New iMac Announced

MrGHemp writes "The new iMac with a flat panel has been offically announced, and can be seen on the Apple website. According to Steve Jobs the top 3 things we asked for were put into this new design. 1. Flat Panel screen 2. G4 processor 3. Superdrive (DVD burner on one of 3 models)... Apple also announced other new products like a 14' display on some iBooks, and iPhoto - the iTunes of digital photos." It's definitely unique looking ;) Update: Slashdot author ChrisD was there and has a report too. Linux and the Macintosh are very different things. I don't want to bore anyone with poor analogies, but when Macintosh has glitz, Linux has power. This isn't about Linux though, it just kept on striking me how much Linux lacks in the desire department.

Steve Jobs is terrific at just that, Creating Desire. This is no surprise to us, for sure, but nothing drives it home as much as sitting in the audience and watching him speak. I could tell you how wonderful an orator he is, and how groovy his products are, but I really want to hear what the Slashdot user communtiy has to say about that. I want to talk about what Apple is doing technically.

First: The new iMac is very attractive. It's cool, it's neat. It will be a very popular machine. It's got a good price/feature spectrum and it looks like a pretty decent machine for the consumer. It isn't, in the end, a machine for the linux die-hard, but that's okay. It's slick, it ships with a bunch of very decent apps to manage your digital media. I want one, it's a cool machine. I don't know what I'd do with it (which is the problem), but it's cool looking. It's not particularly a good deal, I mean, you can pick up 200$ 15" tft displays at Fry's and lets get real, the G4 (Excepting the velocity engine stuff) isn't that fast of a chip at any available speed compared to the x86 world. But boy, this is one slick machine. But we know that already from the previous story. I do worry about it overheating, as I did flash back to the cube's cracking problems a bit.

Second: Photoshop for OS X will be coming out "soon". That was the big news. They had a very impressive working demo, I hope to learn more tomorrow on the expo floor.

Third: iPhoto is a decent cataloging program, and one designed to be used easily and generate more revenue streams for apple in the form of booklets and print costs. But it looks very polished and useful.

Superdrive: You'll see the superdrive in the new imac finally, which is nice. Note that this is not the superdrive that everyone remembers from the 80s' :-)

That's about all. The keynote was terrific, but in the end, not so outstanding. I'll post pictures soon. I'm sure a lot of /. regulars will be doing the same. More Tomorrow!

Comments

More information from the keynote

[MontyP]

I remember a few years ago when they announced the IMAC, I listened the keynote on streaming audio. I was amazed.. Today I watched the keynote on QuickTime. The new IMAC is very cool. It comes with a 15-inch flat screen display suspended on the base of the computer. This screen can swivel 180 degrees, raise up and down, and tilt forward and backwards. The base itself is only just over 10 inches in diameter! They come with a CD-RW up to Apple's super drive (CD-RW, DVD-R). Starting at $1299.

Apple also announced a really sweet image editing program that automatically imports, edits and prints images from a digital camera. IPhoto can also publish to a website (provided on apple's servers), order Kodak prints online, and even publish a hard bound book of photos. All in one application. This application and the new iMac completes apples "digital hub"

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple also announced a really sweet image editing program that automatically imports, edits and prints images from a digital camera. IPhoto can also publish to a website (provided on apple's servers), order Kodak prints online, and even publish a hard bound book of photos. All in one application.

Sounds like MGI Photosuite. Of course that's been out for 2-3 years.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

And isn't it a shock that for $1300 you can build yourself a top-of-the-line athlon box with tons of ram and a geforce 3?

Apple needs to bring the price point waaay down. It's simply not worth $500 to have a 10" base.

Re:More information from the keynote

[CMonk]

As far as the tilting and rotating goes my new IBM T560 does all of that.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Perrin-GoldenEyes]

Yeah, but what this misses is the whole Digital Hub philosophy. And no, that's not just the latest marketing catch-phrase. Apple seems to have remembered that the idea behind computers is to make all our lives easier and more enjoyable. They're trying to do it by streamlining things that we already do (or would like to do but didn't feel like dealing with the hastle). And I think they do a fantastic job of it with their Digital Hub software/hardware. I have an iPod and I think it's great. Jobs wasn't just blowing smoke when he quoted all the reviews saying it's the best digital music player ever. And the integration with iTunes is not a small part of that. iTunes is an extremely easy to use, yet flexible app. The integration with iPod is seamless. The iMovie tutorial I did was pretty cool, and I can't wait to play with it when I actually have some video I want to mess with. I haven't used iDVD yet (probably won't happen until I make my iMovies). I can't wait to use iPhoto. One of the reasons I don't use my digital camera much is that it's just so much of a hastle actually making anything of the images I take. Sure, I can drag and drop them onto my Wintel machine and then I can edit them with some other utility. But iPhoto appears to share one of the greatest features of iTunes...its library function. Sure, functionally it's not a whole lot different from what you can normally get from the filesystem. But it does add a LOT more convenience and accessibility.

Right now Apple's concentrating more on useability and convenience than sheer power. And at the moment, that's most of what I'm looking for. Yeah, I'll probably always keep a Wintel machine to play games on. But to an increasing degree, that's ALL i'm doing on Wintel. The user experience on the Macs is hard to leave behind. And that's really where Apple's adding the value. Not simply in the basic power of the hardware. Though the hardware isn't all that bad either (especially when "Velocity Engine" comes into play).

Re:More information from the keynote

[cheezus]

And isn't it a shock that for $1300 you can build yourself a top-of-the-line athlon box with tons of ram and a geforce 3?

Yes, for $1300 you can do that. However, people who would do that are not part of Apple's target market. People keep forgetting that Apple is a premium brand. They aren't competing with people who would order their own parts and build a box. With a $1300 entry price they aren't even competing with Compaq etc in the bargain market. Your same argument can be used to take a knock at Sony's PCs as well. Point is, for a premium brand like Apple, you pay a premium price.

Re:More information from the keynote

[marktwain]

No the IBM doesn't. Watch the videos on the Apple site. The IBM doesn't have the "mobility" of the neck in moving the monitor around. And the IBM doesn't ship with iDVD, iTunes, iPhoto, and iMovie, nor does it have OS X with Darwin under the hood and Apache ready to be launched. This new iMac will add the best of both worlds, the *nix and the GUI/Applications needs. Too many Linux users live in their own little world. Have a good friend who bought a TiBook and runs nothing but Mandrake on it, getting ready to add OS X. Name of the game is partitions. Run Mac OS 9, OS X, the Darwin *nix (including X Windows), and your favorite flavor of Linux. The drive in these new puppies is big enough for all four. And say goodbye to Microsoft forever. :-)

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

That's assuming that you don't use IE (which on the mac is one of the most complient browsers out there), don't use Office, etc. You Mac users seem to forget that if it weren't for Microsoft you would be out in the cold today. They pumped funds into you and wrote apps for you. The only other company you should thank is Adobe. I wonder how many of you were around when Gil Amelio almost drove Mac off the face of the Earth. The days of the Powerbook 3500 and OS 7.5. Two of the biggest disasters ever.

Re:More information from the keynote

[SkepTech]

gack! I can't stomach all this marketing hype and frill talk on a geek discussion site.

What the hell does 'Premium Brand' have to do with anything we're interested in here? I mean, really. Can't you marketing guys find somewhere else to spam?

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

iAm iGoing to iBe iSick.

Re:More information from the keynote

[alfredo]

If Apple can stimulate the computer market again, it will be good for all of us. keep on talking. And yes, linux will be running on it very soon. It hasn't been released yet so give it a few hours for someone to buy one and install YDL or Mandrake.

Re:More information from the keynote

[CMonk]

>No the IBM doesn't. Watch the videos on the Apple site. The IBM doesn't have the "mobility" of the neck in moving the monitor around.

I would if I could but I have no means to view Quicktimes. If by mobility you mean you can pitch the display side to side I can't see the value in that. If you mean you can rotate, flatten, flip or move vertically, the IBM (and I'll assume other displays) does do all that. Watch the flash movie that IBM has. (and I might add many more platforms can view)

>And the IBM doesn't ship with iDVD, iTunes, iPhoto, and iMovie, nor does it have OS X with

True, monitors seldom come with that sort of software. If anything though I would use the T560 with a PowerMac tower (and yes, the T560 supports DVI) rather than the new IMac.

>Darwin under the hood and Apache ready to be launched. This new iMac will add the best of both worlds, the *nix and the GUI/Applications needs.

No doubt.

> Too many Linux users live in their own little world. Have a good friend who bought a TiBook and runs nothing but Mandrake on it, getting ready to add OS X. Name of the game is partitions. Run Mac OS 9, OS X, the Darwin *nix (including X Windows), and your favorite flavor of Linux. The drive in these new puppies is big enough for all four.

Rebooting to run different apps is over rated. But this is really off topic.

> And say goodbye to Microsoft forever. :-)

I did several years ago.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure they may be a "premium" brand, but they will eternally keep themselves in a niche that's smaller than they deserve, and one of these days they're gonna screw up just bad enough where they can't keep going. All it will take is one more Cube, and this very well might be it if they don't start aiming more to the low end market.

Re:More information from the keynote

[cowscows]

That is 100% it. Apple has realized, (and hopefully the consumers are realizing too) that a 2+ Ghz processor with a 60 Gig harddrive and whatever is of no use to the average person if the software running on it is too complex. Another 400 mhz of clock speed might enable the computer to encode mp3's twice as fast, but that advantage is wasted if crummy software requires me to spend twice as long organizing my songs and setting up the CD.

iMovie isn't full featured by any means, but it's incredibly easy to use. I can do things with iMovie on an ibook faster than can be done with something like premier on any type of hardware you care to throw at it. And hey, it's free as well. Hard to beat that.

The new iMac is about more than itself. It's more about creating a home for the software. It's about creating a new interaction between people and computers. This interaction won't mean that much to powerusers, at least not in the beginning, but that's why it's targeted at the everyday consumer. I think it's quite brilliant.

Re:More information from the keynote

[binarybits]

*You* can build a box from scratch with commodity parts. My mother can't. You don't care if your computer matches the furniture. My mother might. You can figure out how to use cumbersome GPL-ed tools to manipulate images, video, audio, etc. My mother would never even try such a thing.

The iApps aren't targeted at you. They are targeted at average consumers who aren't tech-savvy. And for many non-tech-savvy users, paying an extra $200 for a machine that's tightly integrated with software, includes simple plug-and-play apps, and requires a minimum of behind-the-scenes tinkering is a great deal. For many consumers, paying an extra $50 so their computer can be a conversation piece rather than an eye-sore is money well spent.

Perhaps you're not one of them, but that doesn't make it wrong. And slashdot's motto isn't "News for mascochistic nerds with no aesthetic taste." Not all nerds like to spend their weekends wrestling with their souped up, built-from scratch athlon box. Some of us value our time and are happy to pay a premium for quality, superb industrial design, good aesthetics, and an OS that blows both XP and Linux out of the water.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

you realize photosuite is $50 and iphoto is free, don't you?

Re:More information from the keynote

[jedidiah]

...Fine, then add a $60 DV card into the that otherwise generic PC. Also, factor in all of the OEM software that would likely come with the various components.

Hardware+Software is nothing more than what nearly every PC hardware manufacturer has been doing for at least 10 years.

Re:More information from the keynote

[MoneyT]

And what apple has been doing for 20+

Re:More information from the keynote

[jedidiah]

They're either cumbersome, or don't do anymore than the windows bitmap editor. That's simply a side effect of the kind of software we're talking about.

OTOH, free software is MORE likely to keep things simple. The lack of fluff features that no one cares to code is a condition MORE likely in free software than payware.

Free Software doesn't require artifical feature creep to pay bills with.

Also, your mother is LESS likely to care about whether or not the computer matches the furniture than some geek capable of building their own box.

Hardware+Software is nothing more than what PC hardware manufacturers have been doing for at least 10 years already.

Re:More information from the keynote

[MoneyT]

You show me a company that will sell me that system. You can't compare buying components and slapping them together and buying from a retailer. Thats like saying I can go to the manufacturers of the parts and build a car for cheaper than I can buy it for.

Re:More information from the keynote

[MoneyT]

Are you kidding? Apple's been in way over their heads (45 million in debt) and still kept going. They may have a small niche, but it's a creative one, that
A) is loyal
B)Keeps them in business
C) Provides free advertising (just look at all the mac people here)
D) Allows them to make creative screw-ups (like the cube)
E) Allows them to make creative advances (like the Mac, iMac, iPod, Newton, OS X, etc)
F) Allows them to push technology otherwise not touched (Intel developed USB, Apple made it famous, Apple had firewire support way back in system 7)

No, Apple will always be arround if for no other reason than Bill Gates needs new ideas.

Re:More information from the keynote

[MoneyT]

Watch what you say. The money M$ pumped into Apple was part of a setlement to drop the long running "look and feel" lawsuit. The apps, while quite successful, are certainly not nessesary. I am quite content with Apple Works, Opera, Netscape and iCab, the only time I use IE is when I have all the other browsers open for something else.

Re:More information from the keynote

[MacGod]

However, beacuse free software doesn't lose revenue if it's hard to use, it has more leniency in user interface. Plus, most of the people who use free software are long-time computer users and often Linux/Unix nerds, who are willing to put more effort into it, it works. But for the average mom, who may well have a fair bit of disposable income, a command line is petrifying and big, shiny icons are 'pretty' and help make the experience worthwhile.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

You can get Photosuite III which I think is better than the new version for $1.99 at Best Buy. As close to free as you are going to get. Also you can get 4 for a lot cheaper than $50.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh and I remember getting it for free with my scanner which is how I discovered it.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

What a bunch of Apple Marketing bullshit. You must work for them. I used Mac's in two different jobs for several years. It is no more user friendly than any other OS. Friggin chooser, and Open Apple this, Rebuild Desktop. You guys are more on crack than any Microsoft freak.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

And you are just plain ignorant. iMac is not an OS. Used OSX? No? Pitty, crack boy....

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

They will be around because Bill Gates will keep pumping money into them to keep them alive. He loves showing how Windows is not a monopoly because of Mac. He doesn't consider Apple a threat - more of a toy. Now Linux is another story.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

While you may not consider them necessary but Microsoft Office is a HUGE reason why Apple is still around. Most businesses use Office and would really hate having to switch to another product just so they can stay with Mac. I really think that the switch from Mac to PC can be smoother. I've actually done it at two separate companies without much issue. Run a file name cleaner software and you're done. A new Office Suite is a different story. Now you are talking about incompatibilities on thousands, maybe millions of documents and spreadsheets.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

"Open Apple"? How many years ago did that die? 3, 4, maybe 5? Let me guess, your first Mac job was with an original Mac?

"Rebuild Desktop"? You never had to rebuild the desktop, it just made it easier to link file types with apps, and to make your custom icons reappear in the rare times they reverted to default icons.

"Chooser"? Yeah, MS's networking control panel is just soooo much easier to use. Client, Adapter, Protocol, Service... compared to opening the Chooser and just clicking on what you want to use (not totally true, you do have to open up the TCP/IP control panel to enter TCP settings. Still better than trying to figure where the hell to do that in Windows).

Yes, you are the reason why IT departments are now 95% MS. Thank you.

Re:More information from the keynote

[anothergene]

replace IE with Opera.

Replace Office with??? Not sure on this one. Is Staroffice available for OSX?

Re:More information from the keynote

[bryan1945]

This is a good point- only thing I have ever done to my 5 year old Mac was upgrade the HD, RAM, and processor (603 to G3).

The damn thing is still faster than anything I use at work (well, except for the Sun workstations, but that just isn't a fair comparison).

Re:More information from the keynote

[bryan1945]

Just a little point- all of the iApps are free to Mac users. You just need to download them. Obviously, you have never used these apps, 'cause I've never heard anyone who _has_ used them complain that they are "cumbersome" or "limited" in functionality.

Ok, you don't like Macs, but try not to make stuff up.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Alan Partridge]

no. Replace IE with Omniweb, replace Office wth Appleworks and Filemaker.

Re:More information from the keynote

[epukinsk]

Not all nerds like to spend their weekends wrestling with their souped up, built-from scratch athlon box. Some of us value our time and are happy to pay a premium for ... an OS that blows both XP and Linux out of the water.

You should be thanking the folks who think wrestling with a built-from-scratch box is a good use of their time. Steve Wozniak is such a guy, and if he hadn't wasted his time "wrestling" with built-from-scratch boxes, this iMac wouldn't exist.

In fact, I'm sure at least a couple of the engineers who squeezed all that stuff into that little machine had spent a weekend or two wrestling with a built from scratch box. Not that it's for everyone, but don't insinuate that it's a worthless way to spend one's time.

-Erik

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't get it...

The reference wasn't about people innovating with copper wire and soldering irons...

I'm pretty sure the majority of people who "build their own" boxes buy shrink wrapped commercial parts and THEN wrestle to get them to play nicely.

Good on you if you *REALLY* build your own... but I suspect that most of you DON'T!

Besides I'm sick of seeing discussion of "I could build a much better box for the money"... blah blah... whatever you go do that... this shiny toy is NOT for you!

And was never intended for people of such a calibre.

I happen to like my slick designed boxes and my MacOS X... when I feel like some pain I go bang my head violently on my PC (linux/windoze)!

No competition as far as I'm concerned... but that's my opinion.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

MGI soon to be owned by Roxio.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

But I can't forget about:

• the Sorenson Codec
• threats against skin authors
• crippled DVD authoring software
• licensing the one-click patent

among Apple's other crimes, so I'm going to wait until Apple shows some remorse for its sins.

Re:More information from the keynote

[schvenk]

Exactly. Open Source is a great way to develop software back ends, but user interfaces are by their very nature designed for people other than those who create them. By the time you've written a piece of code, you only need a rudimentary UI to use it.

The forces governing UI design for consumers are markedly different from those governing back ends. (That's part of what makes OS X a great OS...it uses Open Source where that's the best strategy, and proprietary code where it's more appropriate.)

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

He's not insulting your time management he's simply saying that there is a obvious divide in computer users and due to that there should be an obvious divide in features. There are those that are actually interested in technology for the sake of technology. Those people are for the most part not Apple customers. Then there are users that want to take a picture and print it. They dont care want to search for the app, compile it, worry about if they could have done it 1/2 second faster with a new kernel. I'm not that person, but they are the majority of computer users. Hard to use computers make those simply computers, but the users of those simply computers may one day make the leap to *Nix. You dont start driving Formula 500 racing cars. You start small and simple.

