iMac, eMac and iBook Updates

[AidenShaw]

I would assume that most people would also prefer a 16:9 widescreen too.

As long as it's wider, not shorter.

Given the choice between fewer pixels in a widescreen, vs more pixels in a 4x3 screen - I would expect most people would opt for more pixels.

The mockup (a few posts back) of the 4x3 iMac is a good example - fitting a bigger 4x3 screen would be preferred to the smaller widescreen.

 

[~loserman~]

Too bad they didn't put the power supply in a brick like the MiniMac.... The system could have been much more elegant (and cooler and quieter).

By the way, a 4x3 screen would go down to the top of the Apple logo on the 17" (that is, to the top of the apple itself, not to the tip of the stem). That would leave plenty of room for speakers (perhaps even better-sounding front-facing speakers). Here's a Q&D image with the screen stretched to 4x3.

Ooooooohhhh me like the 4x3 mockup.

 

[burntoutjoy]

A widescreen monitor doesn't mean that you have individual Microsoft Word documents that span all the way from left to right. Widescreen allows space for palettes, multiple windows, multiple apps, chat windows, etc...

You could have a tallscreen monitor, but that would seem less natural to use. We naturally place things side by side for comparison, not above and below each other (probably for the reasons you mention.)

Thank you for putting my point far more eloquently than I could.

Thing is, the way Windows has worked for ages is that it's set up to have maximised windows excusively. MacOS has been the opposite - its strength lies in where you have windows cascaded, not maximized, so that you can click on other things in a more graphical way, rather than computer-derived widgets like button bars and list boxes. It's up to preference which one you prefer, but the two operating systems are set up like that way, so it can feel a little awkward using the opposite approach in any one of them. The difference between 'maximize' on Windows and 'zoom' in MacOS is an example of this difference.

It makes much more sense, as has been mentioned, to put this extra background stuff on the side, rather than above and below.

 

[Doctor Q]

Thing is, the way Windows has worked for ages is that it's set up to have maximised windows excusively. MacOS has been the opposite - its strength lies in where you have windows cascaded, not maximized, so that you can click on other things in a more graphical way, rather than computer-derived widgets like button bars and list boxes. It's up to preference which one you prefer, but the two operating systems are set up like that way, so it can feel a little awkward using the opposite approach in any one of them. The difference between 'maximize' on Windows and 'zoom' in MacOS is an example of this difference.

Thank you for putting my point far more eloquently than I could. 🙂 Seriously, that is a very good explanation.

 

[iMacZealot]

Price

Would this mean that prices will drop? I've noticed that prices usually drop when products are updated. For example, the new iPod Photos, the latest PowerBooks, the iBooks in October, etc. I hope this happens, as I am buying an iMac this summer.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

Would this mean that prices will drop? I've noticed that prices usually drop when products are updated. For example, the new iPod Photos, the latest PowerBooks, the iBooks in October, etc. I hope this happens, as I am buying an iMac this summer.

A price drop is possible, but not guaranteed. You're right that Apple dropped prices on recent updates - they don't do this every update cycle, though. Occasionally, they RAISE prices instead.

 

[Rootman]

Several languages read up and down. I think chinese is an example.

Vertical-text languages are always pictograph-based. Phonic written languages are always horizontal. This is because of side-by-side eyes.

PICTUREWORD
PICTUREWORD
PICTUREWORD
PCITUREWORD...

VS.

LETTERSFORMINGWORDS LETTERSFORMINGWORDS LETTERSFOR...

 

[AidenShaw]

more LOL

This is because of side-by-side eyes...

LOL - where's the proof of that claim.

It it's true, then if I cover one eye it should be just as easy to read:

L
E
T
T
E
R
S
F
O
R
M
I
N
G
W
O
R
D
S

as it is to read

LETTERSFORMINGWORDS

😀

 

[Goliath]

Hey there's a good idea. Apple can update the graphics card in the iBook to be the same or better than the 12" PowerBook 😕

Will that then mean it will be called the Power-iBook?

For Apple to bring the iBook in line with the PowerBook is just plain stupid

One of Apple's biggest downfalls is that it always cripples the consumer lines of it's products- so as to not encroach on the 'Power' lines

But not all of us consumers can afford to pay the hefty price for a powerbook or powermac so we suffer slower bus speeds, outdated graphics cards, little upgrade path etc

Imagine if BMW did this

8 series - 150mph+, all the latest gadgets, big fat alloys, any colour you want...

1 series- capable of going 110mph BUT limited to 70mph so as to not take sales away from other higher models, stock wheels you can't change- want alloys? By the 3 series! and only available in pink

Yeah thanks- think i'll buy a honda!

Kinda what Apple's attitude is- the sooner they learn that consumers don't wan't their expensive little macs unneccessarily crippled the better

 

[ASZ993]

Finally iBook revisions may also make their debut soon with speed bumps to 1.33 - 1.55 GHz and "an improved ATI Mobility Radeon graphics processor".
.

1.55Ghz... isn't that higher than a low-end PowerBook?

Wouldn't 1.42Ghz be more reasonable, but still fast enough.

