), but it can be a pain in the rear to drag the pointer over to scroll down a screen and then drag it all the way across the screen again to click on a button, then drag it across the screen again, etc... Just think, you could scroll with one finger and then tap a button with another finger instantly. It allows you to do multiple items in a few quick taps instead of having to drag a mouse back and forth across the screen. (it is like doing everything with shortcut keys with out having to remember key strokes or setting up custom macros).

The first machines will still have all the keyboard and mouse capabilities, but eventually the old interfaces will fade away. Remember that flak that apple took when they dropped the floppy drive etc.. Apple wants to be the pioneer and change the way we do things. They want to put their computer years ahead of the competition.

You guys have to think outside the box. In five years we will all be laughing about how stupid it was to use a mouse!

While touch-screen sounds great and all, I just want to know how you think it's gonna be implemented. Because I can tell you right now I'm sure as hell not gonna be holding my arms up to a screen for hours on end.

 

[MrCrowbar]

Yeah, the thinner it is the harder it will be to make the design radically different. Well, actually it won't, but if you want to stick to traditional Apple design it will be hard. The change would pretty much have to be different materials and colors. Perhaps a more rounded shape.

I also have a problem imagining how they could make a new radical design and keep the current concept. Unless they decide to split up the screen and computer again, but I very much doubt that.

Perhaps it won't be such a revolutionary design, but rather an evolutionary.

iMacs have followed the basic design lines of the operating system for some time now. The pinstripes were in the OS and in the case of the first iMacs. The iMac G5 was rounded like the top edges of the windows etc.

The windows in Leopard have less rounded edges (they're still a little rounded, just like iTunes 7), also a lot of transparency has been introduced. my guess is the new iMacs will be a little less rounded and less shiny. Maybe some plexyglass for the transparent element, a plexyglass stand could look good. I don't think it will have a metal case, not because "aluminum = pro" (the Mac Mini isn't pro) but because it wouldn't look good and can't take child abuse as good as plastic.

There's no real reason to lose the chin. Apple deemed the height of the lower screen edge to be perfectly ergonomic, it's the sam on all iMacs and cinema displays. Loosing the chin would just waste valuable space between your desk and the display. The iMac has already been made slimmer once, it used to be totally flat on the back. The next generation will probably be an evolution of the current model. Thinner, less bezel, HDMI-output, you get the idea.

 

[Billy Boo Bob]

Judging by what HP charges a touch screen would add around $500 to the iMac's price.

I can see that a jump in price of even that much would raise a lot of noise among the masses. However, if they could make it an option when ordering, then it might be more accepted. But the price being forced on everyone will be trouble.

I'd like to see, perhaps, a separate monitor going touchscreen, for use with other machines (or as the addon mini-DVI monitor for iMac). Or maybe an easy add-on item that won't make the iMac look all funky with or without it.

I really doubt that they'll keep multi-touch limited to the iPhone (and any subsequent iPods that take the form).

I remember taking a look at a touchscreen PC at an office store and thinking "Hmm... Wonder if this thing as the right specs to run them OSX86 hacks?"

Being a minor league developer, I think I could make good use of a TS Mac.

 

[Dimwhit]

While touch-screen sounds great and all, I just want to know how you think it's gonna be implemented. Because I can tell you right now I'm sure as hell not gonna be holding my arms up to a screen for hours on end.

I'll play devil's advocate and come up with a touch screen idea (which I don't think is going to happen). What if, for the iMac/desktops, you don't actually touch the monitor? What if the touch screen is actually like the mousepad, so instead of a mouse, you do the touch-screen commands on a small glass screen that sits on the desk? Maybe it has a proximity detector, so as your fingers get close to the pad, cursors appear on the monitor, and you go from there? You could even have a virtual keyboard on that touch-screen pad, though I don't think that would be needed, assuming the regular keyboards would still be used.

Just a though that I don't think has a chance in hell of happening.

 

[skellener]

That is just as ugly as can be kontheur! Blech!

 

[ImAlwaysRight]

Ah yes, another post about new iMacs. Another discussion filled with ingnorant fanboys dreaming of multi touch desktop displays and chinless frames. How much more do we have to take until there's some solid information?

Yeah, who the hell would expect to find mac enthusiasts speculating about a new Mac product on a Mac rumor forum? Methinks someone is in the wrong place ...

i hate to tell you this... jesus is a myth

That's like saying the existence of Mac clones are a myth. NO historian denies a religious person named Jesus lived in the early part of the 1st century.

ok, everyone, listen up: there will be NO touchscreens

the only reason I see for which the new model would have touchscreen, is because Leopard would have touchscreen/multitouch controls, but it doesn't

no, it's not a "secret feature", cause if Leopard did have multitouch, apple would have announced it at WWDC, so the devs could make custom apps for it...