Re:More information from the keynote

[dhowe01]

Can't stomach a discussion of Apple's core market? This is the computer industry, SkepTech. And I believe discussion of it is fair game here. The original author is correct. Apple doesn't target users who will assemble their own computer. If you want something that looks and plays really cool out of the box, you pay for it. -dh

Re:More information from the keynote

[Skeletal_Disco_Infer]

As much as I love Apple computers, I have to admit that although I can drop IE and office and not miss a beat, the majority of computer users cannot.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Toraz Chryx]

praytell what would be the point of installing linux on a machine that already has an equal/superior kernel AND the most gorgeous GUI in existance?

(not to mention that a LOT of *BSD source will compile without too much difficulty under OSX)

Re:More information from the keynote

[Fizzlewhiff]

I was going to build an Athlon box for DV editing, now with the new iMac I think I just saved myself some time. It has all the features I will need without the hassle. The only thing I wish it had were a wireless keyboard and mouse. That would be extra sweet.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

Not only are paying for a premium brand but premium service and warranty. I got the low end Titanium Powerbook when it first came out and had a 'bout of bad pixels. Apple replaced the ENTIRE screen free of charge. Now anybody that's seen the TiBook quarter inch thick LCD display will understand that such replacement was worth probably half the cost of the purchase. And when I got my case back cracked (by shipping? who knows) they promptly replaced the TiBook case. All this at no cost from me. Granted a laptop isn't a computer you can just put together, still, Apple's warranty saved me at least the cost of a brand new, and nice, computer in repairs.

In addition I know for fact that if three major repairs are necessary within the 3 month warranty, you get the next model in the same computer line for FREE.

So who was complaining about the cost of Apple computers?

Re:More information from the keynote

[gig]

AppleWorks (word processor, spreadsheet, database, presentations) is free with iMacs and iBooks and is really great. Plenty of people have used both AppleWorks and MS Office and choose AppleWorks. It's easier to just write a letter, or make a presentation with AppleWorks.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

ooh, looks like the linus community is getting a bit stressed. A freeBSD core with a Steve Jobs GUI and Wozniak-class HW engineering - sounds like I'm getting one. But of course, i386 debian kernel 5.11.12.7 with KDE GNOME is the answer to the desktops of the 62 linux lusers left in 2003. "price is the last resort of the marketeer"

Re:More information from the keynote

[marktwain]

With all due respect, and I mean nothing by this comment, the uninformed shall inherit the earth.

For years I've seen too many Linux users (and all the servers in my company are running Linux at my direction) hide in their own world. That's great for the average geek that wants to bang around and due what he likes, but the day comes when making a schekel or two requires something more.

I hate to see the Linux platform stuck on the server/enterprise dime. Please don't tell me about KDE et al. I can't believe the desktop Linux box will ever find a home out in the greater world.

Stuff like this new Mac and OS X may or may not be where things are going. But I think everyone needs to keep an open mind, and it's not like it's impossible to view QuickTime.

Sure, I know it ain't open source and costs twenty bucks, but the web ain't free and it ain't gonna be free. I can't stand the fact that the net I knew in 1989 is dead, buried, and gone forever sometimes.

You don't know what the enemy is really doing unless you sleep with the enemy once in awhile. There's the world we all like and would like to see, but there's a real world out there that we can't beat over the head unless we know where to find the head.

Thots. I respect all of the points made in your post.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

What if Linux made an offering in this category?

Re:More information from the keynote

[alfredo]

That's for those who just have to have their Linux. I have OSXGNU installed and haven't fired up Mandrake since. Why should I when I can run MacGimp, Abisuite, Nedit, and Postilion in OSX? Gnome works just fine thank you.

Jobs knew he couldn't challenge the giant head on, so he is doing an end run by making UNIX user friendly.

Genentech ordered 1,000 iMac, dispelling the old FUD that Macs are just toys.

Re:More information from the keynote

[chrissam]

You don't care if your computer matches the furniture. My mother might.

Dude, I want to see your mother's furniture.
--

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

The IBM monitor is also $540, almost 1/2 of the list price of the base iMac.

Re:More information from the keynote

[CMonk]

Ah, but what you don't realize is that I'm big fan of MacOS X and most of Apple's line of computers, just not the new iMac. I suppose the point of my original post was that there is nothing new here. To me is seems they just wanted to bring back the cube and teather it to a LCD screen.

In regards to Quicktime. Again, I am a fan. It's just very inconvenient. I don't get a chance to use a computer outside of work that often. And at work I prefer to use and need to use a Linux workstation. I would be all over quicktime if there was a native way to view sorenson encoded videos. Hopefully these issues will be gone when Apple takes a standards based approach.

Actually, I wouldn't tell you at all about KDE, it would be Gnome. :) No seriously, the reason I primarily use Linux on the desktop at home and at work is the applications (and free beer/speech). Emacs, GnuCash, remote X sessions... I haven't found suitable alternatives for other platforms. I know the alternative applications exist but they just don't sit well with me.

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

You know what? You are wrong. M$ is not pumping money at all, whatever they gave was paid back long time ago. Wake up and ask forgiveness from the microkernel (mach) of apple, Your monolithic approach just sucks!

Re:More information from the keynote

[stripes]

Just a little point- all of the iApps are free to Mac users. You just need to download them. Obviously, you have never used these apps, 'cause I've never heard anyone who _has_ used them complain that they are "cumbersome" or "limited" in functionality

I have never heard anyone claim they are cumbersome, but I have heard lots of people claim they are limited. People didn't like that iTunes can't change speed/pitch of music (and before iTunes2 they didn't like the lack of graphic EQ, or MP3 CD burning). Lots of stuff is missing from imovie (see After Effects for "more stuff"). I'll go on record right here and now and complain that iPhoto doesn't have "curves and levels" to let me adjust the brightness of my photos, nor does it have any touch up features (yes, PhotoShop has that stuff, but I only need about 3% of PhotoShop). In fact iPhoto's editing is almost non-existant (crop, red eye, and B&W). Plus iPhoto has no support for "off line" collections of photos. I can and have done 300+M of images in a day, I would kind of like that ability...

So yeah the i-apps are quite limited. I do think that they are (excluding iPhoto for now) a well chosen set of features that can serve casual users, and let someone know if they should go spend $600 on the pro package, or if they really are not that into making movies (or whatever).

I do hope iPhoto gets some more work and next year's iPhoto2 at least has off-line support (and color correction and the like would be nice...but I already have PhotoShop LE and GraphicConverter so I don't personally need it in iPhoto...).

Re:More information from the keynote

[bryan1945]

These are good points which I don't think I've heard before.

Thanks for the info.

Re:More information from the keynote

[ghostdoguk]

I agree . Lets get this straight Apple supply boxes that , generally speaking , work without the hassle. I am prepared to pay for that since my partner who runs our business has no command line skills and quite frankly can burn , write draw atc atc without having to worry , too much.

Re:More information from the keynote

[ghostdoguk]

In fact, I'm sure at least a couple of the engineers who squeezed all that stuff into that little machine had spent a weekend or two wrestling with a built from scratch box. Not that it's for everyone, but don't insinuate that it's a worthless way to spend one's time I dont think anyone assumes that the insides are put together , tinkered with and all that goes into thi iMac is performed by people spending there time in an unworthy way . However these engineers are NOT THE TARGET group

Re:More information from the keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

Am I the only one who's really getting sick of this "Wintel" crap from Mac users? For one thing, it sounds dumb. For another, it's never been particularly accurate, and is even less so now that it's not only possible but financially advisable to build or buy a machine with neither a Win- part nor a -tel part. It also seems only to come out when Mac users are bashing PCs. I admit to a certain amount of MAC-bashing myself, but I stick to legitimate and accurate complaints, mostly about the technical flaws (read: gaping wounds gushing ichor) of the MacOS (9.x and earlier, primarily). There are plenty of reasonable complaints about OSX as well, but since it's barely introduced and people won't start using it until they buy a bunch of the new iMacs with it pre-installed, I usually don't bother.

It's really a shame AMinux or LinuMD don't roll off the tongue or maybe they'd really take notice of how silly the not-word Wintel sounds...

it's a breast implant dammit!@!@#!

[Wakko Warner]

that's all i needs to say.

Re:it's a breast implant dammit!@!@#!

[mosch]

This is not a troll, the damned thing looks like a plastic tit with a flat panel attached. It's a reasonably cool machine in a ludicrously gay housing.

Re:it's a breast implant dammit!@!@#!

[nytes]

Hmmm, that would explain that quote from Steve Jobs about wanting to reach out an touch it.

Re:it's a breast implant dammit!@!@#!

[neafevoc]

How else are they to improve model a few year's ago?

Re:it's a breast implant dammit!@!@#!

[Anonymous Coward]

Is that a dildo?! Brrrr...

Re:it's a breast implant dammit!@!@#!

[plover]

He's right. It's the iTit.

I had Apple figured all wrong. I always thought they were somewhat decent engineers with a creative flair. People defended the G3 by saying "Look, it has doors! Ooo, how novel! How much better than a PC!". Then came the iMac with the least functional cabinet I've ever seen, and those same people said "Look at the styling! Ooo, how cool! How much better than a PC!"

There's no defending this design. As Cartman might say, it's hella-gay.

Re:it's a breast implant dammit!@!@#!

[Anonymous Coward]

That's why I'm buying two of them!

Steve Jobs is a genius.

Re:it's a breast implant dammit!@!@#!

[mattreilly]

And how old are you exactly? 12?

Re:it's a breast implant dammit!@!@#!

[Anonymous Coward]

As Cartman might say, it's hella-gay.

Kinda like using a catch phrase from an even gay-er show? Damn uncle fuckers.

Re:it's a breast implant dammit!@!@#!

[Anonymous Coward]

hella-gay is damn right....

Re:it's a breast implant dammit!@!@#!

[Anonymous Coward]

you might have to be 12 to buy one of these though. apple is going down.

Re:it's a breast implant dammit!@!@#!

[jedidiah]

It is a remarkably pathetic looking thing for an Apple. The shape of the monitor and primary case kind of clash with each other. That cube idea of theirs would have worked better here.

Re:it's a breast implant dammit!@!@#!

[hearingaid]

Er, gay?

Well, I suppose some people have extended the term to cover lesbians, so maybe, okay, for them it's gay. :)

Re:it's a breast implant dammit!@!@#!

[jo42]

The googoo gaagaa over the original iMac mystified me to no end. A few years back, AST released a 486 that was an all-in-one box, only, of course, it came in beige instead of f'aggy colored plastic...

Re:it's a breast implant dammit!@!@#!

[ghostdoguk]

Whats a Dildo ????

Pro users

[centron]

All those folks wanting a new G4 or G5 tower will have to wait. The iLamp is almost as fast and costs less.

Re:Pro users

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought it was the birth of the first Mac Propellerhead. Maybe this one flaps instead of twirls.

Think Different!

Re:Pro users

[waterbug]

Excuse, but they would be iDIOTS (tm)

Re:Pro users

[Anonymous Coward]

If the G5 or 1 GHz G4 isn't available, I'd expect Apple to drop the price on the dual processor tower, and/or include more dual processor models for the towers (maybe everything above the base model). Mac OS X uses multiple processors quite well, and that would increase the overall speed of the system, if not every little specific task.

And iPhoto absolutely rocks....

So much for the Pro line.

[imac.usr]

No new G4s, so the fastest Mac you can buy is a $3500 dual-800 MHz G4, and that's way more expensive than the $1800 800 Mhz G4 iMac, with virtually the same capabilities. Good one, Apple.

Wake me for MWNY, if you're still around.

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[surajrai]

I am sure that the Powermac G4 upgrades will be announced soon. The iMacs are already at 800 so the Powermacs would at least have to be 1Ghz+...

Earliere today I saw this link regarding Dual 1.4Ghz G4s but obviously it was bogus....Oh well... I guess I am to blame for getting my hopes up.

S.r.

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[John Harrison]

Yeah, weren't we supposed to see a G5 Power Mac at this show?

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeahm it's a great machine, but pros are obviously not marketed to this one. It can only do 1024x768 LCD resolution, and with OSX and all it's shinyness that gets eaten up reel quick. This is really not the choice for anyone serriously doing graphics work.

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[Anonymous Coward]

New Powermacs to be introduced at a Special Event next month. There's definately more going on than just a speed bump; possibly the G5. They just couldn't get enough chips to get it out right now. Also, Apple learned in 2000 that you never introduce more than one major product at once, otherwise it's a disaster.

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[Methuseus]

Also, I don't get how you're supposed to upgrade it. It says "Remove the cover on th ebottome to access the upgrade slots." But then I'd be really afraid of hurting the LCD when I turned it over. I never thought they'd go back to the supreme unupgradeability of the PowerPC line. I remember almost losing a couple fingers when I upgraded RAM on a few of them.

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[MrAl]

No, Apple should be to blame for your hopes being up. What a bunch of scheisters...

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[SethJohnson]

I was thinking this too, at first.

The more I ponder this release, though, I think they are 'reinforcing the front line' before they make a significant advancement. Had they announced G5 powermacs, this iMac might seem a little underpowered and it would dim some of this limelight. As it stands, the new iMac is undisputibly incredible. People like yourself are comparing it to the professional line. No criticism can even be levelled at it. In fact, the only criticism is that it's "too good".

Let Apple sell a couple months worth of these, then MacWorld Tokyo. Boom. A new reason to buy a new computer for those of us who wouldn't budge on the new iMac.

I'm on a 1998 B/W G3 450mhz box, so I'm watching these releases intensely. I need a new computer to play Wolfenstein. I want to record DVDs. With only 32 megs on the Geforce2, I'm holding out for the new PowerMacs. I bet they'll have Geforce3s with 64 like the current ones do.

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the rumor sites that claimed the G5s would be out soon despite there being no supporting evidence for that are to blame for creating false hopes, and the idiots who still trust rumor sites even though they're ALWAYS wrong are to blame for fooling themselves..

Apple claimed nothing.

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[MrAl]

Yeah and Apple claimed it was "way beyond" the rumor sites. I stand by my slur.

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

No new G4s, so the fastest Mac you can buy is a $3500 dual-800 MHz G4, and that's way more expensive than the $1800 800 Mhz G4 iMac, with virtually the same capabilities. Good one, Apple

Yes a mac with a dual G4 and a 133Mhz system bus has the same capabilities as a single G4 and a 100Mhz bus.

Go to their site, and compare the specs of the two. I think you will find that the PowerMacs still have quite a few more features over the new iMacs.

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[mojo-raisin]

Holy Shit! They're using 100MHz RAM in 2002!

No wonder I left Macs for PCs 4 years ago.

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL...you're not miffed about having to pay twice as much for a 33 MHz boos in bus speed and a second 800 MHz processor, plus an extra $600 on top of that to see anything? Yeah, you're a Mac user allright.

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy shit, you dumped hundreds of dollars worth of old RAM to get a trifling performance increase.

No wonder you left Macs for PCs 4 years ago.

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[Anonymous Coward]

a 1998 450MHz G3 or an upgrade card? I got my 450 G3 tower the week or so after it came out (the 50MHz bump from the 400MHz) around May or June of 1999...

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[BeApostate]

Dude, you should pay attention to Mac rumor pages. We have new 1200MHz and 1400MHz G4 Power Macs coming out soon as well --- with DDR SDRAM. Cheers,
BeApostate

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[Anonymous Coward]

Not only does the Pro line run on a 133 mhz bus, can hold more memory, the Dual 800 also has 2, 2mb Level 3 Cache and 2, 256 Level 2 cache.

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[zaffir]

The iMac was never meant for serious graphics/DV work. You can't expand it at all - the only iMac with expansion capabilities was the revision A which had a mezzanine slot. Multiple monitors are out of the question, as are those uber-fancy sound cards. The iMac has always been and will always be meant for Joe and Jane sixpack's family.

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[zaffir]

Are you talking about the same rumors pages that told us we had an Apple PDA coming? Or the ones that claimed we'd see a G5 today?

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

LOL...you're not miffed about having to pay twice as much for a 33 MHz boos in bus speed and a second 800 MHz processor, plus an extra $600 on top of that to see anything? Yeah, you're a Mac user allright.

No. I'm not miffed 'cause I'm not getting one. and no, I'm not a mac user either. Although I maybe in the future.

I was just pointing out that the 2 computers where quite different.
And you obviouly didn't do what I said and acctualy go to their web-site and compare the features. because there's more difference than just the CPU and bus speed, expandibility for one thing.

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[ghostdoguk]

Pity..... Perhaps it might have impaired your ability to write meaningless crap .........

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[Methuseus]

Seems like nothing's keeping you from writing meaningless crap, so why should I stop?

Re:So much for the Pro line.

[ghostdoguk]

I kept my fingers but lost my sanity configuring PMCIA cards for Laptops using Windows . Dos was always a bad Unix baby and Windows a bad Macos Otherwise meaningless crap is a matter of how we see things and belong to a free speaking society Write on my my write on

Here's hoping

[NiftyNews]

Here's hoping that with all the R&D and user testing involved, this one will finally come with a decent mouse...

Re:Here's hoping

[medcalf]

I use a logitech optical mouse - easily available, cheap and effective. I don't really care what mouse comes with the machine, and am not sure why anyone else does, either. At least Apple's mouse is better than the cheap-ass $6 mice that come with most PCs these days.

Re:Here's hoping

[Anonymous Coward]

The stupid thing that came with the imac as only slightly larger than a US Quarter Dollar piece. If you were over the age of 3 I don't see how you can put a hand anywhere near it to move it and still reach the button without your hand looking like a crouched up spider.

Re:Here's hoping

[Gogo Dodo]

Okay, I'll bite... what is wrong with Apple's current mouse? Have you used one? It's optical, it got a decent feel to it, and it works.

If you say "It's only got one button", then never mind.

Re:Here's hoping

[FatRatBastard]

what is wrong with Apple's current mouse?

The cord is too short if you're right handed and you're using an iBook. Other than that I love the damn thing (well, a second button would be nice..... :)

Re:Here's hoping

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it's 3 times the diameter of a quarter, but who's counting? Its diameter is the same size as the widest point of my IntelliMouse Explorer.

If you ever get stuck with one of them again (my 6'0" sister actually likes hers, and I have to use it when I'm at her house), try this way to hold it: Rest your middle finger on the right edge of the button. Point your index finger forward (in the direction of the cord) and use it to click. Move the mouse with your thumb and ring finger (keep the pinky off it).