But, I still would like to see the 14" display either go widescreen or go to 1400x1050 to make the 14" actually worth buying for most of us. 😉

iMacs, though are a different story... we don't know what the (censored) apple is going to do... 😛 but it better not be a dissapointment! 🙄

 

[AidenShaw]

But, I still would like to see the 14" display either go widescreen or go to 1400x1050 to make the 14" actually worth buying for most of us. 😉

Wow, 1400x1050 - you mean matching what Dell was shipping in 14" laptops over 2 years ago?


</sarcasm>

 

[Platform]

1.55Ghz... isn't that higher than a low-end PowerBook?

Wouldn't 1.42Ghz be more reasonable, but still fast enough.

But, I still would like to see the 14" display either go widescreen or go to 1400x1050 to make the 14" actually worth buying for most of us. 😉

iMacs, though are a different story... we don't know what the (censored) apple is going to do... 😛 but it better not be a dissapointment! 🙄

Well they should be at least 1.5Ghz so you can run any programs on them 🙄 😉

 

[Maxiseller]

Just a rumble...

Hey guys, do you not think that you're kinda obsessing over speed a tad? I mean, the fact is, most of us here have macs that are going to be outdated in a few months, or that are outdated already. When I originally brought my Powerbook, I JUST missed the transition to the AL books (by a full 3 days!), and that really got my goat - but when it comes down to it, the products are there for us to choose, and we have to decide whether they're going to do the job or not. It's like, we all know that a 64Vram is better than the "standard" 32, but it's not like every machine with 32 is suddenly defunct. Tiger will work on G3's after all! I guess we all want more & more future proof technology, but let's face it - if technology didn't evolve we'd still all be sitting at manual typewriters sending letters to our pen friends in France or somthing! Actually, we're much better off than the PC world - and some of these macs are hellishly upgradeable if only we had the patience.

 

[Platform]

Hey guys, do you not think that you're kinda obsessing over speed a tad? I mean, the fact is, most of us here have macs that are going to be outdated in a few months, or that are outdated already. When I originally brought my Powerbook, I JUST missed the transition to the AL books (by a full 3 days!), and that really got my goat - but when it comes down to it, the products are there for us to choose, and we have to decide whether they're going to do the job or not. It's like, we all know that a 64Vram is better than the "standard" 32, but it's not like every machine with 32 is suddenly defunct. Tiger will work on G3's after all! I guess we all want more & more future proof technology, but let's face it - if technology didn't evolve we'd still all be sitting at manual typewriters sending letters to our pen friends in France or somthing! Actually, we're much better off than the PC world - and some of these macs are hellishly upgradeable if only we had the patience.

You are right 🙄

I hope that in the future we can have upgrades to the G5 😉

 

[Devie]

Hey guys, do you not think that you're kinda obsessing over speed a tad? I mean, the fact is, most of us here have macs that are going to be outdated in a few months, or that are outdated already. When I originally brought my Powerbook, I JUST missed the transition to the AL books (by a full 3 days!), and that really got my goat - but when it comes down to it, the products are there for us to choose, and we have to decide whether they're going to do the job or not. It's like, we all know that a 64Vram is better than the "standard" 32, but it's not like every machine with 32 is suddenly defunct. Tiger will work on G3's after all! I guess we all want more & more future proof technology, but let's face it - if technology didn't evolve we'd still all be sitting at manual typewriters sending letters to our pen friends in France or somthing! Actually, we're much better off than the PC world - and some of these macs are hellishly upgradeable if only we had the patience.

If you knew that the albooks would've been updated in three days, would've you still bought the TiBook?
This is what hurts me, I would probably already have the 20" iMac I desire by now if I never went here, but I know I will be happier if I just wait a little longer to get an even better machine. There is way I will wait another three months for REV C, no matter what. I need a computer for school, badly.

 

[aswitcher]

Wow, 1400x1050 - you mean matching what Dell was shipping in 14" laptops over 2 years ago?


</sarcasm>

🙄 Well if they can't push the clocks much faster higher res screens would be a good move. Great for iPhoto.

 

[Maxiseller]

Would I have brought the Tibook? Nope. I had nothing but problems with the damn thing! But in all seriousness, Ive JUST brought an iBook even though I know updates are probably around the corner. I think it's all about the instant gratification of going into a store, and buying somthing! And plus, what else is life for but to bite the bullet and buy somthing you want. You can wait for three months for the new iMac, you could wait for six - but what are you going to get that you aren't getting now? A better graphics card? More ram? Just remember it's about the experience of the Apple OS that makes these the best computers in the world, and not the specifications. (after all, lets face it - compared to the PC world, we are certainly lower in spec) You buy an IMac now, you will still be able to use it in four or five years - buy one in three months, you'll be able to use it for four years and three months. Don't waste you're life!! Go for it! Plus, if you're anything like me, you'll want a new model in 12 months anyway! Roll on the G6 Extreme Mac!