This post needs to be a sticky at the top of every page of this thread.

My head is spinning from some of the nonsense spewed in this thread. This is how absurd expectations get built up. And then, when Apple comes out with a solid update and a nice redesign, you'll have legions here crying that they'll never buy Apple again because they didn't include a touchscreen, or a combo HDDVD/Bluray burner, or a minifridge.

Here, here!

God that's so funny, minifridge! Some macboys really are living in a dream!

What is even funnier is someone laughing at someone else because they missed the sarcasm in a post.

This whole thread has been quite entertaining, to say the least.

 

[ImAlwaysRight]

That is just as ugly as can be kontheur! Blech!

Enlarged MacBook screen photoshopped on an existing iMac stand. At least we know kontheur is not on Jonathan Ive's design team.

 

[pcorajr]

Im not trying to be rude but people need to wake up and realize that this touch screen crap is not going to work.

It sound all nice and good but i dare anybody to actually do thir daily rutine on a touch screen. We use touch screen where i work. We have 2 or 3 monitors that are touch screens. Once of them was around 1000 Dollars. I used it with both windows and ubuntu and i can tell you that after 1 hour of use my arms where tired and i accomplished far less.

Touch screen belong on tablet PC and mobile devices. I think i wold buy a PC again before i would buy a IMac with touchscreen.

 

[rainydays]

iMacs have followed the basic design lines of the operating system for some time now. The pinstripes were in the OS and in the case of the first iMacs. The iMac G5 was rounded like the top edges of the windows etc.

Yeah, I've thought about this too. In fact, it was the reason I thought that the new iMac might be introduced together with Leopard.
I just have a hard time figuring out how it can be made really beautiful but keep the costs down at the same time.
I think an acrylic stand would make it look rather cheap actually. I'm thinking about a mix between dark gray matte metal and glossy inlays. Kinda like the apple logo on the new site. But that would probably make it more expensive than the Mac Pro case.
Oh well, I haven't slept in 35 hours now so I have a hard time thinking and even a harder time explaining what I'm thinking so I think I better quit

 

[Clive At Five]

Yeah, the thinner it is the harder it will be to make the design radically different. Well, actually it won't, but if you want to stick to traditional Apple design it will be hard. The change would pretty much have to be different materials and colors. Perhaps a more rounded shape.

I would rather have one of two things:

1) This may sound weird but I'd rather have a "thicker" iMac with more style. Just look at the histry of the iMac: First the revolutionary all-in-one egg Mac. They made you say, "How did they do that?!" Then they went to the swivel-neck Mac and again made you say, "How did they do that?!" Then they went to the panel Mac and made you say, "Where did the computer go?! / How did they do that?!" If they were to go to a slimmer, aluminum, chin-less Display Mac, there won't be a "How did they do that" reaction. It'll be more like, "That's is?"

The other part of this is capability: If the iMac keeps getting thinner, it'll never have more capability than a MacBook. Personally, if I were to accept the drawback of not being portable, I'd expect a trade-off: more power. That's something that can't come with a slimmer design. The iMacs of yore used to be just one step behind the PowerMac. That's part of what the iMac so amazing. Well, the current iMacs are three steps behind the Mac Pro. I used to be able to buy an iMac and be a Prosumer. That is no longer true. The iMac needs more power, and I'd be willing to sacrifice thickness for it. It's a desktop anyway! Why are we caring about how small it is?

2) They should go the other way and make it a lighter-powered convertable.

Option A: Give it a base station with a nice GPU, HDD, extra RAM, USB ports (for keyboard, mouse and others), optical bay, and a PSU, all sitting on a nice clear acryllic stand. The display detaches (and becomes multi-touch capable), the unit complete with mo-board (using integrated graphics), some RAM, 16GB SSD (enough for OSX and some free space), Wi-Fi, and a battery for a good 5 hours of detached life. A good ol' tablet is you will.

Option B: Just a multi-touch detachable display, Wi-Fi, and a battery, loaded with enough guts to act as a "remote desktop" interface to the base station.

Out of the two choices, I'd say 1 is more likely but I'd love, love, love to have 2.B.

mmmmmmmmm detachable display....