Hope this helps!
--xxk

Re:Here's hoping

[jafac]

the CORD, is also way too fragile. At the joint where it meets the mouse body, mine frayed after a year of below average use.

Meanwhile, at work, where my main machine has a "$6" two-button HP mouse, I've been using that mouse for 10 years.

Re:Here's hoping

[derch]

Looks like it comes with a color co-ordinated Optical Pro mouse.

Re:Here's hoping

[Anonymous Coward]

Try "no button". The whole thing is a bleedin button. Granted, it looks kinda sweet.. and its design is certainly more visually pleasing than their new-fangled "Ilamp" excuse for a computer.

My thoughts on the whole thing

[sebi]

There where times when the Keynote really blue me away. After it was over I did feel a little cheated though. iPhoto looks like a great application. I downloaded it allready, but didn't have a chance to try it out yet. You can get it here. Download size is 13.4 MB.

The new iMac looks amazing and has great specs. It is "Flat out cool". A bigger screen iBook is another great addition to the apple product line. What worries me, is that there have been no changes to the professional line. The PowerBooks got a Combo drive just a couple of weeks ago so that is okay. But having PowerMacs and iMacs with the same processor and more or less identical clock speeds seems like a strange move to me.

This is beyond the rumour sites. All of them that I looked at swore that the gigahertz barrier was to be broken. At this Keynote it wasn't. And I don't think that Apple would just put faster PowerMacs in stores without having at least one Photoshop shootout on stage first.

It was an okay keynote I suppose. But after all that hype some people seem to have expected iTransporter, iEndofworldhunger with iWorldpeace thrown in. And all that running 3 ghz.

sebi

Re:My thoughts on the whole thing

[sammy.lost-angel.com]

I agree with you. However, Macwork Tokyo is just 2 months away. They revised two of their lines of computers (with the iMac being a MAJOR revision). Introduced iPhoto, which is waaay cooler looking than i had imagined. If the updated their pro lines, what would be left for Tokyo?

It's possible that the G5 can be ready in time for Tokyo, in which case they don't want to take any attention away from the iMac if they don't have to by offering minor speed increases to their pro line.

Just my thoughts.

Re:My thoughts on the whole thing

[phalse phace]

"What worries me, is that there have been no changes to the professional line"

My guess is that when the new iMacs are made available in March, Jobs will announce updated PowerMacs (hopefully with the rumored G5s) sometime then. And if G5s are around the corner, this gives them extra time to test the stability of the faster chips, not to mention time to ramp up production of enough chips to satisfy demand (I for one will be getting one if it is a G5).

Apple has always (as far as I can remember) distinguished their consumer models from their pro lines with different processors (603/603e vs. 604/604e, G3 vs. G4).

Re:My thoughts on the whole thing

[JWW]

No i was actually hoping for iOsXrunningonX86. But was pretty sure that wasn't going to happen.

Re:My thoughts on the whole thing

[ttyRazor]

(as has probably already been said repeatedly here) They probably just don't want the new iMacs to look underpowered compared to whatever new Pro machines come out. It would really take the wind out of the iMac's sails if everyone got the more powerful new machine instead of the stylish yet slower machine.

Re:My thoughts on the whole thing

[Brownian Motion]

I'm betting that the imac is why there wasn't a speed bump of the Powerbook G4.

The iMac is quite small and has to deal with heat/space constraints just like a laptop. It uses so-dimms for example. It's not a hard stretch to see that it most likely uses the same G4's that would go into a Powerbook G4.

Now, imagine trying to pump out the iMacs and the Powerbook G4 at the same time. Motorola probably couldn't keep up the volume yet.

I imagine that MacWorld Tokoyo will see the release of 700 and 800 Mhz Powerbook G4s (or maybe even faster if Moto delivers).

Now the non-release of any speed bumped Professional desktop machines is the best evidence that Apple is going to move to the G5 next and do so soon. I mean, if they weren't going to the G5 soon, Apple would have announced minor speed/feature bumps in the Professional line to make them look better vs. the new imacs. Which would you buy: an $1800 800 Mhz G4/256MB/60GB/Superdrive + 15" TFT or a $1700 733 Mhz G4/128MB/40GB/CDRW + no monitor? The 867Mhz tower looks even worse.

The only reasons you'd choose a tower are if you know that you need a larger monitor, dual monitors or you are adding some PCI card. Possibly you might need 1.5GB of memory instead of 1GB. Otherwise, the imac looks like a killer deal.

Re:My thoughts on the whole thing

[cb0y]

What happened to apple making ALL MACS dual CPU a standard? dead because OSX MP sucks? or 4 APPS will use it?
Btw, in 12 months apple went from 600mhz to 800mhz

(btw this 2minute wait sucks....
it should be 20seconds 2nd post, 60secs 3rdpost, 120secs wait for 4th post, rest to 20seconds after 600 seconds.)

btw (This form has been used already 3 minutes ago) sucks ass, lame shit.

I make a new window , and now the lame script says

Slashdot requires you to wait 20 seconds between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment.

It's been 5 seconds since you hit 'reply'

well duh, that one was a failed one so why does it matter, god damn what lame logic.

Re:My thoughts on the whole thing

[MwtrV]

On a side note, I'm going to comment this move from apple is in all honestly a major stride toward becoming exclusive with a certain segment of computer users; it appears now they will be making no effort whatsoever to enter the sub $1k market, something the imacs were doing before this new beast came along. This is probably not the best thing Apple could have done, IMHO, you know, because there are markets out there that do try for sub $1k before takes and everything. Dismissing that market as unimportant to Apple is bull shit, plain and simple, because there are people out there who want the apple experience but don't want to pay high prices -- older imacs were ideal for those folks (well, ideal being in the of the beholder -- hopefully theirs).

Me, personally, i could never stand the idea of buying a system with a 15" screen as part of the price, albeit flat with all the claims to faim perfectly valid. I'm spoiled by a $400 19" inch and I also don't believe the I'm missing out on anything major. I really do want an Apple in later years, as I think UNIX backed by commercial applications we'll never see in Linux sounds quite quite exciting.

ObDissapointment of the weekend: 2.4.16 w/ XFS patches applied don't compile with either GCC-3.0 or GCC-2.95. god damn it, SGI; comments in makefile telling us to install gcc2.96 for chrissakes...

Some points to actually owning one?

[bliss]

What points would the programming inclined need for such a thing.

Re:Some points to actually owning one?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, you can do all your work with the power of last weeks $2,499 tower w/o monitor. But the most important thing, the thing the iMac is for, is that you kids, wife, & parents can use it to share memories and enhance their life. You can use it for doing things not possible to the average consumer a few years ago. If all you need in a computer is a calculator, then buy a PC and know how to troubleshoot it. If you want to use the computer as an extension of the mind to visually express your thoughts and listen/record to music and view/create movies in a fun way, get the iMac. The iMac is not for everyone anymore, maybe next year it will be again.

Re:Some points to actually owning one?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can use it for doing things not possible to the average consumer a few years ago.

Of course its been possible on the PC for the last few months since XP.

Re:Some points to actually owning one?

[Kranium]

Sure it is. Possible, but enjoyable? I would rather have this than XP on some clunky PC box.

Re:Some points to actually owning one?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not all PC's have to be "clunky". Check out Alienware or any of the other companies that make nifty atx cases. Either way my point is that this isn't anything revolutionary. Apple has become the "Oh that looks neat. Let's do that only make it even frutier."

Re:Some points to actually owning one?

[fitten]

If you want to use the computer as an extension of the mind to visually express your thoughts and listen/record to music and view/create movies in a fun way, get the iMac. Hmmmm... seems you have bitten deep into Apple's hype. I can do all of these things on my PC and I don't have to pretend that it is a new/revolutionary/religious experience. It's not the hardware that does all of that. It's the software and I like mine without fruit. Ex-Apple owner and Mac fan

Damn Macs and their excellent video support!

[Marsh Jedi]

Where can I get a 14' display for my computer???

Re:Damn Macs and their excellent video support!

[Maserati]

You'll also want a 2GB video card or you'll be running it in 640x480 @ 4-bit color.

Re:Damn Macs and their excellent video support!

[AVryhof]

...and why do you think that? Screen size has a whole lot of zilch to do with video memory...

Re:Damn Macs and their excellent video support!

[Anonymous Coward]

aaaaaaaahhhhahhhhahhaahaaahaaaaaaa

Re:Damn Macs and their excellent video support!

[Anonymous Coward]

hmm 14 foot display would best be used at 14,336x10,752. therefore 2gb probably wouldn't cover all the frame buffers, you might opt for more video ram.

Re:Damn Macs and their excellent video support!

[Anonymous Coward]

you may like to record your mp3s in dubbly as well ...

Re:Damn Macs and their excellent video support!

[spongman]

actually original Macintosh monitors, via a proprietary connector, would report their resolution to the video card at boot time to ensure a 72dpi display for all screen sizes. It wasn't until recently that resolution-switching became part of the UI.

Re:Damn Macs and their excellent video support!

[faboo]

You're just talkin' some jive, right? You know the video card has to keep in memory the color value of _every_single_ pixel right? For a 1600x1200x32 display that's 7.3MB. Add double buffering, and your right at the standard 16MB of video memory. That's _before_ any extra memory for svga computations, or 3d operations.
Now, that's not 2GB, but it's not zilch either.

faboo

Potential as a good home system

[Marx_Mrvelous]

I like the direction that Apple is taking here. Lots of people have things like digital cameras, mp3 players, CD burners, but the software erquired to get them all working together can be a major pain for Joe ComputerUser.

One machine with sufficient power (700MHz G3 is pretty quick) that makes all that truly easy would be a great thing for most homes. But... the secret lies in the software, not the hardware. I'd like to see something like this for PCs.

Re:Potential as a good home system

[Dominic_Mazzoni]

A 700 MHz G3 is okay.

Now a 700 MHz G4, now that's fast! (All of the new iMacs have G4 processors.)

Re:Potential as a good home system

[Mr. Barky]

700MHz G3

The iMac now comes with a 700 MHz G4

Re:Potential as a good home system

[Takeel]

One machine with sufficient power (700MHz G3 is pretty quick) that makes all that truly easy would be a great thing for most homes. But... the secret lies in the software, not the hardware. I'd like to see something like this for PCs.

I don't think this will happen anytime in the near future. Few companies seem as brave as Apple is when it comes to taking steps towards throwing out the old ways.

Re:Potential as a good home system

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad for most home users a 1.2GHz "bottom of the line" celeron cpu smokes any G4. Honestly the G4 line is just a waste of money when you compare dollar for dollar against X86. But then most X86 machines don't look like over grown paper weights either.

Re:Potential as a good home system

[Anonymous Coward]

But we can't forget about:

• the Sorenson Codec
• threats against skin authors
• crippled DVD authoring software
• licensing the one-click patent

among Apple's other crimes, so we are going to pass. Someday if Apple reforms and shows remorse, then maybe we'll take another look. But until then - no thanks!

Looks dorky, but makes a great hat!

[Anonymous Coward]

http://sakots.pekori.jp/imgboard/imgs/img200201071 62803.jpg

Re:Looks dorky, but makes a great hat!

[siphoncolder]

personally, i think it resembles a lamp. which is nice.

'cause when my friends come over and i need to look elite, i can just stick a lampshade over it.

Re:Looks dorky, but makes a great hat!

[guttentag]

This explains why it wasn't hooked up to a keyboard or mouse at the keynote: it's a supercomputer thinking cap! Complete with an LCD screen to let everyone around you know just what you're thinking.

Re:Looks dorky, but makes a great hat!

[jacoplane]

It really reminds me of pixars luxo jr movie, the way the screen moves around in the movie they have online. Funny, since jobs was also founded pixar.

Re:Looks dorky, but makes a great hat!

[jacoplane]

woops guess i didn't read enough threads to realize everyone else here also realized this :)

Re:Looks dorky, but makes a great hat!

[mbcbvn]

This image is NOT brought to you by Photoshop for OSX.

Re:Looks dorky, but makes a great hat!

[AtrN]

Ha! We were talking about that at work today. Wear it as a hat. Flip the screen over. Hop on your SHT and whoosh... Get me off this crazy thing!

Re:Looks dorky, but makes a great hat!

[Anonymous Coward]

or this one... http://www.geocities.com/ilamppic/

it's like the lottery!

[Bjarke Roune]

"DVD burner on one of 3 models"

Wow! I hope I'm lucky and my maschine comes with a DVD bruner! I mean, the chance is 33%, so it's not that unlikely... If I don't get lucky the first time around, I'll just have to try again... really want a DVD burner!

Re:it's like the lottery!

[Anonymous Coward]

Typical /. spelling/grammar issues. The sentence should probably read "DVD burner on one of the 3 models".

Re:it's like the lottery!

[jimhill]

So if you gather three of these on a store shelf and select a box, then the clerk opens one of the other two and shows you that it does NOT have a burner, should you buy the one you're holding or take the final box to the register?

Re:it's like the lottery!

[abigor]

Take the final box (not the one you're holding.)

What's this called again? The Monte something?

Re:it's like the lottery!

[Anonymous Coward]

The Monty Hall delimma (named after the host of "Let's Make A Deal", which make this problem famous).

And your answer only holds true if the dealer in the store is INTENTIONALLY showing you a losing box. If not, it's not the same problem, and your odds are the same no matter which box you take.

Re:it's like the lottery!

[rgmoore]

I think that it's the Monte Hall paradox.

For those who don't know, Monte Hall was the host of a gameshow in which the prize was hidden behind one of three doors. They picked one door, another was opened to reveal nothing, and then they were given the option of staying with their pick or switching to the remaining unopened door. It turns out that in a fair contest you should choose to switch; the chance of the first chosen door being right is 1/3 and the remaining door is 2/3 (hence the paradox).

Re:it's like the lottery!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's Monty Hall, not Monte Hall, FWIW.

And I take some issue with this:
It turns out that in a fair contest you should choose to switch;

That's not really true. In a fair contest, it doesn't matter. It's only in an unfair contest that you should switch. The advantage to switch creeps in because the host (Monty Hall!) already knows which door is a winner, and he is intentionally showing you a losing door. That's why you're better off switching. If the show was "fair" and the host knew nothing of the doors ahead of time, you wouldn't get the advantage, and both doors would have the same change of containing the prize.

Re:it's like the lottery!

[Quaternion]

Um... I'm confused. What do you mean by "fair" and "unfair?"
The way I always heard the problem, it was what you were describing as unfair: the contestant picks a door, and monty hall shows him one of the wrong doors. And then you get a chance to switch. But I don't see why anyone would ever switch, if you know going in that you'll be shown a wrong door. Nothing has changed between the time when you chose a door in the first place, and the time when you can switch doors if you want.

Basically, my question is: why switch? There's no difference between the two remaining doors (in terms of your belief about what may be behind them) after Mr. Hall opens up a wrong door...

In other words, what I don't agree with is when you say that there's an "advantage to switching" when the show is unfair (as we both agree it is...)

Wasn't this a question on "Ask Marilyn" a while ago?

Re:it's like the lottery!

[Priam]

oooOOOOOoooo, you're sooo smart. I bow before your knowledge.

It was a lot funnier before you stuck your "Informative" nose in here and explained the joke to everyone.

*sigh*

Re:it's like the lottery!

[Anonymous Coward]

That's what makes it such a great problem. It doesn't SEEM like there's an advantage to switching, but there IS. If you don't believe me, try it.

Break it down into three situations:

Prize is behind door 1, you pick door 1: Monty opens either door 2 or 3, you switch and you lose.

Prize is behind door 2, you pick door 1: Monty opens door 3, you switch to door 2 and win.

Prize is behind door 3, you pick door 1: Monty opens door 2, you switch to door 3 and win.

In two of these three cases, you win. After he shows you a losing door, your odds if you stick are 33% and your odds if you switch are 66%.

This problem was, in fact, popularized by Ask Marilyn. She gave the correct answer (to switch), and many, many mathematicians (and others) wrote in to tell her how wrong she was. It seems deceptively simple, but it's not. Marilyn is right: you should switch.

Again, the key to the whole problem is that even though YOU don't know which door has the prize, Monty does, and he's ALWAYS going to open a losing door. That's where your advantage creeps in. When Monty reveals the losing door, you are gaining a bit of information that you didn't have before.

If you still don't believe me, either try it yourself (in total, there are nine combinations of doors you picked vs. doors the prize was behind) or just search the web for "Monty's dilemma" or "Monty Hall paradox" or similar. There are plenty of pages out there describing it.

Re:it's like the lottery!

[Anonymous Coward]

But I can't forget about:

• the Sorenson Codec
• threats against skin authors
• crippled DVD authoring software
• licensing the one-click patent

among Apple's other crimes, so I think I'll pass until Apple reforms and shows some remorse.

Re:it's like the lottery!

[Shotnicam]

Here is a page explaining the math and giving a chance to run a few tests and see the results:

www.math.toronto.edu/mathnet/games/monty.html

Re:it's like the lottery!

[Quaternion]

Prize is behind door 1, you pick door 1: Monty opens either door 2 or 3, you switch and you lose.

Prize is behind door 2, you pick door 1: Monty opens door 3, you switch to door 2 and win.

Prize is behind door 3, you pick door 1: Monty opens door 2, you switch to door 3 and win.

So, my question now is: why are there only 3 cases and not 4? It seems to be that your case #1 should be split up into two cases:
1a) Monty picks door 2
1b) Monty picks door 3
Either way, you switch and lose... and now the ratio is 1:1, winning to losing, and there's no apparent advantage to switching.

Or maybe you'd like to break it down in the sense that the fundamental actions aren't which doors are picked but what type of doors are picked:
1. You pick right, and Monty shows you a wrong one. You switch and lose.
2. You pick wrong, and Monty shows you the other wrong one. You switch and win.

Now there are 2 cases instead of (my) 4 cases, and it's still a 1:1 thing: half the time you switch and win, half the time you switch and lose. Either way, there's no advantage to switching.

Now, I'm no mathematician. And I read the Marilyn article, but I've read a few probability theory books in the meantime too. And I'll admit that I could be wrong here, after all, I'm only human: But it just seems to me that you're not gaining any (any!) additional information from what Mr. Hall shows you. You know, before you even pick your door in the first place that you'll be shown a wrong door. At which point, there will be two doors left, one right, one wrong, and you will have chosen one of them. There still doesn't seem (to me) to be any advantage to switching.