 

[swy32x]

Would I have brought the Tibook? Nope. I had nothing but problems with the damn thing! But in all seriousness, Ive JUST brought an iBook even though I know updates are probably around the corner. I think it's all about the instant gratification of going into a store, and buying somthing! And plus, what else is life for but to bite the bullet and buy somthing you want. You can wait for three months for the new iMac, you could wait for six - but what are you going to get that you aren't getting now? A better graphics card? More ram? Just remember it's about the experience of the Apple OS that makes these the best computers in the world, and not the specifications. (after all, lets face it - compared to the PC world, we are certainly lower in spec) You buy an IMac now, you will still be able to use it in four or five years - buy one in three months, you'll be able to use it for four years and three months. Don't waste you're life!! Go for it! Plus, if you're anything like me, you'll want a new model in 12 months anyway! Roll on the G6 Extreme Mac!

With me all I save is a bit of money. I can wait another few weeks for my iMac if it saves me $350 on both the new OS and some RAM.

 

[gekko513]

Wow, 1400x1050 - you mean matching what Dell was shipping in 14" laptops over 2 years ago?


</sarcasm>

I know Dell has been shipping very high resolution laptops for quite a while, I even have a 15" 1600x1200 Dell laptop myself, but if it's an advantage is very questionable in my opinion. Issue 1: The Dell laptops with higher dpi were/are more expensive than the ones with normal dpi. Issue 2: Windows does not scale well at all to screens with higher dpi, causing terrible eye strain.

I think it is a wise move to not increase the dpi of the screens beyond a certain point before there is an OS that can handle screens with different dpi's well.

 

[rickvanr]

my dad's toshiba has the ability to have a huge resolution, but how it works is it just stretches the screen bigger, so the you have more screen real-estate, you just can't see it. you have to scroll up and down on the side to use it all.. it was silly.

 

[ASZ993]

Wow, 1400x1050 - you mean matching what Dell was shipping in 14" laptops over 2 years ago?


</sarcasm>

Well, what I have noticed on all of the iBook 14" (and even the 12" to some extent) is that the screen is really fuzzy, especially when viewing DVD movies. On the Dells that I have used at my school that have 1400x1050 displays, I have noticed that the 1400x1050 displays were much clearer than the iBook's XGA display. I dont own a 14", but I have seen the 14" display and it looks really fuzzy.

What I am saying is that Apple needs to catch up and increase the resolution of their 14" iBook display.

 

[AidenShaw]

Issue 2: Windows does not scale well at all to screens with higher dpi, causing terrible eye strain.

I think it is a wise move to not increase the dpi of the screens beyond a certain point before there is an OS that can handle screens with different dpi's well.

I don't have much of a problem scaling windows fonts for high resolution screens....

First off, if there is a special setting in one of the graphics driver panels for scaling the screen DPI - turn that off immediately. It didn't work, and the graphics folks seem to have removed the feature - download a new driver from Dell. (My 1400x1050 14" had that feature when new, it gave fuzzy photos and crufty fonts - later drivers don't have the option (thank Gord).)

For small increases, the system font size (dpi) adjustment (Display -> Settings -> Advanced -> General). Most of the time just setting this to "Large Size (120 dpi)" is enough.

Personally, I prefer to leave the DPI setting to "Normal (96 dpi)" and change the font sizes in the appearances panel.

Go to "Display -> Appearance -> Advanced" and check out the "Item" drop down. This lets you adjust the font face and size for most of the GUI elements. In particular, the font settings for "Icon" are actually the defaults for most things in the system (like File Explorer). This gives a lot more flexibility. If you go off the deep end you'll see some minor oddities with some applications which don't follow the rules to resize buttons according to the actual font size, but it's bearable.
______________________

I agree with your final comment to some extent - when Avalon and other new display subsystems are available we'll no longer have to worry about these issues with high resolution displays - it will just give us things at the size we ask it to.

 

[gekko513]

That was my point exactly. Windows doesn't handle different DPI's well. You have to go through a lot of tweaking to make it right, and the result looks like a very contorted and strange UI.

 

[mac-man]

ibook soon to upgrade???

yeah , i cant wait fer the new ibook's , i heard they were up to 1.55 GHZ
64 MB AT 9600 or a 9200 which i hope is not the case,
Im hoping that they will come standard with 512 ram ,
I hope this is all true , i want to get somthing that is portable yet somthing that can run Unreal Tournament 2004 and a few Racing games. I hope there Pre-loaded with Tiger , that would be sweet. Do u think that they will have a good enough Graphics to run a External 17 er 19 " LCD monitor fer some Games , or even desktop work such as imovie ?
any comments will help..



_________

Blue Berry iMac @ 350 MHZ, 320 MB Ram , 8 MB VRAM 10.3.8 Panther....Its Time Fer a Change!!!!

 

[Piarco]

64 MB AT 9600

Not on an iBook. No way. Rule of thumb is that if the latest Powerbook doesn't have it, then the iBook definately won't. Apple will not put a 9600 into an iBook whilst the latest revision of the 12" PB still has an FX5200 in it. If you have an iBook running at 1.55ghz, with a 60GB HDD, built in AE and BT, plus the expected RAM boost and a 64MB ATi 9600, would the 12" Powerbook actually be worthy of the inclusion of "power" in its name? No. So it won't happen.

Still The iB's may get the 64MB hike, but I'm sure it will be on the 9200 or FX5200 at a push.