-Clive

 

[Stridder44]

I'll play devil's advocate and come up with a touch screen idea (which I don't think is going to happen). What if, for the iMac/desktops, you don't actually touch the monitor? What if the touch screen is actually like the mousepad, so instead of a mouse, you do the touch-screen commands on a small glass screen that sits on the desk? Maybe it has a proximity detector, so as your fingers get close to the pad, cursors appear on the monitor, and you go from there? You could even have a virtual keyboard on that touch-screen pad, though I don't think that would be needed, assuming the regular keyboards would still be used.

Just a though that I don't think has a chance in hell of happening.

That's what I have always thought too, which made me think even more...why bother? I mean I know you could turn use said pad for a number of different things other than just typing, but otherwise I don't see the point. Touchscreen is perfect where keyboards are unwanted (due to size) but when you're sitting at a desk it just doesn't seem that practical. It's like switching out a normal keyboard for a virtual one, but even then you're still typing.


But hey I know somebodys gotta come up with a good idea to change that so I'll be ready.

 

[Dany M]

Hey, with Leopard coming out with the see through bar, doesn't that mean that the monitor is going to be a ratio of 16:9 and not 16:10 wit the bar taking the top 0:1

 

[Clive At Five]

Im not trying to be rude but people need to wake up and realize that this touch screen crap is not going to work.

It sound all nice and good but i dare anybody to actually do thir daily rutine on a touch screen. We use touch screen where i work. We have 2 or 3 monitors that are touch screens. Once of them was around 1000 Dollars. I used it with both windows and ubuntu and i can tell you that after 1 hour of use my arms where tired and i accomplished far less.

Touch screen belong on tablet PC and mobile devices. I think i wold buy a PC again before i would buy a IMac with touchscreen.

If you went with a convertable, you could use a touchscreen for simple tasks, like browsing the net, reading a document, using iTunes, simple games, etc. but when you needed you do heavyweight work, dock it and use the attached keyboard & mouse. I agree that you wouldn't be able to use it day in and day out as a touchscreen unit on the desk but it would be nice to have occassional portability.

If I want to read the news (macrumors.com, of course) while sitting on the couch, I don't want to boot up the 10 pound dead-weight-laptop (yes it's a PC) and set it on my lap and be tied to a keyboard. If I want to type up a little blurb or submit my super-secret inside info to Arn, I can use an on-screen pop-up keyboard, but when I'm done and want to work on my novel, it's either back to the den, or boot up the dead-weight. I'd rather type that up on a real keyboard anyway.

I think a convertable could world... it would just be a matter of deciding on what hardware goes where.

-Clive

 

[WannaGoMac]

Lol, i just can't believe this thread is at 15 pages! my god. 15 pages of just wish lists and whining!

Seriously, threads should be limited to like 5 pages. After that, they are just pointless repeating or arguing in a thread about things that should be PMs, and no one reads the entire thread since it is too long.

 

[sam10685]

And that's bad because....?

It's not bad. Macbook Pro's/Powerbook's are beautiful... but then again, so are the current iMac'siMac G5's and everyone wants a new form factor there.

 

[Clive At Five]

Hey, with Leopard coming out with the see through bar, doesn't that mean that the monitor is going to be a ratio of 16:9 and not 16:10 wit the bar taking the top 0:1

The 16:10 ratio includes the menu bar. Typically the menu bar covers up the top portion of the screen. With transparency it will still exist and now you'll be able to see it.

Even still, if you were to change to a 4:3 ratio, the screen would smash and resize the backdrop, menu bar and windows to fit it to the screen size.

And by the way, mathematically, "0:1" makes no sense. The menu bar would be infinitely wide and infinitely long.

I love correcting math errors.

-Clive

 

[Dany M]

The 16:10 ratio includes the menu bar. Typically the menu bar covers up the top portion of the screen. With transparency it will still exist and now you'll be able to see it.

Even still, if you were to change to a 4:3 ratio, the screen would smash and resize the backdrop, menu bar and windows to fit it to the screen size.

And by the way, mathematically, "0:1" makes no sense. The menu bar would be infinitely wide and infinitely long.

I love correcting math errors.

-Clive

I didnt know how to put the apple bar at top , so that means we are going to have find and resize our wallpaper to fit the new size when leopard comes out, unless apple makes a 16:9 if this rumor is true???

 

[Clive At Five]

I didnt know how to put the apple bar at top , so that means we are going to have find and resize our wallpaper to fit the new size when leopard comes out, unless apple makes a 16:9 if this rumor is true???

It's not a new size. Previously the menu bar covered up a sliver of the background. In the future it will not.

No new screens, no new aspect ratios, just the same 16:10 with a semi-transparent menu bar.

-Clive