Look, if you want to approach it from a classical viewpoint, with a set of elementary outcomes and a sigma field of events (subsets of those outcomes), and probabilities assigned to those events... Well, my intuition is that we'll get a situation more like the first one I described above (splitting case 1 into 1a and 1b), but I have to run to work. Ack. Maybe I can post it later in the day, if you're still interested in talking about it.

Re:it's like the lottery!

[magicianuk]

This may be a little difficult to explain, but let's give it a go
1) when you start you have a 1/3rd chance of being right (no problem there)
2) when you start two of the doors (at random) are losers (also no problem there)
3) once you pick a door, then at least one of the other two is definitely a loser (possibly both)

Initial probability
A:1/3rd B:1/3rd C:1/3rd

So at this point you have a 1/3rd chance of winning and a 2/3rds chance of losing, *and* one of the other doors is a definite loser but you don't know which one. So the actual odds at this point are (if you picked A)

A:1/3rd B&C:2/3rds
but at least one of B and C is a guaranteed loser ... so the actual odds are

A:1/3rd B:0/3rds C:2/3rds
or
A:1/3rd B:2/3rds C:0/3rds

But you don't know which ...

The bit that isn't intuitive to most of us is that the host's choice isn't random but depends on him/her knowing the winner isn't behind the door he opens.

So
state 1
A:1/3rd B:1/3rd C:1/3rd

pick one, leaves the odds of it being behind either of the other two doors as *2/3rds* (important point). At least one of the two doors in the 2/3rds is a loser, guaranteed, 100%, but you don't know which one, however the host does. This means that you've got a 1/3rd chance door (say door A), and the host has two doors, one of 0/3rds and one of 2/3rds. He shows you the 0/3rds door, this means he still has the 2/3rds and you still have the 1/3rds ...

... or to put it another way, imaging a three-card monty set up (one queen, two aces, you have to find the queen). The person shuffles them and you put your money on one card, that's a 1-in-three chance, leaving a 2-in-three to the dealer. The dealer has two cards, at least one of which is definitely an ace. I know he's got an ace, you know he's got an ace, you don't know whether he's got two aces and you've won, but it's still a 1-in-three chance at this moment whether you've won or not, even knowing he's got an ace (he must have an ace, he's got two cards and there's only one queen). I think you'll agree that you've got a 1/3rd chance of winning at this point. The dealer now shows you that one of his cards is an ace, this does not change the odds at all since you picked 1-in-three for the queen and always knew he'd have at least one ace. If you were to pick randomly out of the two remaining cards it would seem to be 50/50 but that's throwing away the history ... you know that when you started you had a 1/3rd chance and he had 2/3rds that a single card in his hand would be the queen. By throwing away the ace, he's concentrated that 2/3rds into a single card, so you've got a 1/3rd chance (what you started with) and he's got a 2/3rds chance, so you switch cards!

Think about the betting on that. You pick a card out of the three and you bet that you've got the right card, you'd want to get 3 dollars back for your one dollar stake to break even over enough games. You know that he's got at least one loser in his hand at this point. He shows you that loser, do you now feel that your initial choice has somehow become more likely? I don't, I always knew that one of his two cards was a definite loser and him showing it to me hasn't changed that, what I don't know is if I picked the right card to start with (1/3rd chance) or if the remaining card in his hand is the winner

Did that help?

Re:it's like the lottery!

[Quaternion]

Actually, I think your explanation was a bit confusing.... But that doesn't mean it's not right :-). I've become convinced of my mistake with help from the web, but thank you anyway for being patient and trying to explain it to me. Agh, need more coffee this early in the morning...

After reading about it in these comments, I went and found this solution online, here. This convinced me completely... I was drawing the same diagram as this guy "Peter", but I was making the same mistake he had made. Then I realized my mistake (by drawing out the possibilities as partitions of a unit square) and his second diagram confirms it.

It's never to early in the morning to feel dumb, I guess.

Mount on wall

[dthable]

I wonder if Apple will start selling wall mounting kits. Then you would take up zero desk space.

Re:Mount on wall

[mx90]

Yeah, except you'd have to be careful and be ready to make a quick catch when you eject the CD/DVD. :)

Re:Mount on wall

[Lars T.]

And when you eject a disk - bluuurp, drop.

Re:Mount on wall

[klui]

There are what appears to be ventilation holes on top of the halfdome base so mounting it vertically will probably cause overheating.

Re:Mount on wall

[Have Blue]

Actually, what would take up even less space is putting the thing inside your desk with only the monitor pivot sticking up through a tiny hole. Might have heat issues though.

Re:Mount on wall

[westfirst]

During the keynote, Jobs mentioned that the optical drives run slower if they're vertical. So he wants to keep them flat. Thus the blob on the desk.

Re:Mount on wall

[Anonymous Coward]

Have fun inserting CDs...

Re:Mount on wall

[Anonymous Coward]

In the keynote, Jobs specifically mentioned that the CD/DVD drive had to be horizontal. Well, he at least said that they wanted it that way and that when it wasn't it decreased the speed dramatically. He also said that the Superdrives don't work at all when not horizontal. He said all of this as he explained why they didn't just slap a flatscreen on the current iMacs and put the "guts" behind the monitor.

I doubt some of the veracity of those statements, though. Perhaps I'm a horrible monster, but my CD drive works fine sitting on its side and has been so for over a year.

Re:Mount on wall

[I_am_Rambi]

Eject a disk? Are you using a USB floppy drive? Apple now only carries three different type of drives that are built in. 1. CD-RW 2. Combo Drive (CD-RW/DVD) 3. SuperDrive (CD-RW/DVD-R) 4. Zip 250 Apple no longer uses floppies. So what type of disk is it?

Re:Mount on wall

[jrockway]

That makes sense, but how come the PS2 is so hyped in the vertical position. Is it just to look cool?

Re:Mount on wall

[Lars T.]

Yes, disk - as in Compact Disk or the last D in DVD, (that once stood for Disk, but now has no meaning).

Re:Mount on wall

[fermi's ghost]

Actually, I was thinking it would look really neat hanging upside down on the underside of my overhead book bin in my cube. The screen would just peek out from under the book bin. No desk space wasted, and the unit is still horizontal.

What, you can't install the DVD drive upside down?!?!? Woops!!! CRASH!!!!

Re:Mount on wall

[angelo]

The CDs of course. We don't know if it has retainer clips. But if you want heat death of the system, have fun mounting it on the wall. The holes are from normal bottom to normal top. It would be like laying a multia flat.

Re:Mount on wall

[vonbratty]

Heat must go up. No wall mounting unless there's new holes.

Re:Mount on wall

[Cryptnotic]

Yes, it is just to look cool.

Cryptnotic

Re:Mount on wall

[Catbeller]

Put it on a shelf over your desk... problem solved!

Seriously, I always thought that a swing-arm flatscreen mounted on a wall, or a BIG one mounted like a mirror, would be the ideal desktop display.

And Jobs and Co. do have the right idea -- PC's do not have to be behemoths anymore. I think that giant boxen have more to do with Freudian theory than actual utility.

Re:Mount on wall

[MindStalker]

Explain?

Re:Mount on wall

[Fjord]

I've never heard of a compact disk. I've got a lot of compact discs, but not compact disks.

Re:Mount on wall

[telstar]

Yeah ... and with the productivity that we expect from most Mac users, that'd probably be okay.

Re:Mount on wall

[Refrag]

The tray has claws that hold on to the disc. Just like the ones that allow clone manufacturers to mount them sideways.

Re:Mount on wall

[Lars T.]

What?

Re:Mount on wall

[Lars T.]

OK, here are more reasons why Apple won't release a wall-mount-kit:

(redundant) Jobs said in his Keynote that Apple didn't just put the computer inside the display because the drives can't perform optimaly when not build in horizontaly.

Ventilation. Neither Jobs in his keynote, nor the Apple info say anything about the new iMac having a fan, but looking at the pictures (with the vent holes on top and bootom), the history of the iMac and Cube, and the rather low max. temperature for operation (35C), I'ld guess the IMac/G4 is meant to be opperated in an upright position.

Re:Mount on wall

[MindStalker]

Was asking what you meant by the D no longer stands for anything?

Re:Mount on wall

[Lars T.]

First, DVD stood for Digital Video Disc, than they thought it could do more than just video, so they called it Digital Versatile Disc, then they found out that that's trademarked already, so now DVD just stands for DVD (unless it stands for Digital V Disc).

Re:Mount on wall

[ghostdoguk]

Maybe you mean compakt diks sorry but I cant believe you are wasting cycles (with a c) on discussing the spelling of the word disK.

Nice Stuff...

[FatRatBastard]

... but I was expecting a little bit more. Something truely groundbreaking.

The iMac update is pretty cool (if not a little funky looking). iPhoto gets downloaded when I get home (and it gives me an excuse to go buy a camera... anyone have any advice on a good digital camera in the $300-$400 range?). The new iBook seems to be just a bigger version (no G4). Nice, but again nothing truely groundbreaking.

At least the Quicktime streaming was fairly smooth. I expected them to get hammered. It seemed to have held up pretty well.

Re:Nice Stuff...

[harvardian]

I just bought a Sony Cyber Shot DSC P50 for $300 (for my girlfriend, actually) and found it well worth the investment. It goes up to 1280 with 1.3 Megapixels and a 3x optical zoom (up to 6x with digital zooming, but that doesn't count).

It takes high-quality JPEGs, which have excellent quality so far as I've seen and you can fit 20 of them on an 8MB memory stick. If you want to be really anal about picture quality and take all of your pictures in TIFF form, they're 3.6 MB a pop, so you should buy a 128MB memory stick (about $130 I think).

With spiffy battery, memory stick, and all, the thing comes out to about $425.

Now, if only I had a Mac so that I could plug this thing into iPhoto...that would be mad cool (this kind of thinking is just what Jobs wanted, I think).

Re:Nice Stuff...

[Anonymous Coward]

Olympus anything, floor demo model from Micro Center or something.

Trust me. Olympus.

Re:Nice Stuff...

[greenfly]

The Fuji FinePix 3600 is a nice camera. They can be had for around $300 now and offer 3X optical zoom and 2 Megapixel resolution.

Re:Nice Stuff...

[hs81]

I suppose it all depends on how you define "groundbreaking". If these products were from the rest of the PC industry e.g. Dell they would be groundbreaking products. Appple are so far ahead of the game in terms of design that we become a little blase with these sort of anouncements. What we see today from Apple will be followed up by the rest of the industry in its trail.

Re:Nice Stuff...

[elmegil]

I love my Olympus C-2040 Zoom. Under $400 several months ago, probably better than that now. 2.1 Mpx.

Re:Nice Stuff...

[Anonymous Coward]

sure the streaming worked well, most of us couldn't get hooked in!

Re:Nice Stuff...

[4mn0t1337]

I just bought a Sony Cyber Shot DSC P50 for $300 (for my girlfriend, actually)

You bought a camera by trading your girlfriend???
Dude, if you are one of the /. people that actually has one you should know that they are worth a heck of a lot more than just $300.

Re:Nice Stuff...

[RoofusPennymore]

Cannon Digital Elph

Re:Nice Stuff...

[KwamiMatrix]

Trust me, go with a Cannon, an Olympus, or a Sony Digital Camera. My sister just got a Sony DSC-P30. Geat camera for $300. My dad has a Sony DSC-S70 I believe. Great camera for $800(now costs $600). Look at Sony, Olympus, and Cannon. If you have the doe, you migh want to get one of the Sony CD Mavicas. Anyway, I am waiting for the PowerMac G5 so I can purchase one. I'll sit it next to my Dell Inspiron 8000. Right now, I am waiting for Playstation 2 Linux to get for my PS2.

Re:Nice Stuff...

[Anonymous Coward]

anyone have any advice on a good digital camera in the $300-$400 range?

My Canon Digital Elph S110 is the best gadget I've bought, period. Curently $400, and Canon has a special deal right now where you get a free extra battery, carrying case, and 16 MB CF card with it. That's still a little expensive for a 2 megapixel, 2X optical zoom camera. But the Elph's saving grace is the fact that it's tiny, so you can carry it everywhere and get a lot of photos you would have otherwised missed.

Re:Nice Stuff...

[Stonehand]

It was on sale in a pre-Xmas sale at PhotoAlley (price went back up the day afterwards), but my Minolta DiMAGE S304 cost $399.95, not including sundry accessories like extra CF cards. That was a sale price, but if you wait a bit and search around you might be able to find it at that price again.

It's a 4X optical zoom, 3.1 MP (that is, 3.3MP total, but 3.1MP used), fits in... about a large coat pocket, say. The LowePro 20AW case that I bought with it is a very snug fit -- note that it doesn't come with a case, and Minolta doesn't seem to make any.

I'm happy with it so far, 'tho it does have a weakness -- there are only two aperture settings available at any given set of other parameters (focal length, which can be selected from a list [IOW not continuous dial], exposure compensation, exposure time, et al). The cf card included is only 16MB, 'tho, so you might want to buy, say, a SanDisk 128MB (what I currently use). Oh, and it includes 4 non-rechargeable AAs -- use NiMHs instead.

Try DPReview for specs, review and comparisons.

Re:Nice Stuff...

[stripes]

anyone have any advice on a good digital camera in the $300-$400 range?

Yep, and for most other price ranges. Visit DP Review, and browse the reviews (you will need to get current prices for the cameras though, since I doubt the Canon PS100 is still $600!).

If you can afford it the Nikon CoolPix is an extreamly nice camera (the 900 series is nicer then the 700/800 series, but still...). I did buy the PS100 for the small size though, and there are a few others that are now that small. Of corse if you can afford it the Canon D30 or 1D are very nice, but not as small :-)

Re:Nice Stuff...

[ichimunki]

I dunno. Looks a lot like the iPaq on steroids if you ask me. Frankly, I wish Apple would concentrate on making user choice an option. I mean, with this product the only choice I have is what kind of drive I want installed. No choice of colors. No choice to have a keyboard or mouse that aren't hideous to look at (plus, I want my scroll wheel, sorry). No choice to get one that's a pyramid, or a shape that doesn't look like it will tip over easily.

Ditto the OS itself. Nothing I've seen indicates any sort of real customization is possible. After using either Gnome or KDE, you get *real* spoiled in that area.

Re:Nice Stuff...

[Anonymous Coward]

a nice camera.. the Olympus C2100UZ which can be had for $300 or so. 2.1 megapixels (frameworthy 8x10s), 10x optical zoom(! 35mm equiv...380mm) and tons of manual features, it's worth checking out. www.dpreview.com

Re:Nice Stuff...

[mbcbvn]

It might be a good idea to check this list before you lay down a few hundred dollars for a new camera. They also list the compatable card readers.

Re:Nice Stuff...

[b1t r0t]

Ditto the OS itself. Nothing I've seen indicates any sort of real customization is possible. After using either Gnome or KDE, you get *real* spoiled in that area.

You can load Yellow Dog Linux on it. If you just have to have Gnome or KDE, nothing is stopping you. So what's your problem with that? Besides, OS X is no slouch. I've gotten real spoiled by the MacOS 9 Finder, but as of 10.1.2 OS X's user interface has become tolerable. And it doesn't crash either (except that the AirPort drivers cause a kernel panic when I wake up my PowerBook at work if I don't remember to turn AirPort off before putting it to sleep.)

Re:Nice Stuff...

[A Bugg]

yeah i got one of those for christmas and i love it, its one of the coolest presents my parents have ever gotten me way better than that damned cell phone from last year that a rarely use.
a bugg

Re:Nice Stuff...

[rekoil]

You obviously had better luck than I did...I've got an Akamai streaming installation in my building, and my packet loss was in the 25 - 50% for most of the keynote, with the predictable loss of image quality making the video practically useless.

Re:Nice Stuff...

[gravelpup]

...since I doubt the Canon PS100 is still $600...

Dell is selling them at 10% off of $399. At least they were last month. Plus you get a rebate that includes a spare battery, 8MB card and a couple other things. So I picked one up for just over $350. It flat out rocks.

Re:Nice Stuff...

[holt]

> Frankly, I wish Apple would concentrate on
> making user choice an option. I mean...No
> choice of colors.

We can thank Apple for any choices in colors we have now....it was beige (sp?) and black before the original iMac...

Re:Nice Stuff...

[ichimunki]

I already have YDL loaded on my Rev A iMac. I'm not going to spend $1400 on a new iMac just to replace the preinstalled OS (assuming YDL supports this new machine fully) any more than I am going to go to Best Buy and pay the Windows tax if I'm planning to install Debian GNU/Linux when I get the machine home. For the price of the new iMac, I'm reasonably sure I can build or buy as a complete package a similar x86 running Linux, just not in a cute little blob of a container (although there are some pretty compact and attractive ATX cases available).

And I'm not saying OS X is a slouch. I'm saying that as far as I can tell it offers almost no user freedom in the way that Gnome/Sawfish or KDE or many other Unix/Linux window managers and desktop environements do. If I can't do simple things like replace those little colored dots with sensible images that indicate the function of the button, or move them to a location where I am more accustomed to finding window controls, then I am basically being told that I shouldn't be able to control my work environment.

This might be nice for consistency in places where computers are shared frequently, but in the privacy of my own home, why shouldn't a lot of this be highly scriptable and configurable (and at the very least theme-capable beyond the simple color scheme I'm familiar with from Mac OS 8.x).

If I am wrong, and it is highly configurable then please accept my retraction and apologies. But the only way I've ever seen to configure a Mac was to use shareware (which I tried and abandoned since my crash rates went way up).

Re:Nice Stuff...

[ichimunki]

Except that now, Apple itself doesn't offer any real choice. Frankly I prefer a plain metal box to an off-shape plastic doodad. Probably a lot of people do. I think that's part of why Apple still hasn't gotten much more than 5-10% market share (most of which is squarely centered on the education and graphic design niches).

Re:Nice Stuff...

[ghostdoguk]

Naaaaaa
they cost a lot to run and can be expensive when trading in for a better model , the camera was a good deal

iI iJust iDon't iKnow

[eries]

iI ijust idon't iknow iif iI ican itake iit imuch ilonger!

Cute, but ...

[d-e-w]

I keep expecting it to start hopping around like the Pixer desk lamp! ;)

Re:Cute, but ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Gee reminds me of a post from the last thread on this subject...

Re:Cute, but ...

[Jon Abbott]

That will come in the next product update. Rumor has it that Apple was unable to procure springs and pneumatic shocks that would safely bounce it around. I do agree though, it could be called the iLuxo Jr, even without the "bounce".. :^)

Re:Cute, but ...

