With only a couple of high end Windows laptops.. (alienware etc) capable of true HDMI IN, will Apple ever make an iMac, or a portable with this capability?
Last edited:
Is there a big if any demand for such a feature?
Apple does not cater to the 1%. This will never happen.
EXACTLY!!!!!If I had an iMac with HDMI in I might hook an Xbox into it.
Suddenly, it's no longer just an all-in-one desktop, it's also a small HDTV you can use for game consoles, Blu-Ray players, a monitor for other computers, television, and digital cameras.
Direct importing video from what source? Doesn't appear to be a mainstream sort of thing.
Can you give an example of what a typical use would be?
If I had an iMac with HDMI in I might hook an Xbox into it.
I can promise you that the upcoming iMacs being released will have this feature. Guaranteed.
What evidence do you have to support this?
Lack of denial from Apple.
Lack of denial from Apple.
And Beta was better than VHS. So what?Thunderbolt is better than hdmi.
How is it more convenient to have two separate devices when an extra port on the iMac would save space and money? I know even 27" isn't a fantastic size for an HDTV, and there's something to be said about reducing a perfectly good iMac to the role of a screen to watch MythBusters on, but why would you not want the iMac to be able to do more?Rumor has it Apple is working on an Apple TV so no need to turn the iMac into one.
In my previous post, I just listed off a plethora of devices that could use an HDMI port on an iMac. Are you trolling?That's about it ..... you could use your game console on it!![]()
Thunderbolt may be superior to HDMI, but right now, very few devices use Thunderbolt. And until the technology is adapted by the rest of the industry, having the only video-input port on the iMac be something as exclusive as Thunderbolt really limits the technology in my view.Thunderbolt is better than hdmi.
really we should be asking is when other company's will catch up and use a better technology.
Apple skipped hdmi because they have thunderbolt, plus they want you to buy the cinema display.
How is it more convenient to have two separate devices when an extra port on the iMac would save space and money? I know even 27" isn't a fantastic size for an HDTV, and there's something to be said about reducing a perfectly good iMac to the role of a screen to watch MythBusters on, but why would you not want the iMac to be able to do more?
EXACTLY!!!!!
Think of it this way: 27" iMac + HDMI IN = iTV
An HDMI IN would exponentially boost the flexibility of the iMac line. Suddenly, it's no longer just an all-in-one desktop, it's also a small HDTV you can use for game consoles, Blu-Ray players, a monitor for other computers, television, and digital cameras.
It would also make the iMac itself very useful years after its outdated by faster computers, because the HDMI port would let you still use the screen!
I honestly don't know why today's iMacs don't have HDMI IN ports. It seems like a great feature to advertise and a great addition to the computer.
I detest reductum ad absurdum.But you could make this argument about a lot of different features that "should" be added to the iMac. Why should I have a special machine to make toast when with just a little upgrade of a toasting slot an iMac could do the job quite decently? Even if I didn't use the toasting slot, why wouldn't I want the iMac to be able to do more?
Each little function would be nice for a segment of the market, but in sum you would end up with a computer that had a whole slew of different features that it wasn't very good at fulfilling. Apple tends to cut out functions that the product is not going to do well.