Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Calebj14 said:
nah... needs a new program... kinda like the iTunes for playing/buying and GarageBand for creating... how about iMovie for creating and iTheatre for playing buying... thereby making QT only an engine... and having iTheatre and iTunes???

One thing I'd like to see introduced in iTunes is the ability to download and play music videos straight from the playlist. One thing thats real common at school is to put on a playlist when you're hanging out with people and put the visualizations (whatever they're called in the normal world) on the TV just as something to have in the background. If I could intermingle music videos with the visualizations, that would be great.

Oh yeah, and if Apple would only start putting NTSC out in their macs. (at least as option, please :)
 
thatwendigo said:
The reason that DVDs can look okay on your computer even at compressed state is that you're looking at a very, very low resolution screen.
Pardon me? Sorry to take one sentence out of context, but can you explain that statement? Or were you thinking NTSC television screen?
 
thatwendigo said:
I'm stepping back from my claims that the iMac G5 couldn't be done, since the situation has changed. The 970FX is apparently in quantity now, and the use of liquid cooling changes the whole game from the ground up. However, I don't expect anything like a pricedrop unless the display is completely removed, and that means no hideously expensive wireless display.

and you argued your point against me so passionatly, infact tried to make me look stupid.....

hum anyway.. atleast you have "stepped back"

im with you on the wireless display thing.... not yet anyway... as for the price drop, i would settle for value for money, the current imac is nothing even close to value,

i take it you also take back the imac will be killed off thing???


EDIT: how well does virtual pc run on a powerbook??? i will be programing in csharp and maybe vb
 
Well I can understand why a new iMac would be premiered at a developers conference, but why the displays? iSight was premiered, and the G5 PMs were last year, but things can be developed for them. Same with the iMac. However, the displays....they're displays, and the people there can't do much with news of a new display. A new Apple display will be a bit better, but people are really only interested in seeing it because of its new frame that will hopefully match the PM G5.

SiliconAddict said:
Beyond that is the average person REALLY going to put a hole in the wall to mount their computer? Thanks but I've moved my computer desk 3 times in the last 5 years and the last thing I would want is a anchor in the wall where I last placed my iMac. Or lets say that Apple has their own stand that it hangs on. What's the point other then possibly allowing little Billy to more easily knock over the family computer.
Now maybe an iMac in the form of a cinema display where the easel on the back folds out and locks to keep it upright. with maybe another joint for tilting the screen?

I agree somewhat. If the iMac is meant to be hanged, then its going to be difficult to ever move it around. What is Apple going to do, give you a mount, screws, and a bunch of Allen keys to screw it all in place. Apple ain't Ikea. And notice that at offices and such, not all desks have a wall sitting in front of it. If someone wants to hang it, they'll need a 30inch model in order to read text well. Its a bad idea, or at least a bit unnecessary because of how useless it is (other than for bragging rights, of course). If they made a wireless hanging display for the PM, then I could understand it since you wouldn't hang it unless it works in your particular office situation, but not for the iMac. I have a window in front of me. Where the heck would I hang it?

Also, Tiger
 
I also think Tiger will be the big news. To all of you dreaming about a mountable iMac, I don't think it's happening because we know for a fact that PB G5s are still several months away. So if Apple could make slim, mountable iMacs, they would also be able to design PB G5s. Since G5s run pretty hot, the case of the new iMac must have a certain size, which is probably bigger than the current design, so the pizza box thing makes more sense. Anyway I'm pretty sure we'll see new iMac (new form factor that is) pretty soon. But I think there's also a chance it will still be G4.
 
michaelb said:
Am I the only one to point out the obvious here?

I mean, this is the iMac 3 we're talking about.

If Apple is not making the effort to broadcast a STEVENOTE - no satellite feed, no live relays to Apple Stores - then the chances of the iMac 3 being released are much lower.

When it does come, I can see Apple hyping it a bit more than at an unbroadcasted, developers only WWDC. It's not even as if it suits a developer's conference like the pro G5 did.

I hope I'm wrong, but I can see some :( and :mad: faces here if the rumors are illfounded and expectations are over high.

Good point. No broadcast, and yet a new iMac comes out?
 
Headless idea

Random speculation: what if rumors of new NON-ADC displays and rumors of new iMacs are actually the same?

Something like this:

* Headless pizza box iMac--use flat, or on its side like a micro-tower. With power supply, optical drive, and upgradable GPU--and loads of cooling vents. Aluminum, but maybe painted white.

* Three widescreen DVI displays: 15.2", 17", 20".

* All displays have built in USB and Firewire hubs with ports on the sides, all have built-in Bluetooth, all have built-in microphones and stereo speakers with "subwoofer." Much more than just a display.