[sebi]

Thats what it basically does in the new commercial. You should be able to see a cool video here sometime in the future. Seems like the link is stevedotted at the moment.

Re:Cute, but ...

[rsmith]

That will probably be the next model, with the built-in iBrator :)

Re:Cute, but ...

[RobBob]

Except the Pixar lamp has more personality.

Re:Cute, but ...

[maniac11]

You're right on here. The new cmmercial is directed by Pixar creative chief John Lasseter

Re:Cute, but ...

[x4d3]

it has a strong resemblence to Vonnegut's "Tralfamadorian" characters... I wonder if it exists in several dimensions... and sees all moments of time at once...

hrm... so it goes.

Re:Cute, but ...

[ghostdoguk]

No , No
that will be catered for in OSX2.0 adding more dimensions using kexts Hopefully up to a gigahertz by then.

nice new form factor

[yellowjacket03]

It looks ok, but I hope that I don't have to service these things. Hopefully they will be RMA to apple

Re:nice new form factor

[MacEnvy]

Yeah, ditto... But I'm still gonna buy one...

iPhoto - Best...

[Anonymous Coward]

pr0n organizer ever. And now I can turn my favorite pr0n into a real book! With captions! Thank you, Apple!

Re:iPhoto - Best...

[Anonymous Coward]

That would be AdultMediaFinder for OSX:
http://www.dekorte.com/software/osx/AdultMediaFi nd er/

OS X still sucks - run like Windows NT 4 on a 486!

[Anonymous Coward]

Can Apple do anything but put a computer in a new box with a fancy design and colors? LCD monitors for desktops have been available for years!

Where's the "One More Thing" (tm)?

[tibbetts]

Now that the highest-end iMac is hitting 800MHz, where's the speed bump (not to mention all-out redesign) for the G4 towers? This can't be the last word for the keynote.

Re:Where's the "One More Thing" (tm)?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I was expecting the trademark "One more thing." However, the rumor is (and it makes A LOT OF SENSE), the G5 was NOT ready, although greatly hoped for.

It only makes sense that with a G4 iMac the G5 will be the new powermac. Probably have to wait for Tokyo Expo though. You never know though, he could just do a media circus like the iPod and release it soon.

Time will tell (literally, they will spill the beans).

"Superdrive?"

[duncan7]

Seems it wasn't too long ago that I spec'd a "Superdrive" for an iMac that was an LS-120 120MB floppy. I even bought it from Apple, IIRC. Now it's a DVD/CDRW combo drive? Did Imation not trademark that term?

Re:"Superdrive?"

[merlynn]

They were called "SuperDisk" drives from Imation. Close, but no cigar...

Re:"Superdrive?"

[PatSmarty]

Actually, it's the 3th time: The 3.5 inch floppy drive in the old SE and Mac II were also called Superdrive, since they could change between CAV (the PC way) and CLV (the Mac way) and therefore also read PC disks.

Re:"Superdrive?"

[Anonymous Coward]

That term has been used ever since the 3.5" floppies have home out. It's been tossed around more times than a 30Lb whore.

Re:"Superdrive?"

[Anonymous Coward]

Plus, the Superdrive could handle High Density disks (1.4 megs, baby!) instead of just 800k Double Density disks.

What a surprise...

[Chicane-UK]

I thought this was supposed to be 'way beyond the rumor sites' - god damnit, Jobs's overhyping of his products is starting to really rile me...

Re:What a surprise...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah...even though I'm not a Mac fan, I was very interested in what Jobs was hyping as the next big thing.

New flat panel iMac? So what. Faster processor? Big Deal...AMD and Intel produce newer faster processors every week. Big hard drive? I hope it is at least as fast as the 80GB 8.5ms 7200 RPM drives that have been available for quite some time. DVD RAM Combo drive? Nothing new there. iPod or iWalk...does the world need another stinkin' PDA?

I have to admit that Apple's products have a lot of appeal in their design, but in the end they are still more expensive than their competitors without really offering anything extra for the cost (except a pretty brushed stainless steel finish...or some frosted plastic.)

Jobs can wake me up when they announce something like the Orgasmitron from Barbarella, or an iMac that will cruise around my apartment cleaning the floors when I'm not using it to browse the Internet.

Re:What a surprise...

[Anonymous Coward]

It blows away anything the LinuxWorld will ever come up with. Linux doesn't even have a decent window manager...and don't even say Enlightenment, KDE or the rest of the garbage that's out there.

Apple Rules!

better than slashdot

[sebi]

A Jobs Keynote is way better than slashdot. It even managed to bring the apple servers down. By ourselves we wil never manage that ;-)

iMac availability

[pemerson]

Note that on apple's purchasing site (store.apple.com) the lower end new iMacs aren't available until March. The only one available in January is the top of the line $1800 one with the Superdrive (DVD writer & CD-RW). The other new item which I saw (didn't see the Keynote, so don't know how much attention was paid to it) is the 14.1" screen on the new top end iBook.

Re:iMac availability

[foghorn666]

Steve addressed this in his remarks, saying they expect the superdrive model to have the highest level of demand.

At first, this made me hesitate- it sounds like just marketing, coming up with a reason for your poor planning in production. But the more I think about it, I think the superdrive -and the consequent ability to burn DVDs- is going to be one of the biggest selling points of this computer. Everything is coming together to make this iMac huge -cheap DVD players, digital still and video cameras finally becoming commonplace- and I think the iMac's role is going to be as a video-editing station for the masses. The original iMac had great success because it was a cheap, all in one internet machine. I think Apple has really nailed what the next digital zeitgeist's going to be.

Of course, knowing apple, they probably screwed up the production anyway.

Re:iMac availability

[Cryptnotic]

It makes economic sense though to stagger product launches. The people who just WANT this machine are going to buy it right away at whatever price. If they can only buy the highest-end version, then that's more money for Apple. If the lower-end models were available now, those people who just "gotta have one" might buy the cheaper ones instead.

Cryptnotic

A New Record

[ptrourke]

http://www.apple.com/ was slashdotted before Slashdot even posted the story!

Re:A New Record

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.apple.com/ was slashdotted before Slashdot even posted the story!

If that's true they weren't "slashdotted", they were "macworldexpoed".

Re:A New Record

[Lars T.]

More proof that Slashdot lost it as a news service ;-)

Arrorgant People Profit Losing Entinty=Apple

[termite666]

It looks great ,it's just too bad I dont buy computers for how they look !!!

Re:Arrorgant People Profit Losing Entinty=Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad there's about 6 billion more people here than you.

heh

[altan]

Looks like Steve gave in to Canada early...

The one thing I wish macs had...

[gooberguy]

Apple has done a great job with design, ease-of-use, and bus speed. The only problems they have are slow CPU speeds and SMP solutions that are too costly.

Until Apple makes a 1.5Ghz G5, they won't get me as part of thier market share. They look pretty and have blazingly fast hard drives, but the cpu limits the capabilites of the Mac.

D/\ Gooberguy

Re:The one thing I wish macs had...

[Anonymous Coward]

The only problems they have are slow CPU speeds and SMP solutions that are too costly. Until Apple makes a 1.5Ghz G5, they won't get me as part of thier market share.

That's ok, if you're stupid enough to compare the clock speeds on a RISC directly to those on an CISC, you don't deserve a Mac anyway. My 450 MHz iBook running OSX with 256 MB of memory is twice as fast as my 700 MHz PIII running XP with 256 MB of memory.

Re:The one thing I wish macs had...

[Anonymous Coward]

You probably judge auto engines by their RPMs, too, instead of their actual output. Right? :-)

If you think an 800Mhz G4 is slow, you're just being fooled by comparing clock speeds. That comparison is ONLY valid within the same processor family.

Re:The one thing I wish macs had...

[Arandir]

Slow CPU speeds? If the *only* thing you're comparing is Mhz, then of course Pentium wins hands down. But the effective speed of a processor is derived from much more than the clock speed. A 1.5Ghz G5 would make a 1.5Ghz PIV seem like a turtle on exlax.

Re:The one thing I wish macs had...

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.info.apple.com/support/export.html
Power Mac G4 @867Mhz .......... 11,124 MTOPS

http://support.intel.com/support/processors/ctp. ht m
Intel® Itanium(TM) @800MHz .......... 6,133 MTOPS
Intel Pentium® 4 @2.0GHz .......... 5,333 MTOPS

Re:The one thing I wish macs had...

[non-poster]

How about AMD CPUs?

Re:The one thing I wish macs had...

[gooberguy]

A 1.5Ghz G5 would make a 1.5Ghz PIV seem like a turtle on exlax.

Which is exactly why I would want one! Where was I comparing clock speed? Macs and x86s are on a different playing field in terms of mhz. A Mac does about 1/3 more work per cycle than an x86. Mac OS X is also more efficient than windows, which allows Macs to get away with slow CPU speeds except for in the high-end market. (such as 3d rendering, etc.)

D/\ Gooberguy

Re:The one thing I wish macs had...

[charon_on_acheron]

Not that I don't want higher MHz in computers, but your argument is weak. Everyone knows that the Macs use a totally different processor structure than PCs. One is CISC and the other is RISC. So why try to say that Apple 'must' have a certain GHz processor before you will buy it?

By time the Macs have a 1.5GHz G5, Intel will have a 3GHz Pentium V. Then you won't want a Mac until they have at least a 2.5GHz processor.

If you want one, buy it. Otherwise don't. It's that simple. You didn't insist that a PC has a 1GHz processor before buying one did you?

Re:The one thing I wish macs had...

[Master Bait]

Apple has done a great job with design, ease-of-use, and bus speed.
Forget the bus speed. The new iMac seems to be an outgrowth of the Cube. It only has a 100mhz SDRAM bus. About the same level of memory throughput as a $500 Celeron computer.

Re:The one thing I wish macs had...

[Master Bait]

A Mac does about 1/3 more work per cycle than an x86.
Not quite. When you compare integer ops, the Pentium3 and Athlon are at parity mhz for mhz with the G4. It's only when you compare vector ops (AltaVec) does the G4 shine. That's why Jobs uses Photoshop 6.0 for his infamous benchmark.

Of course, Adobe added some SSE2-enabled plugins for the Pentium 4 in Photoshop 6.0.1, so I don't expect Jobs to be using that comparison anymore because the Pentium 4, lame as it it is, smokes G4s in Photoshop now.

Re:The one thing I wish macs had...

[Anonymous Coward]

And what about non AltiVec Shit (99%) like compiling a kernel.

Apple deserves their market share.

Re:The one thing I wish macs had...

[KwamiMatrix]

Um, how does the 300 MHZ Emotion Engine in Playstation 2 compete with XBox's 733 MHZ Pentium III? DIFFERENT ARCHITECHTURES. Have you heard of FPU's? Vector Units? CPU stages? Integer Units(Well, in that case, the Pentium IV does win against the G4)? Man, I am not even going to start. This guy probably also goes around saying that XBox's CPU is more powerful than Playstation 2's. You have A LOT TO LEARN, man. So many people don't understand. I am a University Computer Engineering Student, but it does not take someone like to to get this simple point. Then again, most people, except techies, don't understand anything a bout computer architechtures.

Re:The one thing I wish macs had...

[posmon]

XBox's CPU is more powerful than Playstation 2's

arguable, but it probably is. not surprising considering the ages of the consoles involved.

Re:The one thing I wish macs had...

[Anonymous Coward]

Then again, most people, except techies, don't understand anything a bout computer architechtures.

apparently you are wrong alot of nerds who love microsoft a.k.a tech tv types dont seem to understand it

Re:The one thing I wish macs had...

[MacEnvy]

With the velocity engine, instructions are carried out much faster than on a Wintel machine... most of the time. You should check out the benchmarks... when they unveil the 1.6 Ghz G5 in July, it will very likely blow away anything in the Wintel market. The G4s already match them. Lets talk actual meaurements, gigaflops...

Re:The one thing I wish macs had...

[fitten]

GFLOPS are useful if you are doing Photoshop or CFD codes. Even in those cases, you will not find a 100% instruction mix of only FPU instructions. The majority of instructions you run in any program will be integer based (don't forget that load/store instructions are not FPU instructions). The only problem with the 1.6GHz G5 is that Apple will take about 2 years to get one of them into a Mac. If you want to compare the CPUs, http://www.spec.org is the place to go. Unfortunately, I couldn't find these benchmarks run on a G4 on first glance or a quick search. (The formatting sucks and I'm not gonna spend time fooling with it) SPECint2000: Company Name System Name #CPU Base Peak Full Disclosures Advanced Micro Devic Epox 8KHA+ Motherboard, AMD Athlon (TM) XP 1900+ 1 677 701 Intel Corporation Intel D850GB motherboard (2.0 GHz, Pentium 4 pro 1 640 656 Text HTML PDF PS Config SPECfp2000: Company Name System Name #CPU Base Peak Full Disclosures Advanced Micro Devic Epox 8KHA+ Motherboard, AMD Athlon (TM) XP 1900+ 1 588 634 Text HTML PDF PS Config Intel Corporation Intel D850GB motherboard (2.0 GHz, Pentium 4 pro 1 704 714 Text HTML PDF PS Config

Re:The one thing I wish macs had...

[fitten]

GFLOPS are useful if you are doing Photoshop or CFD codes. Even in those cases, you will not find a 100% instruction mix of only FPU instructions. The majority of instructions you run in any program will be integer based (don't forget that load/store instructions are not FPU instructions).

The only problem with the 1.6GHz G5 is that Apple will take about 2 years to get one of them into a Mac.
If you want to compare the CPUs, http://www.spec.org is the place to go. Unfortunately, I couldn't find these benchmarks run on a G4 on first glance or a quick search.

Summary:
Athlon XP 1900+ SPECint2000 677 SPECfp2000 588
Intel P4 2.0GHz SPECint2000 640 SPECfp2000 704

hmm

[imsirovic5]

Why does apple care more about exterior fashionable aspects of its products then about its funcionality and usability as well as perfomance?

Mice are cheap

[Toe, The]

One of the favorite mice for Macs is... the Microsoft intellimouse (or whatever it's called). Works great on a Mac.

Just another one of those weird cross-breeding things, I guess.

Re:Mice are cheap

[Anonymous Coward]

This is more of a problem with the iBooks.

I'd order one of those 14' display models today if it came with an extra button or two.

Re:Mice are cheap

[DeMorganLaw]

If I am paying 1300$ for a mac, there is no reason why I should have to go out and buy a 3rd party mouse.

Re:Mice are cheap

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you saying you use the mouse that came with your $1300 PC? Not bloody likely, unless PC manufacturers have suddenly started shipping optical mice as standard equipment with new PC's.

Re:Mice are cheap

[Anonymous Coward]

Some of them come with them. It depends where you look and which package you choose. That's the beauty of buying 386 (notice I didn't specify Intel or AMD), there are tons of choices on what you get or you can build it yourself. Most would say that the one downside is that you get them with a Windows OS on them but there are places you can buy pre-builts without os's.

Re:Mice are cheap

[Anonymous Coward]

The only OEM mice I didn't replace promptly were MS Intellimice. Damn those thing were comfortable, that and their original Natural keyboard (which I still have) were the only microsoft products I actually was happy to own. It's with equal amounts of disappointment and satisfaction that I hate all their later versions.

Re:Mice are cheap

[gig]

The keyboard has, like, 70 buttons on it. It also has extra modifier keys that other computers don't have, so we can afford to use Control+click as a context click. You can also Command+click to do a lot of things (open a link in a new window in IE for example), and Shift+click, Option+click, etc. It's not hard, and the hand that stays on the keyboard while you use the TrackPad does the modifier keys.

It's actually easier for many people than a right-click on the mouse. A Shift+right-click is almost impossible for most people to use regularly (both hands are chording) so the spare-keyboard-on-the-mouse thing has limits.

14' display!!!

[mrroot]

Apple also announced other new products like a 14' display on some iBooks

Wow! a 14' display, and my laptop only has a 14" display. Just imagine playing your favorite video game on a 14 ft display.

While many business application users will not enjoy having a 14 ft screen, I think this will be great for gamers.

I wonder what the max resolution on that will be... 1,280,000 x 1,024,000 pixels?

Re:14' display!!!

[mx90]

Except for the fact that it only comes with a GeForce 2 MX....

Re:14' display!!!

[Tintin]

So if you play a DVD of This Is Spinal Tap on it, will the Stonehenge monument come out to be the right size?

Re:14' display!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess that's quite optimal for watching 'This is Spinal Tap' with your friends.

Re:14' display!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Especially if your friends are midgets who like to dance around small objects..

Re:14' display!!!

[CaptCosmic]

Nah, Apple has kept the resolution limited to the standard 1024x768.

But look on the bright side, now you won't have trouble seeing the pixels. After all, they'll be about 3 inches sqaure. No more trying to determine what color that pixel is.

Re:14' display!!!

[Tristan McCann]

Yeah, but I'd be scared of the giant gnomes...

Re:14' display!!!

[King Babar]

[about the alleged 14' monitor on the iBook]

So if you play a DVD of This Is Spinal Tap on it, will the Stonehenge monument come out to be the right size?

There are three possible answers here, but they are all "no". :-)

1. Screen reality: on my ~14" screen, I estimate the 18" tall Stonehenge from the movie comes out to be no more than 2" tall, so on a 14' screen, you're only looking at 24" (2') tall.
2. Psychological reality: tragically in this case, human perceptual abilities will still be able to tell the Spinal Tap Stonehenge is only 18" tall, and that those are just dwarfs dancing around it.
3. Physical reality: actually, the 18" Stonehenge might even be over 2 feet tall on the 14' iMac screen, so it would *not* be according to spec! The spec value written on the napkin in the movie was very clearly that the edifice was to be 18" tall, and 24" tall is way out of spec.

Ask a silly question, get a silly answer...

Re:14' display!!!

[chancycat]

I wonder what the max resolution on that will be... 1,280,000 x 1,024,000 pixels?

Woah - what would the marketing folks call that one - a "Terapixel" display. Or "USEMXVGA++*+"

Re:14' display!!!

[hearingaid]

Actually, I really wanna get a projector just so I can play Quake on the wall. It would be so cool. :)

Re:14' display!!!

[Riktov]

Perfect for watching "Spinal Tap" on DVD!

I kind of like it

[harvardian]

As much as I've been anti-Apple since I was small, I have to say that Apple's new direction is definitely impressing me. I didn't think the iMac was as revolutionary as Jobs thought it was, but it was a good idea and it raised Apple's stock an incredible amount -- which is why after watching the expo streaming in Quicktime I went to my online brokerage and bought stock in the company (not too much in case I'm being taken for the Hyped-Out-Fool).

I also think this "digital hub" idea of Jobs's is very compelling, especially to the average home user. Compare the idea of a BSoD while trying to plug in your digital camera ("Creating a driver database...please wa...*gurgle*) to plugging in your digital camera and having your photos automatically uploaded to your computer and organized in a sensical fashion. And then paying $30 for a book of hard-copy pictures. There's really no comparison.

If these things sell as much as I think they will, I think we might see quite a bit of Apple resurgence...

Re:I kind of like it

[Anonymous Coward]

***sig error***

should be:

"If a man wishes to rid himself of a feeling of unbearable oppression,
he may have to take to Hashish."

Re:I kind of like it

[Anonymous Coward]

if it was MS hardware, (ALL of it, the computer to the camera to the mp3 player) it would all work like that. but in exchange for choice and massively lower prices we don't have seamless integration between different companies

apple is pretty, that's about it

Cooling this thing?

[Brento]

How are they cooling this new one? It's got a G4, a SuperDrive, a GeForce2 MX, and the power supply, all inside that base, and there's no airflow from the bottom to the top? (There's a cover over the bottom, where the ram chips and Airport card go.) I can't believe this thing isn't going to get toasty-hot. The Cube didn't have a fan, but it had an external power supply, so they were kinda cheating.

I'll be watching the whole deal just to see how they pull that off. If they can cool that thing without a fan, I'll be impressed.

Re:Cooling this thing?

[banky]

the answer should be obvious:

iCe.

Thank you, be sure and tip your waitress.

Re:Cooling this thing?

[jslag]

The Cube didn't have a fan, but it had an external power supply, so they were kinda cheating.

The Cube also has a big open vent on its top (say 6" by 3"), and a comparably sized opening along the bottom. So, even though there is no fan, air moves through the thing fairly well. I haven't seen any closeups of the new imac, but from what I have seen, it's unlikely that there's nearly as much airflow.

Re:Cooling this thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

The G-serice PowerPC chips dissapate much less heat than equiv-clocked chips from AMD&Intel (like less than half, probably under 25%), the GeForce i a MX (meaning mobility, which if Tom's Hardware and my memory of it are right, means they skimped some performance to save batter power---and thus less heat dissapated.

That leaves the power supply, which is only 130W according to the Apple tech specs, and the hard disk, of which there is only one and it's 7200rpm or less.

Given all that crap so close together won't help since there isn't a lot of air in smaller containers to cool with. They may use the metal inside the case to help dissapate the heat via direct contact with heatsinks... like a Dell laptop does.

I also though I saw some small slits in a circular patttern at the top to let heat out, but it may just be me...

Re:Cooling this thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, if you look carefully, it does have airflow. The bottom part of the hemisphere has air vents, as well as the top where the display attaches.

Re:Cooling this thing?

[Gogo Dodo]

The Register says there is a fan in it.

Re:Cooling this thing?

[andy@petdance.com]

The Cube also has a big open vent on its top (say 6" by 3"), and a comparably sized opening along the bottom.

Unfortunately, the cooling benefits of the slot are diminished when you try to shred sensitive paperwork with it.

re:Cooling this thing?

[scrawny]

the top of the unit is perforated and the bottom has vertical slits all the way around. there is top to bottom airflow. there is a fan, too. no issue.

Re:Cooling this thing?

[schussat]

I'm interested in cooling, but I'm also curious about accessing the guts in general: The web site states that the bottom panel removes -- so you access the computer's innards by turning it upside down. Then what do you do with the screen? Is it removable, or do you lean the whole thing on the screen when you turn it over? If it's removable, it strikes me that the mechanism would have a high tendency to become loose over time. If the screen wobbles in its little slot, it won't be much fun.

-schussat

Re:Cooling this thing?

[aron_wallaker]

The M in GeForceMX does *not* stand for mobility. nVidia's mobile chips are called GeForce2Go. The GeForceMX chips are just scaled down GeForce2 designs for economy 3D video cards. They probably do give off less heat than high-end GeForce chips, but all that means is they don't require their own heat sinks/fans.

Re:Cooling this thing?

[Bullfrog]

There is a "rosette" pattern of perforations on the top of the base unit, and a ring of closely spaced slots around the base, under the bottom lip. A single fan draws air from the base trough the top of the unit cooling all internal components. The fan, according to the Apple website, runs at about the same db level as the hard-drive (~25db) so it should be very quiet.

I trust that this provides adequate cooling and depending on the environment the iMac is used in, won't get fouled by dust and crap, as packing all that kit into such a small package means the chances it will clog up over time are quite high. At least in my beige box there's room for that crap to accumulate without adverse effects to my components.

Bullfrog

Re:Cooling this thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

How are they cooling this new one?

Easy: Everything is running at an extremely low clock rate (read: less than 1 Ghz.) Got it?

Re:Cooling this thing?

[jafac]

My wife's iMac (slot-loader) has no fan, and the power supply and monitor are in the same enclosure.

It's mondo-quiet.

Re:Cooling this thing?

[jankol]

How are they cooling this new one? It's got a G4, a SuperDrive, a GeForce2 MX, and the power supply, all inside that base, and there's no airflow from the bottom to the top? (There's a cover over the bottom, where the ram chips and Airport card go.) I can't believe this thing isn't going to get toasty-hot. The Cube didn't have a fan, but it had an external power supply, so they were kinda cheating.

I'll be watching the whole deal just to see how they pull that off. If they can cool that thing without a fan, I'll be impressed.

First of all, I see no mentions on the official site, so I'll have to assume that there might be one.

Second, look around the bottom. There are small holes at the bottom, all around the thing. There's your air intake! Nifty, huh?

Re:Cooling this thing?

[k_187]

the GeForce i a MX (meaning mobility

The MX series of GeForce cards are just lower clocked versions of the GeForce Series. Thus a GeForce 2 MX 400, will be clocked lower than a straight up GeForce 2. I forget why they're called MX, but its the value line of the Geforce Family. The GeForce mobile line was called the Geforce2Go(cute ain't it?). That all being said, I know the MX cards did ship with passive heating.

Re:Cooling this thing?

[yorgasor]

The G4 is an amazing chip. We're using one as an embedded system where I work, and the thing doesn't even have a heat sink on it! If I recall correctly, it uses about 5W of power (but I guess that depends on which speed it runs at).

With many people searching for the perfect silent computer, I think the best way to go is with the G4. The only thing better than a quiet fan, is no fan at all.

Re:Cooling this thing?

[spacefrog]

Although power and heat are concerns, yes, using the laptop nvidia mx chip is probably the cheapest/easiest way for them to hook up to that LCD without having to resort to analog or something ungodly expensive....

Heck, now that I think about it, the entire machine looks like a laptop that melted in the sun.

Re:Cooling this thing?

[anfloga]

Looks like a laptop that melted in the sun? No, I imagine that it was inspired by one of those prototype AMD laptop's apple has been working on :)

Re:Cooling this thing?

[grammar fascist]

Just one fan?

He's gonna have to buy a whole lot of those if Apple is planning on making a profit...

Re:Cooling this thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I just came out of about an hour playing with the new iMac, and I could not hear the fan, in a relatively quiet room, with my ear about 3 inches from the vent holes.

Davfe

Re:Cooling this thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

The hard disk is 5400 rpm, and you are correct on the metal heat sink lining the polycarbonate shell.

Dave

Re:Cooling this thing?

[Samuel Hughes]

A fan? I sure hope it's on the bottom (after all, that _is_ the most circular part of the computer). It'll suck air out of the machine, keeping the entire computer floating on a cushion of air. It'll be marketed as the "HoverMac. Never stops moving."

;-)

Re:Cooling this thing?

[jamieo]

I noticed the 25dBA fan and this really is cost cutting cheapness, I'd expect much more of Apple.

For such a machine you should be getting sub 20dBA from it's mechanicals, then it really will be quite (to the point you really won't notice it's on). 25dBA is better than most PCs, and is quiet by office standards, but it's by no means quiet for home use.

In the Overclocking/Build Your Own PC community (obviously not Apple's target market), building quiet PCs is a bit in fashion at the moment. It's very easy to build a sub 20dBA machine and doesn't cost too much.

25dBA from Apple is plain cost cutting and hence disappointing for a "premium" brand.

Re:Cooling this thing?

[leinerj]

The funny thing about the cube is that if you would put your hand over that vent (not only did it get really really hot) the machine would go into sleep mode because it would overheat (and no - I want not accidently pressing the sleep button).

Overhyped?

[bliss]

" There where times when the Keynote really blue me away. After it was over I did feel a little cheated though. iPhoto looks like a great application. I downloaded it allready, but didn't have a chance to try it out yet. You can get it here [apple.com]. Download size is 13.4 MB."

Why is this revolutionary? And why does Apple seem to put such great stock in it? Aren't things like this mostly old hat with a nifty interface?

Re:Overhyped?

[sebi]

I think that it's a lot of old hats under one nifty interface. You can import your photos, edit them , print them on your inkjet, put them on the web, have prints delivered from kodak and have a hardcover bound Album with nice layot delivered to wherever you want it.

Most of these things where possible before, but not this nice. And the program is free. Prints and the Album will cost (29.99 for the first 10 pages, 3 dollars for each page afterwards IIRC)

Re:Overhyped?

[Anonymous Coward]

As I mentioned above, Photosuite does all of this except for the hard cover book. And I actually found a version 3 copy for $1.99 at Best Buy. I also remember there being a rebate on version 4. Photosuite also does Mosaics which is pretty cool.

Re:Overhyped?

[elmegil]

The word is "integration". If I could do all this stuff this easily with my PC I'd be all over it. (See previous apple thread for why I probably won't be getting an iMac any time soon, cool looka and great software notwithstanding).

Re:Overhyped?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is this revolutionary? And why does Apple seem to put such great stock in it? Aren't things like this mostly old hat with a nifty interface?

Apple's hyped on this because it's a gateway to a whole new type of business for them: services. You do realize that Kodak is probably going to give them $$ for each print ordered from them through iPhoto, right? This is a whole new revenue stream for Apple, and iPhoto is just the loss leader. I'd expect to see more of the same types of services in the future.

The "nifty interface" is the revolutionary part. Jobs said as much. Creating and printing a book of your photos, for example, used to take a half-dozen applications and a trip to a service bureau. Now it takes a click or two - and the more advanced apps are still available to you when you want to get more advanced.

I watched the keynote - my mom could use this stuff. That's revolutionary.

Re:Overhyped?

[Anonymous Coward]

I know we posted at the same time but I definitely recommend Photosuite. It lets you grab from the camera, manipulate it, create a photo album, upload to the web, and even create mosaics, and panoramas. I even think that's it Auto-Enhance functions is one of the best out there.

Re:Overhyped?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why nobody is talking about the new sweet 14" inch iBook, thats a sweet deal for 1700 bucks!...

I think new ibook was the best of the show...

Re:Overhyped?

[gig]

> Aren't things like [iPhoto] mostly old
> hat with a nifty interface?

With most PC's, you get LE or Lite versions of apps with licensing restrictions and no upgrades. With Apple's bundled software, you get a real product that answers a real need with a full features set, complete with free future upgrades. The "iApps", as they are called, are worth buying the whole computer for, for many users. iTunes, iMovie, and iDVD are all at version 2, and are absolutely the BEST at what they do, bar none, Mac or PC. iPhoto does the things that average people want to do with their digital photos.

Also, these apps are all very easy to use, and lots of fun. People like to use them, and they get great results. These apps are operating a level up from other apps ... you don't get lists of technical options ... the apps are very smart and make complex tasks simple and easy. Often, they replace two or three other poorly-suited apps that you were using to get some simple task done the hard way.

It's still FUGLY

[drenehtsral]

It reminds me of obnoxious contemporary furniture, snotty yuppie housewares, tacky .COM boom era loft houses, and all those other things that symbolize snobby excess, and like many other Apple products, it's very 3 years ago.

Re:It's still FUGLY

[Bearpaw]

... like many other Apple products, it's very 3 years ago.

Well, given that the "designs" -- if you want to call them -- of Dell et al are very 10 years ago, I guess that means that Apple is 7 years ahead of the pack!

Re:It's still FUGLY

[drenehtsral]

The trick is that rectangular objects stack easily, fit under/beside desks, and are in many other ways practical. I'm against "beautiful" or "artistic" computer hardware if it interferes with functionality. If i can ever afford it, i'm going rackmount with my home systems.

Re:It's still FUGLY

[Bearpaw]

Only geeks need or want to stack computers meant for a desk. And part of the reason for a computer design like this is to make it unnecessary to hide the damn thing under the desk.

Rectangular computers are as "fugly" as a monkey-dancing Steve Ballmer. (Well, ok, not that fugly, but close.)

Re:It's still FUGLY

[Anonymous Coward]

But you're gonna need room for a monitor, and the iMac (especially the new one) takes up the space that a monitor would take up (or less). So it don't need to be stacked and whatnot. And it means your plugs, DVD drive, etc are all convenient instead of buried under your desk.

Granted, if you're a hardcore geek that has so much equipment he wants to rackmount it, it ain't for you, but you're not the core audience, are you?

Re:It's still FUGLY

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm against "beautiful" or "artistic" computer hardware if it interferes with functionality

Who said it was either thing?

Re:It's still FUGLY

[jedidiah]

This thing actually looks UGLIER than a bookpc or any other NLX/Flex-ATX system. The bottom line is that you can still achieve the same result (or a better one) with cheaper PC hardware.

oops

[seanw]

The comments about the lack change to the PowerMac desktop line are spot on...Apple has a real problem here.

The iMac now has a G4 at comparable speeds, a Superdrive, more expandable RAM capability, and OH YEAH it comes with a 15" LCD display. The PowerMac has the same thing, for $600 more, and without the display (so throw in another $500 if you want to be able to actually see the output of your computer). It is more than just disappointing...it is totally illogical.

I will grant that the PowerMac is more expandable in terms of PCI slots, but...I can no longer think of a single good reason anyone would want to buy a PowerMac, which means unless Apple updates them before the iMacs ship in January, their high-end desktop sales are pretty much going down the crapper.

sean

Re:oops

[90XDoubleSide]

The same thing was true of the Power Mac G3 when the original iMac came out; I would say that the G3 looked even less attractive then than the PMG4 does now, actually.

The bright side of this is that Apple will obviously have to put out new Power Macs (and probably at least speedbump the Power Books) at Tokyo, and the fact that they didn't announce them at MWSF might indicate that they will wait for G5s rather than bumping them to Apollo G4s.

Re:oops

[Genom]

That's the strategy - make the new iMac comparable, but cheaper than the existing desktop line. People buy 'em up. Then, they release the new desktop machines, and we all drool over 'em again. More people buy 'em up.

From a business perspective, it's killer - from a customer's perspective, it's nonsensical.

Personally, for a non-geek household, the new iMac seems like a hell of a deal. Most geeks, of course, will want something with a bit more oomph in the server department or the gaming department - but for the average Joe who needs to type a letter or throw some pics up on the 'net, it's pretty good.

Now...if they'd made it a *bit* more expandable (for example, being able to replace the 15" LCD with a special iMac-ized version of the Cinema display)...

I was expecting updates to the G4 tower and TiBook, but alas, that will have to wait for MWNY (or *possibly* MW Tokyo...)

Re:oops

[FatRatBastard]

I assume by MacWorld in Jp they'll have released updated towers. My guess is they'll be G5 based (whether that's the G4++ renamed as the G5 or the other silicon Moto/IBM have been working on remains to be seen).

If they don't have these in place by then--with a nise Ghz+ clock speed to go with them--then I think you're right; they'll lose a lot of profit margin from creaming their high end sales.

Re:oops

[Duke of URL]

>I can no longer think of a single good reason anyone would want to buy a PowerMac

Well, it's missing the one thing my coworker wanted. A second video out. The mirroring is nice, but it's no second monitor. That video card wouldn't have much trouble doing a second display either. Apple probably didn't opt for it to force users who need that to get the PowerMac line.

Re:oops

[labratuk]

so throw in another $500 if you want to be able to actually see the output of your computer

Be a man: Telnet.

Re:oops

[jasonbw]

more expandable RAM capability
I dunno. One 'user-accessible' so-dimm (who's bright idea was that?) 100mhz ram slot isn't exactly what i would have had in mind.

the funny thing is, theres a factory-installed standard ram stick inside. I would think the two different flavors of ram would be problematic at best.
Other concerns:
where is the hard drive? How can i pull it out?
I have to buy a adapter to get the vga-out to work?
Is there a system speaker whatsoever?
is there any protective glass/heavy plastic on the screen?

If you can live without the superdrive, you can have a comparable machine for the same cost in the tower. You're still on your own for a monitor, though

My iMac is just over two years old, and i actually considered replacing it, but not with this. Gee, if they only made a compact g4 ...oh thats right, they did.

Re:oops

[colinm1981]

Be a man: Telnet.

Actually, you should have said "be an idiot and have anyone and everyone looking at your data and passwords as they are sent over the network in plain text: Telnet."

Try ssh instead :)

Re:oops

[larien]

Now...if they'd made it a *bit* more expandable (for example, being able to replace the 15" LCD with a special iMac-ized version of the Cinema display)...

Of course, it was soooo easy to change the display on the original iMac....:)

My guess is the kind of audience that would be bothered about the cinema display aren't the ones Steve Jobs is trying to sell to.

Re:oops

[foobar104]

I have to buy a adapter to get the vga-out to work?

If it's like the iBook, the VGA adapter is just a little pigtail to convert from the microscopic port on the computer to a standard HD15 socket. And it comes bundled with the computer.

Re:oops

[Iamthefallen]

Now...if they'd made it a *bit* more expandable (for example, being able to replace the 15" LCD with a special iMac-ized version of the Cinema display)...

Yeah, but you can attach a second screen to it to get both :-)

Re:oops

[_Spirit]

Don't you think it would tip over with a 22" monitor on top ?

:-)

Re:oops

[grub]

Be a smart man: ssh.

Re:oops

[ab]

A single good reason? Same reason I bought one last year: lots and lots of disk space for video. I'd rather have a box to put drives in than stack them up next to my iMac/iBook.