* A single "hydra cable" from CPU to display, connecting via a single multi-plugged "head" (like a laptop dock) cleanly in back of the display. Firewire, USB, DVI, power, and audio. ADC cleanness, without locking you into Apple displays.

* If you do choose an Apple display, then several mounting options: simple tripod stand like current Cinema Displays, or a wall mount, OR an arm mount that attaches to the CPU (when sideways) to make in all-in-one. The cable could be inside the arm.

Thus you have an elegant, simple, compact new headless iMac with just one cable (plus main power of course), assuming you choose the Apple display and Bluetooth mouse/keyboard. Or you can have an all-in-one with the same great arm we have now. Or if you want just the CPU with wired mouse/keyboard, you can have it, and add your own DVI or VGA display.

Apple could even sell a standalone 17" CRT that attaches to the CPU with a swivel (at the same place the optional arm goes) and now you have also replaced the eMac! One model, lots of flexibility, no more e vs. i confusion.

Just a thought :)
 
Video iPod - Steven Spiegelberg user No 1?

OK,

here's something for you all to bite into.

On page 96 of the June issue of Premiere Magazine there is a picture of Steven Spiegelberg and Diego Luna (cast member of "the Terminal"). They are both intently looking at a video mionitor. In Mr Spiegelbergs hand is an iPod.

If you are not familiar with the going-ons on a film shoot, it's become increasingly common to tape the video tap from the camera, and to have the ability to play it back for both the director and the talent to evaluate performance.

From the picture in question, Mr Spiegelberg appears to be operating the iPod while at the same time he and Diego is looking at the video monitor...

Make of it what you will...

Jack
 
nagromme said:
* Headless pizza box iMac--use flat, or on its side like a micro-tower. With power supply, optical drive, and upgradable GPU--and loads of cooling vents. Aluminum, but maybe painted white.

The problem with the G5 isn't going to be venting, it's going to be getting the heat away from the machine, which requires some kind of active cooling system - liquid or air. On top of that, Apple's insistence on quiet computing, which they've largely lead us to expect, means higher prices and more elaborate systems to achieve this end. All in all, the only cost-cutting measure I can possibly conceive of is the removal of a built-in screen, and odds are that won't remove all that much from the cost. The G5 necessitates an almost total refitting of the system and components, and that means greater hardware costs across the board.

Even headless, don't expect the iMac to be much cheaper than it is right now.

* Three widescreen DVI displays: 15.2", 17", 20".

Why would Apple reduce their overall screen real estate?

A move to widescreens at their current sizes would be far more impressive and useful, not to mention more in line with the progress in the overall industry. Stepping back - though it's more of a sidestep, but consumers won't see it that way - is usually not a good plan. Just ask intel about their new naming scheme. :D

* All displays have built in USB and Firewire hubs with ports on the sides, all have built-in Bluetooth, all have built-in microphones and stereo speakers with "subwoofer." Much more than just a display.

No thanks. I'll take a simple, functional display that does what it's supposed to and has fewer parts to go wrong, if you don't mind. Also, cabling to a monitor for all that would increase latency and decrease overall available length to the consumer - FireWire and USB only go so far without losing signal strength. It adds to the cable complexity unnecessarily, makes more for there to go wrong within the monitor itself, and generally fails to really add anything that isn't already done better externally or within the computer.

* A single "hydra cable" from CPU to display, connecting via a single multi-plugged "head" (like a laptop dock) cleanly in back of the display. Firewire, USB, DVI, power, and audio. ADC cleanness, without locking you into Apple displays.

This is interesting, but not really as "clean" as ADC, thought it would provide an even easier way to use non-Apple displays with your computer. If nothing else, the cable would have more RF interference than ADC does, because it carries all that additional signal. Also, I don't know exactly how you're expecting to have user-exchangable graphics cards with a single plug that does all this, but the multiple cord thing is one reason that Apple moved the way it did with ADC. You'd need some kind of internal routing to a socket, or to know how to plug everything on the back.

Definitely not new-user friendly.

* If you do choose an Apple display, then several mounting options: simple tripod stand like current Cinema Displays, or a wall mount, OR an arm mount that attaches to the CPU (when sideways) to make in all-in-one. The cable could be inside the arm.

Counterbalancing a 15 pound display is going to make that tower sit strangely when it doesn't have one, and probably list hard to one side in terms of overall weight. It's a cool idea and all, but I can see there being a lot of problems, especially with the detachable cable-in-arm setup.

Apple could even sell a standalone 17" CRT that attaches to the CPU with a swivel (at the same place the optional arm goes) and now you have also replaced the eMac! One model, lots of flexibility, no more e vs. i confusion.