I'm surely not the only one with a DVD-R Mac that's cutting video, am I?

ab

Re:oops

[__rsub__]

buy a dell for about $500 less with comparable specs. with a dell at least you can dual boot into linux/windoze. but of course, if you like to wait a year...2 years..before some software that came out on windoze comes out on a mac, more power to you. i would think that more for a home environment where you write reports, surf the net, share files on your favorite p2p program, a PC would be a more appropriate solution.

Re:oops

[supabeast!]

Exactly what I was thinking. Apple is no longer concerned with any sort of long-term, intelligent strategy because they simply cannot keep up with the X86 world. For them it makes more sense to focus on selling overpriced hardware in burts based on marketing hype, brand loyalty, and the fact that a LOT of people absolutely hate using Windows, but cannot manage to get by with Linux/BSD on their primary desktops.

The only reason I own an Apple is because I need a laptop that just simply works with almost no hassle when away from home; my TiBook running OS X is a dream compared to dealing with strange Linux/Windows issues when I am at a friend's house, game store, library, etc.. This is in part due to the fact that there isn't much OS X software to begin with, and 99% of the GNU stuff I can get for it is utterly unneeded (At least by me.) on a simple desktop, so I wonder how much that will have changed in another year when 10.2 is out, Aqua performance is better, and there is actually some software for the damned thing. What I am pointing out here is that Apple fills a niche market, and would much rather just keep going and let people fall into that niche and then hang around if they feel like it, than to try and suck in every potential customer on earth and hold them forever like the Wintel world wants to.

Re:oops

[King Babar]

If they don't have these in place by then--with a nise Ghz+ clock speed to go with them--then I think you're right; they'll lose a lot of profit margin from creaming their high end sales.

Hmm...Mr. Back Of Envelope isn't so sure about that. Apple is using some pretty cheap components *very cleverly* in this package. For the $1800 unit, you're realistically looking at something like this:

• 60 gig HD => $100
• LCD screen => $200
• mobo w/ proc => $250
• RAM, packaging and nicknacks => $100
• Superdrive => $300
• R&D amortization => $150
• TOTAL COST: $1100

If we add 30% to this for Apple's margin, then the retailer gets 20%, and we've got our $1800 price tag. Now, it could be even better than this for Apple, since they'll sell a lot of these directly over the Internet or in their new Apple retail outlets.

I think the interesting story for Apple margins on the previous versions of the iMac was that components like RAM and CD/RW burners only got really, really cheap after their sales of the things had basically run their course, and they'd had to blow out at least 3 rounds of excess inventory as they did updates over the last 3 years. Other than the superdrive, there really isn't any new/expensive technology in these things.

Re:oops

[labratuk]

Maybe it would be better for security, but I was thinking about being able to NEVER use a monitor, from when you first power up. AFAIK ssh is not installed by default on MacOS X, whereas I think telnet is enabled.

Re:oops

[larkost]

Well.. you were right for the very first version of MacOS X, but all subsequent version have come with a button to enable SSH, while telnet requires some (minor) fiddling with config files. However, all versions have come installed with all services turned off (a bit more secure than Windows that way... *chuckle*).

Re:oops

[dumpster_d]

Now...if they'd made it a *bit* more expandable (for example, being able to replace the 15" LCD with a special iMac-ized version of the Cinema display)...

Well, you could simply attach the Cinema display to the VGA port on back [but you'd lose the swing-mount (or just duct-tape it onto the existing one, but I think that'd mess up the counter balancing {not to mention the aesthetics})].

One thing that doesn't get mentioned as much as it should is its appeal as hardware consolidation. I purchased a used iMac about a year ago, even though it was a little weaker than the computer it replaced, simply because we needed the room that the tower+17" Monitor+speakers were taking up.

These things become relevant when your limiting factor is space [from which I am suffering] or four power-strips hooked into two outlets isn't enough for your needs [from which I am also suffering].

Re:oops

[labratuk]

Ah. Well now I know.

Re:oops

[Anonymous Coward]

with a dell at least you can dual boot into linux/windoze

You say that like it's a good thing. Why would I want to dual boot when I can have all the UNIX goodness of linux and a superior desktop all at the same time?

Re:oops

[TexTex]

For some folk, a LCD actually isn't the way to go. Color printing folk will admit the LCD looks pretty, but you're not going to want to try to judge any sort of output on it for press.

Also, while the Final Cut Pro demo was nice, many video pros wouldn't dream of trying to run media off only Firewire harddrives. Gimme IDE, gimme SCSI, and gimme about 5 of them in a RAID 0.

That's not going to work well at all with the iMac.

Re:oops

[saintlupus]

a home environment where you write reports, surf the net, share files on your favorite p2p program, a PC would be a more appropriate solution.

Appleworks.
OmniWeb.
Limewire.

All running on my iMac, running OS X. You trolling bastard. Look, no Microsoft!

--saint

Re:oops

[Refrag]

Mac OS X supports SSH. It doesn't support telnet.
The checkbox for turning on SSH is located in the sharing control panel.

Re:oops

[stripes]

Mac OS X supports SSH. It doesn't support telnet.

Correction, it supports the telnet and ssh clients, and the ssh server... well a GUI to turn the ssh server on and off, both sshd and telnetd are on the Mac. You have to edit /etc/inetd.conf yourself to get telnet. It's in /usr/libexec/telnetd in case you are lame enough to want it...

Re:oops

[c_king]

The desktops have faster system bus speeds (133Mhz vs. 100Mhz) which can make a real difference in some applications. For example, Final Cut 3 introduced real-time effects in software, but I believe they work only on the faster bus machines.

Re:oops

[__rsub__]

the use profanity negates any logical (and for you, illogical) argument you are trying to make. go get vasectomy to go along with that lobotomy to clean out the gene pool for future generations. for the love of god, do it now you ignorant freak.

New 'wireless' keyboard and mouse

[charon_on_acheron]

The best feature isn't even mentioned on the Apple website. You apparently don't need a keyboard or mouse anymore. There must be a receiver built into the frame of the LCD that senses your brainwaves, and knows what you want to type, or click, or what alien you are aiming at.

Now that is so cool.

By the way, does the Superdrive mean they are re-evaluating their rejection of the floppy drive. Since Superdrives can read and write floppies, they have to support the format, even if there is not the actual hardware such as a floppy drive controller. Just wondering...

Re:New 'wireless' keyboard and mouse

[tao]

By the way, does the Superdrive mean they are re-evaluating their rejection of the floppy drive. Since Superdrives can read and write floppies, they have to support the format, even if there is not the actual hardware such as a floppy drive controller. Just wondering...

Huh? Where the f**k did you dream up that?! The Superdrive is a combined reader/recorder for DVD-R and standard CD-RW's, nothing else. And I'd really want one too...

Re:New 'wireless' keyboard and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeesh, still no floppy? I'm still not okay with that.

Remember those smarmy Goldblum commercials? "PC... Pretty Complicated"? Well, "iMac... I'm Missing A Component..."

Re:New 'wireless' keyboard and mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Your an idot! For what possible reason can you justify a floppy drive? A CD-RW will do all a floppy can and more you frickin dunce.

Re:New 'wireless' keyboard and mouse

[Seehund]

Your an idot!
Don't you mean "you're an iDot"?

I wish that laptops had the cool screen arm thingy

[John Harrison]

As I stare at my laptop screen each day I wish that I could raise it a bit without having the keyboard end up at my chin. Wouldn't it be cool/useful it laptops came with some mechanism for moving the screen independently from the base? I don't mean simply tilting it, but moving it up and down as well as turning it to either side. Moving it closer to me and further would be useful too.

The only problems that I could see with a feature such as this is that you might be able to change the center of gravity of the machine enough to tip it over and it might be difficult to design a mechanism that would be both lightweight and durable.

Apple didn't deliver!

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually the top thing we asked for was for Jobs and his iEgo to go away. And once again he disappoints.

New iMac is da bomb

[Richard5mith]

New iMac is da bomb, I want one. That screen is just too damn cool.

Bigger screens on iBooks, excellent.

Really nice, free image program in the shape of iPhoto. Fab, since I just bought a new digital camera.

No change to the G4, so I should get a good price when I sell mine (and buy an iBook probably).

Bit disappointed there was nothing hugely surprising, but that's really just because everybody expects them to create world peace, when in fact they're just a computer company.

Guaranteed PC manufacturers up and down the country are now trying to work out how to copy the new iMac though.

at least...

[Gehenna_Gehenna]

it didn't turn out like this

Re:at least...

[Anonymous Coward]

Your post looks familiar.

Yay, go BSD go!

[Anonymous Coward]

With Apple's support, the original prototype
Open Source BSD Unix(tm) is now the largest
volume shipping Unix(tm), eclipsing all other
*Linux and commercial Unix(tm) versions combined.
The new iMac is just one more platform that will
spread Unix to more and more users.

Re:Yay, go BSD go!

[Anonymous Coward]

How so? Last I checked Linux had nearly 30% of the server market (handily beating all combinations of Unix/BSD) and noone has ever done a proper study of the number of Linux desktops out there.

Do you have a study backing up this claim about OS X or are you just spouting off?

Yuck

[Burgundy Advocate]

Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit's...

Super-Mega-Fugly, my GOD it's FUCKING UGLY!

You know, if they were going to change the design that much, the least they could do is take some design cues from SGI or NeXT. Right now it looks like a bizarre roadsign with a tupperwear base.

Apple may have great hardware, but I can't figure out where they get their design cues. Well, besides the new iBook. Yum.

timecanada

[sinserve]

On my birthday, a representitive of TimeCanada
stoped me as I was about to enter my apartment.
"Don't be alarmed" he said, "Your friends are in
there, awaiting to surprise you."

Wow, a laptop without batteries

[sludg-o]

So the new iMac is basically a laptop without batteries. Gee, I better preorder.

(don't mod me down as a troll for telling the truth)

Re:Wow, a laptop without batteries

[VRisaMetaphor]

1. Show me the laptop that can burn DVDs.
   
2. Show me the laptop with a G4 processor and 15" screen for $1299.
   

Can we mod you down for being uninformed?

Re:Wow, a laptop without batteries

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it would be because you are a idiot. The superdrive is not avaliable on a laptop. The swivel lcd is not avaliable on a laptop. It can use desktop components instead of slower laptop ones. There is no laptop out there with all this for the price.

Re:Wow, a laptop without batteries

[Anonymous Coward]

www.sony.com

www.toshiba.com

www.ibm.com

Re:Wow, a laptop without batteries

[Anonymous Coward]

still don't see it, pc loooser.

the tech wreck is over, dot-con sucker.

14' Display?

[TheBracket]

Apple also announced other new products like a 14' display on some iBooks, and iPhoto

I think CmdrTaco might mean 14" (inchdes) not 14' (feet); while a laptop with a 14 foot display might be cool, it definitely wouldn't be practical!

Re:14' Display?

[Anonymous Coward]

J00 = SUXORZ

Re:14' Display?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah... Imagine carrying one of those around...

pretty much exactly what the rumormongers said

[SideshowBob]

So last year the rumor mongers predicted both these items, a flat panel iMac and a digital photo "i" application. Apple didn't announce either and everyone blamed the rumor mongers for hyping peoples expectations too high.

So this year Apple itself hypes like crazy ("Beyond the rumors. Way beyond") and then announces pretty much exactly what the rumor mongers predicted *last* year. Apple opens mouth, inserts foot, has no one else to blame but itself.

Vertical Use?

[SanLouBlues]

Are they gonna update OSX so the display could be easily rotated 90 deg. for long web pages and the like? That'd be cool.

Re:Vertical Use?

[wugmump]

I would hope that the machine knows when the display is being moved... that display coupled with a QTVR object movie would be sooooo cooool.... shift around the display to examine different sides of objects in question.

Re:Vertical Use?

[Saeger]

Don't you think simply moving your mouse (to rotate view) is infinitely easier than moving your entire body to swivel your display?

Think before you drool! :)

--

Re:Vertical Use?

[ambclams]

Are they gonna update OSX so the display could be easily rotated 90 deg. for long web pages and the like?

That would be pretty cool indeed. I seem to recall a monitor from long ago that would do that, the Radius Pivot. It could detect when the monitor was physically rotated and change its orientation from landscape to portrait. Of course, this was during the days when most Macs had built-in monitors and needed a (expensive) video card to use an external monitor, so its use wasn't all that widespread.

Speaking of vertical orientation, I wonder if the iMac could be rotated and mounted vertically on a wall. That seems like it would make for a really space-efficient workspace, especially if the monitor could be moved out of the way when it's not in use.

I don't know if this would be possible. I imagine it's not physically possible out of the box, but maybe with some additional mounting hardware. The only question is whether the iMac could survive such an orientation -- I would think it could, but it might be a problem for the hard drive or DVD/CD. Also, the monitor may not be able to swivel or reach far enough to position itself in a useful configuration with the base mounted on the wall.

Still, it sounds interesting, even if purely for the coolness factor.

Re:Vertical Use?

[g0at]

Well, until there's a Mac with a laterally-rotatable display, there's prolly not much pressing need.

What're you going to do, mount the iMac onto a wall or something with the monitor arm sticking out horizontally? 8)

Re:Vertical Use?

[stripes]

Well, until there's a Mac with a laterally-rotatable display, there's prolly not much pressing need.

Um, all their laptops. I rotate mine for reading PDF'ed books, since the reader will rotate the book and many PDFs work better that way.

It's amazingly useful. There were even CRTs at one time that would rotate, the display driver would handle the rotation for you though...

Re:Vertical Use?

[zorglubxx]

phh, around '89-'90 there was already a monitor that could do this. Dont remember the brand, anyway I doubt they are still around. Was very cool, as you tilted to horz or vert position the driver would change the resolution. One of my professors at the U had one in his office. Oh yeah, that was Hercules of course, way before VGA and all this color stuff.

Re:Vertical Use?

[g0at]

Actually you're right... the Radius monitors. I remember those from high school.

Good point about the laptops and reading PDFs; I hadn't actually thought of that. The screen-switching wouldn't be as elegant as a hardware solution though (since you'd have to hit a key or somesuch to tell the puter that you've turned it sideways).

Unless they mount IR sensors in the front and side, so it could determine where your body is in relation to the keyboard/chassis... that'd be funky. 8)

Re:Vertical Use?

[stripes]

Unless they mount IR sensors in the front and side, so it could determine where your body is in relation to the keyboard/chassis... that'd be funky.

They could use a mecury switch, as long as there was an overide it would be right almost all the time...

Re:Vertical Use?

[jcr]

Cool idea, but I think it might be very difficult to build it. Think about what would happen if someone kept rotating it and hitting the stops, with the leverage from the edge of a 15" LCD panel..

-jcr

Re:Vertical Use?

[iphayd]

No, as the screen doesn't rotate on that plane.

However, a hack to make a super wide desktop (requiring pivoting of the screen) is in the works. Users will be able to adjust the iLamp to see just what they are working on. Then, with a quick movement, they can focus on something else.

Another key feature: cost

[Masem]

CNN reported on the Time's flub with the pre-keynote news, but had additional analysis of the new iMac. Most importantly, besides Apple's attenuation with style, this iMac with DVD writer will be quite compariable in price to similar offerings from Dell or Compaq, $1800 vs $1600 respectively. If this was 3-4 years ago, I'd have expected similar machines from Apple and the PC clone makers to have a price difference of at least $500, but that appears to have evaporated; I'd suspect that the bulk of the cost of these units (Apple and PC) are in the flat-panel monitor, DVD-writer, and OS software; everything else is dirt cheap nowadays.

I don't ever expect an Apple and non-Apple machine to cost the same, but the more Apple can cut down that difference, the better off they are.

Re:Another key feature: cost

[markj02]

I don't think the price difference has evaporated. Let's look at the "entry-level" iMac, a $1300 machine. For around $1300, you get very nice laptops with 14"-15" screens. Or, for less than $1000, you can get a fast desktop PC with a 15" LCD screen. Furthermore, at the very low end of the market, CRTs are still the way to go because they are cheaper, and Apple is cutting themselves off from that market. The iMac is a neat machine, but it isn't cheap and it isn't low-end. For practical purposes, Apple doesn't have a low-end machine, and that's a problem for them.

Re:Another key feature: cost

[Ryan Amos]

Apple is still selling the "old" iMac, at least for now. For $799, it's really not a bad deal. I suspect they'll sell the "old" iMac till they can drop prices on the new one to under $1000. This strikes me more as Apple's "mid-range" machine, which they never really have had. The computing industry as a whole is less and less about the hardware and more about the marketing and software. This is probably also why a lot of highly-skilled tech jobs are moving overseas and a lot of us geeks are between jobs.

Re:Another key feature: cost

[jandrese]

I'm not sure you could get buy with $1000 for a cheap desktop PC (remember to pay for the power supply, case, motherboard, etc...) with a DVD writer and bundled software (including a consumer OS!). Too many people on Slashdot only count up the cheap components cost when they build a system (although if you install Linux on it the OS cost will be less (perhaps $0), but you won't have the nifty bundled photo manipulation and video software). Oh, and given Apple's track record (which I'm admittedly a little spotty on at times), the hardware will be of at least average (of not better) quality on average. This is stark constrast to the average $1000 PC that uses only the crappiest hardware slave labor can build most of the time.

Re:Another key feature: cost

[Graymalkin]

Like I said to the other dude, how much did the iMac cost originally when it first came out in 98? It wasn'y 799$ that's for damn sure. They also still sell the fucking CRT iMac if you are so inclined to save a couple bucks when buying a Mac. I think the point the guy was trying to make is that Macs aren't the price monsters that PC users generally assume they are. A 1800$ iMac has a Superdrive in it and a flat panel monitor. That's about what you'd pay for a BTO Compaq or Sony with a regular DVD-R in it (the Superdrive being arguably more useful since it can pretty much burn anything). The iMac is also designed to be an all in one package, the consumer asks "Hey can I take some movies I shot and edit them together into something people want to watch easily?" and they get pointed to an iMac. Of course you can get a Dell with a flat screen for a thousand bucks but what exactly are you getting? A 1GHz Celeron and a cheapo flat panel and some crap software Dell got a sweet OEM deal on. I'd put the 700MHz G4 up against a 1GHz Celeron and I'd definitely put Apple's iSoftware up against whatever Dell was packaging.

Re:Another key feature: cost

[maggard]

I don't think the price difference has evaporated. Let's look at the "entry-level" iMac, a $1300 machine. For around $1300, you get very nice laptops with 14"-15" screens.