If you think Apple can sell a $799 G5, then I'd like to see what crippling, corner-cutting measures you think will accomplish that. Just to point this out...

Asus SK8N motherboard for AMD Socket 940
-4x ECC or non-ECC dual-channel PC3200
-3x UltraDMA 133, 2x SATA
-1 AGP 8x, 5x PCI
-2x PS2, 1x LPT, 1x COM, 6x USB2.0 (4 rear), 2x 1394a (1 rear), Audio
-10/100 Ethernet onboard
$177

AMD Opteron 244
-1.8ghz
-1MB L2
$307

512 MB Crucial OEM PC3200
$87

Pioneer DVR-A07XLA
-8x DVD+/-RW
$122.99

Seagate 120GB 7200RPM SATA
-8MB buffer
$94

ATI Radeon 9600XT 128MB
$169

Enermax Noisetaker 600W PSU
$168

Without a case, that's $1125 in parts at retail, so call it about $850-900 wholesale. That's basically zero profit if Apple sells it a grand, with no monitor and fewer features than the PowerMac.
 
thatwendigo said:
No thanks. I'll take a simple, functional display that does what it's supposed to and has fewer parts to go wrong, if you don't mind. Also, cabling to a monitor for all that would increase latency and decrease overall available length to the consumer - FireWire and USB only go so far without losing signal strength. It adds to the cable complexity unnecessarily, makes more for there to go wrong within the monitor itself, and generally fails to really add anything that isn't already done better externally or within the computer.

It's a matter of personal taste as to what you want your monitor to do (or not to do). However, I don't think that restrictions on FireWire or USB cable length are a legitimate reason not to add these things to a screen. From what I can quickly ascertain, IEEE 1394 has a maximum cable length of 4.5 metres with up to 63 devices attached, or up to 72 metres with up to 16 devices attached. For USB2, the maximum cable length seems to be 5 metres. These cable lengths should be sufficient (especially if the monitor contains a repeater for FW and/or USB) without running into signal drop-off issues...just how far away to most users place their screen from their CPU anyway?

Combining various ports with the monitor isn't such a bad idea IMHO...other manufacturers have done this for a long time. It's either a few extra cables to the back of your screen, or the usual mess of external USB and FireWire hubs with their data cables and power leads strewn everywhere.

This one's just down to personal taste, or the decisions of Apple's design teams, and since neither of us are part of those teams, then...well...insert all the usual disclaimers about everything uttered on these boards not being worth a microgram of dog crap.
 
well guys, it's just over a week ledt to the event ;-)
we know for almost a fact that 30" is coming, abeit w/o ADC connector.
we know pretty sure that iMacs will have G5 inside and will be headless!
we know 10.4 gets introduced, especailly w/speech emphasied...

i doubt that new iMac will be a pizzabox physique --;
and since it's without display, it can compete with barebone PC!
i expect it to be under $800 US!!! :eek:

and i hope Steve come out with wireless remote for iMac that i can speak
to it - "iTune, play playlist Eric Clapton, volume 5" and it just plays, wow!
:rolleyes:
 
imgmkr said:
well guys, it's just over a week ledt to the event ;-)
we know for almost a fact that 30" is coming, abeit w/o ADC connector.
we know pretty sure that iMacs will have G5 inside and will be headless!
we know 10.4 gets introduced, especailly w/speech emphasied...

i doubt that new iMac will be a pizzabox physique --;
and since it's without display, it can compete with barebone PC!
i expect it to be under $800 US!!! :eek:

and i hope Steve come out with wireless remote for iMac that i can speak
to it - "iTune, play playlist Eric Clapton, volume 5" and it just plays, wow!
:rolleyes:

it wont be headless,,, it wont be headless,,, nope nope nope.....
 
imgmkr said:
i doubt that new iMac will be a pizzabox physique --;
and since it's without display, it can compete with barebone PC!
i expect it to be under $800 US!!! :eek:

I would be truly shocked if Apple sold even a headless iMac for $800 U.S. As ThatWendigo pointed out, parts for a G5 iMac would likely be around $900 without case ($950 or more with the case). If Apple was looking for a 25% return on these, they would be about $1199 without monitor.

I don't think Apple will ever market a loss leader to compete with bare bones Wintel boxes - Apple's focus has always been on elegant, integrated solutions, and these come with a premium...

I do still like the idea, as some have suggested, of a collection of monitors that can either be hung on a wall, placed on an adjustable desktop stand, or mounted on an adjustable iMac arm. If the new iMac is headless, as you suggest, then I suspect a buyer will be able to mount one of these displays on it.
 
It seems pretty obvious to me that this won't be a replacement iMac, we might have to wait until the end of the year for that, but something more like a eMac crossed with a digital device.

Apple is going to want to continue its streak of providing for the huge market of the iPod, and rather than just try and grab them straight in from their scrollwheels, I think Apple will drop some more bait in the water and lure those fishy boys in.

Consider this, a cheap TiVo-esue computer, possibly tablet, that connects to the iPod and to future Apple devices and allows you to manage music, videos etc. and possibly stream to a TV or whatever. It could even be wirelessly connected to ones computer and run on a Li-ion battery. If Steve could bung one of those out for under £500, that would rock.
 
Bluetooth wi-fi something iPod

I charge my iPod more often than I sync it. It uses the same cable, but I'm recharge often with with computer off, which means I will have to unplug the firewire cable from the computer to the charger. If I want to sync I have to put it back in the computer, which involves crawling under and behind my desk - a hazzle!

I would like to have the cradle connected to the recharger at all times for easy recharging. And then I would like my iPod to sync whenever it's near my pc and the pc is on - without me having to do anything. Whether this is done with bluetooth or wireless I don't mind.

Of course it would be cool to use this wireless feature with the Airport Express - when I get one of those
 
Peyote said:
Amen to that. I'm getting tired of hearing buzzwords like "market share" and "price points" thrown around as if the knowledge of the definition of a word gives someone insight into an industry or company. Anyone that compares a $400 PC to an iMac is jsut someone concerned with the bottom line price and nothing else.

There is something to be said about price points. That is why Apple has the eMac at a start of $799.

I am pretty sure that if Apple saw profit in the $400 system range they would do it in a NY minute. But some do forget the costs to a company offering such a low cost system. The primary is added support costs. That price level is attractive to those that want a computer, but may not know a keyboard from a cutting board. These same customers may not be willing to pay the added cost of AppleCare, if the $400 is that attractive to them.
 
PowerMacMan said:
Maybe this is of relevance?

Although I would update it to AL and no pinstripes or anything like that and the legs would be different not one big clear leg to seperate the LCD from the desktop... And instead of the clear back thay could make that AL as well or make it all clear plastic (or not) or even colorful, making it a ORIGINAL LCD iMac (so no)... not that either... :confused:

(I cannot take credit for this)

I can see this as the basis of the rumored iMac G5. An arm that has the screen attached so one can at least move up and down like the current "new" iMac's do (without the side-to-side movement).
 
MacsRgr8 said:
I gave a bit of a reason.... Ive not wanting to keep to the "consumer whites" for too long (just like a fashion designer).
Maybe not aluminium, but it will be different. The "Bondi" iMac was introduced in 1998. The colourful iMacs a year later, and the "all whites G4" iMac in 2002.
I assume, that a G5 iMac would be "so much of a deal" that the consumer line-up will be revised. The iBook and eMac (both G4) will stay white, but the new G5 consumer products of time to come will certainly be "different".

I have no clue (hey, I'm not Mr. Ive!), but it should be looking gr8!

But you are right about it probably not being aluminium.... We have that now as the "Pro" line-up...

Given the trend in consumer electronics (stereos, home theater systems, and even TV's) I think the new iMac color may be a "silver" plastic.
 
Machead III said:
It seems pretty obvious to me that this won't be a replacement iMac, we might have to wait until the end of the year for that, but something more like a eMac crossed with a digital device.
Why wouldn't it be a replacement iMac. We already know (at least I think we do) that they have said there won't be any more iMacs coming, and that stocks are running low, whereas the eMacs have just been updated. It therefore makes more sense to me that they would be releasing the new iMac, almost certainly in a new form factor (otherwise why would they run the old ones low). As for it being wall mounted, I have no idea, but if it were an option, but not essential I would go for it.

I also think that it would have to include a screen, as otherwise it wouldn't be an iMac, a headless iMac isn't an iMac.
 
noel4r said:
I wonder how pissed off everybody would be if they only preview Tiger and not announce a G5 iMac and updated displays.

I think that Apple's stock would suffer. It is not just us Macheads that are waiting for a iMac update. It has been almost 10 months since a serious update to the iMac.
 
No broadcast at Apple Stores? Guess nothing big is going to happen.

Was last year's WWDC web broadcast "live" or delayed? Couldn't remember. But I do remember that Apple only announced a broadcast on Friday three days before. If nothing happens by Friday this week, it means nothing. :cool:
 
Sell more tickets....

HasanDaddy said:
I believe that last year's broadcast was LIVE

and yeah -- they usually announce the broadcast late --- I'm sure it'll be on again

Perhaps they do this because they want to sell more tickets to the keynote and the conference? :cool:
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.