Really? You can find a quality in-production/non-EOL'd laptop from a major manufacturer offering the same or better features of the new iMacs for US$1,300? I'm sure it's out there but it'll be tough to match, particularly when one starts counting in the hardware/OS integration Apple offers.

Besides, if you want a cheap laptop check out Apple's iBook line - very impressive at low prices.

Re:Another key feature: cost

[rho]

... and after all, all those companies making Super El-Cheapo "$699 Internet Specials" are doing so well. Witness eMachines. Witness Joe Bob's PC-o-Rama.

Making Yugos does not make money for a company. Making Hondas does make money. Get over it.

And, if you're not posting to /. from a $699 Internet Special, what do you know about the "market" that Apple is "cutting themselves off from"?

Re:Another key feature: cost

[markj02]

Well, I was posting from a $1000 low-end laptop with a 14.4" screen, a 1GHz AMD processor, 256M of RAM, and a DVD drive, bought about 6 months ago on sale. Even allowing for a smaller screen, the closest Apple configuration at the time was about $1800. Even six months later, now that we have 14" iBooks, the closest Apple offering has still costs $1800. Low-end PCs aren't "Yugos", they are pretty comfortable and affordable economy and compact cars. Apple makes nice hardware, but you do pay a premium.

Re:Another key feature: cost

[iphayd]

In other news: BMW dropped the price of their newly redesigned flagship car by 50%. Users of /. were reported to have complained as they were still more expensive than a Chevy.

BTW, Moderators: This is not a troll, but rather an attempt at sarcastically hinting that Apple machines are better than products from the industry whores (Dell, Compaqard)

Re:Another key feature: cost

[rho]

You're comparing laptops. I'm talking desktops. (does that laptop have Firewire ports and come with software to make use of it?)

Discuss this with me again in 2008. I'm still using a Powerbook 180c from 1993--a fine piece of hardware--and a Powerbook 5300ce.

My point still stands: nobody makes money from making cheap cars or cheap computers. It's a nearly non-existant market. Apple makes good computers and software, and they shouldn't have to apologize for it, nor ruin their advantage by catering to a market that basically doesn't exist.

Re:Another key feature: cost

[ksheff]

I spec'ed out a Dell Dimension 2100 to be as close as possible to the two low end models, and it was only $100-150 cheaper and a Dimension 4400 w/ a DVD-RW/CD-RW was $50 more than the top end iMac. The Gateway 300x was about $200 cheaper than the mid priced iMac while the Sony desktop was only $70 cheaper and the equivalent IBM model was $50 more. I couldn't find the price of an HP or Compaq since their websites were uncooperative.

Sure, you can build a much cheaper x86 system, but most people don't do that. They walk into a store and pick out a name brand machine. If one ignores the megahertz gap, and focuses on what the machines can do (which is what Apple will be pitching to customers), then they don't seem to be all that far out of line based on the 10-20 minutes I spent browsing around the different big name OEM web sites.

Re:Another key feature: cost

[stripes]

nobody makes money from making cheap cars or cheap computers

Some companies do, Hundai seems to be doing OK with cheap cars. Some of GM's cars are cheap. So are (or at least were) Ford's. VW did in the '70s, I think Honda use to make cheap cars as well. Many of the PC lines are cheap, and making some money.

That isn't the only way to make money. There is room in the car market for BMW and the like. Hopefully there is room in the computer market for Apple as well.

Re:Another key feature: cost

[rho]

GM and Ford do not make money on those cheap cars. They only produce them to bring their average MPG rating down as required by law.

Hyundai does do fairly well, I think, but they also have more expensive cars along with their cheaper cars.

Yugo was the only company to make nothing but cheap cars. They are out of business.

Re:Another key feature: cost

[stripes]

GM and Ford do not make money on those cheap cars. They only produce them to bring their average MPG rating down as required by law.

GM's Saturn use to only make cheap cars, and they turned a profit (well would have if you ignored the start-up costs, and did do quite well for a start-up car company). I can't say about the others because they don't really publish seporate numbers.

I do think it is better for a car company to produce a mix, but not because the cheap cars make no money. I think it is a good idea because people tend to have brand loyalty (even though they shouldn't in most cases), so as people become more successful (or at least have more cash to burn on cars) it is good to have something to sell them rather then offering two of the old ones :-)

Yugo was the only company to make nothing but cheap cars. They are out of business.

Lots of companys go out of bisness, Avanti went under but it doesn't mean "making 300 or fewer really fine cars per year" is unworkable.

Re:Another key feature: cost

[Anonymous Coward]

Correct - since 1999 to be exact, when USA bombed the "Zastava" ("flag", hah) factory in Yugoslavia.

Not really related to economic analysis, is it?

You're going to be waiting a while...

[Doktor Memory]

Until Apple makes a 1.5Ghz G5, they won't get me as part of thier market share.

You're going to be waiting a while, since Apple doesn't make CPUs of any speed -- that's Motorola and IBM's job.

Re:You're going to be waiting a while...

[gooberguy]

Bah, you know what I mean: Until a 1.5Ghz G5 is being sold by Apple, they won't get me as part of thier market share.

That better? I really sould use that preview button.

D/\ Gooberguy

Re:You're going to be waiting a while...

[Anonymous Coward]

Why 1.5GHz? ppc is about 30% "better" at the same frequency than x86 so you would still need more than 1.5GHz to surpass.

Re:You're going to be waiting a while...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, the old Apple lie again. I was hoping there would be another crop of fantasizing Steve-worshippers bring that up this morning.

Re:You're going to be waiting a while...

[Snowfox]

Why 1.5GHz? ppc is about 30% "better" at the same frequency than x86 so you would still need more than 1.5GHz to surpass.

I'm aware that different processor architectures perform differently at the same clock speed, but I'd like to see some hard numbers on this. People repeat the 30% and "one third" numbers a lot, and I'd like to know where they come from.

Does this mean that popular benchmarks are 30% faster at the same clock, or does this mean that Photoshop and a select few other flashy products perform 30% better?

Also, I hope someone Mac-savvy can comment on the bus speeds of the different Mac models, cache sizes, etc. Last I knew, Macs were still running on 100 and 133MHz busses, which can be rather limiting for many types of work. Are these specs dated, or are there other nifty performance-boosting aspects?

Re:You're going to be waiting a while...

[gooberguy]

I'm aware that different processor architectures perform differently at the same clock speed, but I'd like to see some hard numbers on this. People repeat the 30% and "one third" numbers a lot, and I'd like to know where they come from.

Mac processors are RISC, unlike the CISC x86s. RISC is much more efficient. I recommend this site, which will answer most of your questions: http://www.gcn.ou.edu/~jahern/comp_aps/ciscrisc.ht ml

d/\ Gooberguy

Re:You're going to be waiting a while...

[BdosError]

Well, that doesn't really help answer the "hard numbers" part of the question, as that article is ancient as hell (6 years!). The RISC/CISC lines are even more blurred now, and they don't necessarily tranlsate into better performance, though that may be the tendency. You can quote theory all you want, but let's see some actual tests.
Maybe that 30% figure held then, but what about now? That's what the asker (and I) would like to see. The chips have progressed, is there still an adavantage?

Re:You're going to be waiting a while...

[fitten]

Except that the Power Architecture instruction set has more instructions in it than the x86 instruction set does...
The terms "RISC" and "CISC" are pretty much useless. Load/Store architectures are usually cleaner, but if you look at the code produced by most compilers nowdays, they stay clear of the more complex memory operand instructions. Also, the "CISC" processors are optimized for Load/Store type behavior as well, even though they have the circuitry to support the "nasty" instructions. At the heart of the Intel and AMD x86 processors is your "RISC" core.

Re:You're going to be waiting a while...

[Jay Carlson]

ppc is about 30% "better" at the same frequency than x86

I'm aware that different processor architectures perform differently at the same clock speed, but I'd like to see some hard numbers on this. People repeat the 30% and "one third" numbers a lot, and I'd like to know where they come from

Does this mean that popular benchmarks are 30% faster at the same clock, or does this mean that Photoshop and a select few other flashy products perform 30% better?

Well, I did a benchmark last summer, although it's hardly popular. See also the slashdot story and John Carmack's post (cheap appeal-to-authority).

The most favorable interpretation is that, for the load in question, the G4/533 is roughly 21% faster than you might expect a P3/533 to be.

I've slowly been putting together another round of tests with more recent kernels; add another 10% or so for improvements there. So 30% is the rule of thumb I used to use. The OS X SPECint numbers I have imply a smaller clock-for-clock performance ratio, so I'm back to using 20% as my rule of thumb.

Keep in mind that I'm not that interested in floating point performance, and I have made no attempt to quantify it. As always, the best performance measurements are those made on the workloads you actually use.

(Snide remark: and if all you bought your computer for was to run SETI units, then that's a useful cross-platform comparison. :-)

Re:You're going to be waiting a while...

[Anonymous Coward]

why?im assuming youre basing it on

thats like saying you wont put a server on intel xeon chip because its not 1.5 mhz.

Re:You're going to be waiting a while...

[Snowfox]

Mac processors are RISC, unlike the CISC x86s. RISC is much more efficient.

I think that statement is a bit dated. The link you provided definitely is.

What you say may have been true before out-of-order execution, deep pipelining, predictive execution and sundry clever cache methods were introduced.

And the PowerPC line has migrated toward a more bloated instruction set, while the underlying architecture of the Intel (and Athlon, I believe) processors has moved toward RISC. It's tough to say who's closer to which architecture anymore. At best, you can point to ad copy as an indicator of what the company prefers you to call it.

And hell -- PowerPC doesn't even get a register count advantage anymore. L1 cache access speeds are identical to register access, and I believe that's been true since the Pentium III.

Re:You're going to be waiting a while...

[jedidiah]

It doesn't really matter.

At the same pricepoint, the x86 cpu's will be twice faster based on clock speed. So even if you accept claims that PPC's are twice faster, it doesn't matter in the end.

TIME magazine cover story

[avij]

Seems like the Time magazine cover story was OK with Apple, as there's a link to TIME.com right on the front page. Obviously the "spoiled surprise" was just a neat marketing trick.

Wow, another shape

[jeff13]

Oh I'm soooo excited. Another shape! Ooooo. Ahhhhh. Gosh, a G4 chip! How powerful. How much RAM? What video card? HOW MUCH!?!?!?!

I'm kidding. But really, is there any reason to be this expensive? It's hardly the Rolls Royce of hardware, no matter how cleverly the motherboard is laid out. Why apple insists on creating over priced hunks of plastic is mystifying.

Re:Wow, another shape

[Anonymous Coward]

Just wait a year. Sony and Dell will come out with a cheap knockoff. Sure, the plastic will be thin, and the seams won't quite fit together, but, hey, you didn't want a Rolls Royce. That's why you're driving a damn Yugo.

Re:Wow, another shape

[jeff13]

{
/if troll = ignore. }

Re:Wow, another shape

[Pope Slackman]

It's hardly the Rolls Royce of hardware

No, it's the BMW of hardware.
Mac hardware is the closest mass-market thing I've seen to UNIX workstation hardware.
It really is nice, if you can afford it.

C-X C-S

Re:Wow, another shape

[Anonymous Coward]

Why apple insists on creating over priced hunks of plastic is mystifying.

Gosh, I wonder. Maybe because people buy them?

Re:Wow, another shape

[Anonymous Coward]

people buy macs for what they offer them as a total package. Is it really that expensive? no. A PC of the same quality would be equal or more expensive.

Re:Wow, another shape

[jedidiah]

Actually, Unix "workstation" hardware is nothing that you want to be making comparisons to these days.

Re:Wow, another shape

[Anonymous Coward]

Why apple insists on creating over priced hunks of plastic is mystifying.

Because people who use computers to decorate their office rather than to do work buy them in droves, that's why.

Reason for PowerMac and iMac processor situation

[Infonaut]

The new, faster G4s (or call them G5s - same chip, regardless) have been in the pipeline for some time. My guess is Jobs wanted to put the new iMacs front and center right now. In three or four months, we'll likely hear about the new processors being placed in updated desktop machines.

heavy...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Apple also announced other new products like a 14' display on some iBooks..."

That's a pretty big display for a laptop :)

Great Consumer product.

[joel8x]

I know a lot of PC users will say that the specs are yesterday's technology, but they obviously have never had the pleasure of owning a Mac within the last couple of years. What you get when you by a Mac is so much more than a computer and the new iMac is a perfect example why. The original iMac was a fashion statement. It was something every college kid lusted after for their dorm rooms. This one is so stylish, that people will have them proudly diplayed in their houses, not just their kids' rooms. The fact that they gave the new iMac a G4 and an NVidia 32MB graphics card in that design is amazing to me.

Re:Great Consumer product.

[Anonymous Coward]

So why bother with the computing hardware at all? Just gut it and sell it as an ultra-fashionable $100 picture frame.

Re:Great Consumer product.

[Anonymous Coward]

lol fasion statement!

thats absolutley the most ignorant & dunderheaded reason to buy a computer ive ever heard of

Re:Great Consumer product.

[Anonymous Coward]

What are you talking about? Here at the OSU dorms, kids get mocked for having an iMac. How the heck are you supposed to play anything buy the sims and quake 3?

OOPS on the Superdrive

[charon_on_acheron]

My mistake, I thought that was the SuperDisk. This Superdrive is apparently a CD and DVD burner. Oops.

I guess I should have stayed with my main topic.

Imac on the cover of Time?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why doesn't the Time abandon all premise of objectivity here and just publicly kiss Steve Jobs macin-tush.

* SMACK *

The photo/video difference...

[Ariane 6]

Is striking...I honestly didn't know what to think of this creation from Apple's labs when I saw the little pictures online, but having seen the thing in action during the keynote, I have to say that yes, I do want one. Too bad I'll have to pay off my TiBook first :P

Some nice little jabs at Adobe and Time magazine sprinkled in, too...fun. Photoshop X does look nice, though, and I'm dling iPhoto as I write this. It looks sweet enough to make me want to get a camera.

Oh, and all those wondering about the Pro Line...I doubt anyone'd bet against new Powermacs at MW Tokyo this March, and unlike what was predicted for this show, I imagine that those really will have the G5.

Re:The photo/video difference...

[Anonymous Coward]

When is the Macworld Tokyo going to be in March?

Re:The photo/video difference...

[Ariane 6]

21-23 March

iPod prices

[Triv]

Don't know if y'all noticed, but they dropped the educational price of the ipod by ten bucks to 350ish as well.

It's getting more affordable at least. At this rate it'll be under a hundred in...four years, at which point it'll be replaced with a much better unit that can be implanted subcutaneously and run off of your nervous system.

"I've got you...under my skin."

Triv

Shame about MacOSX

[Chicane-UK]

Darn.. I was hoping one of the big announcements was going to be MacOS X on the PC..

But seeing as they cant even get it running quickly & reliably on their own hardware, asking them to port it over to the PC is a bit too much to ask :)

Ready for K-12?

[Xcruciate]

After seeing the new iMac design, I wonder how such a machine will hold up in K-12 education settings. How sturdy is the neck that the flat screen is attached to? Is it removable? Will it tip over somewhat easily? They de-evolved back to a tray load CDROM, Why? They (on higher priced models) use non-integrated speakers; after all the hype of less wires. Slot loads were great! I know that Apple would probaby like to see iBooks throughout K-12, but non-portable workstations are sometimes more useful in a classroom setting. In the end, consumers will let Apple know what they don't like, and Apple will revise the iMac again.

Re:Ready for K-12?

[Anonymous Coward]

...the tray-load CD is necessary for burning DVDs. Duh.

Re:Ready for K-12?

[Xcruciate]

Why?

Re:Ready for K-12?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because there is absolutely no way you can get a slot load dvd burner right now, not for another year at least.

Re:Ready for K-12?

[Graymalkin]

Ever stick an 8cm CD in a slot loading drive?

Re:Ready for K-12?

[altair87]

An even more important issue for the K12 market is price. I'm sorry but that's the first thing that school's look at is the sticker cost. The iMacs were getting pretty darn cheap ($799) for a seat.

You are right Xcruciate, I can see kids jerking that monitor all over the place and I wonder about the durability of the neck.

The new iMac is very cool, but I don't think they were targeting it at K12 market.

Re:Ready for K-12?

[gozar]

8cm disks work fine in slot loading drives, it's the irregular shaped disks (such as business card CDs) that cause the problem.

Re:Ready for K-12?

[HerrNewton]

Apple is selling US$699 iMacs to the K-12 education market.

Ugly

[Zephy]

Ugly ugly ugly. Looks like someone stuck a flatpanel in some turd, sprayed it white and called it an imac.

I'd like a better graphics card

[TurboDog99]

Since the graphics card can't be changed, I would have thought they'd use something other than what was considered low end at the beginning of last year. It will be a dinosaur by the end of this year. My PC that I haven't upgraded in a year and a half has a better graphics card (GeForce 2 GTS.)

Re:I'd like a better graphics card

[Anonymous Coward]

What, you're expecting a top of the line GeForce 3 Ti with all that other stuff for 1299? Most iMac owners aren't exactly hard core gamers.

Re:I'd like a better graphics card

[jasonbw]

If i remember correctly, the GF2 MX was mac compatible, but the rest of the 2 line...well, nothing was said that they were/were not.
Maybe they could have pried the GF3-ish chip from an xbox and used that.

Some specs

[90XDoubleSide]

Now that the keynote is finished, apple.com has been updated with sections on the new iMac , the new iBook and iPhoto, including the download (13.5MB).

Here are the official specs on the new iMacs from Apple's page:

The two bottom models have a 700 MHz G4, with the top one having an 800 MHz chip. All feature 256K processor speed L2 cache, but all have a 100 MHz bus, slightly slower than the towers. Bottom model has 128 MB RAM, all others 256; lower two models have 40 GB drives, top model has 60; bottom model has CD-RW, top two have DVD-R/CD-RWs, and finally the top two come with a set of Apple Pro Speakers.

All models have: GeForce 2MX/32MB DDR, 2 FireWire ports, 3 USB 1.1 ports on the machine and two on the keyboard, Mini-VGA output port, 56K modem, 10/100 ethernet, and a typical software bundle with all the iApps, Quicken 2002, Otto Matic, World Book Encyclopedia, AppleWorks, and a bunch of free browsers and readers preinstalled.

The screen is a 15" viewable TFT at 1024x768 at millions of colors.

Apple will continue to sell CRT iMacs starting at $799; the new models cost $1299, $1499, and $1799, respectively.

The new iBooks received more of a speed bump than a revolutionary upgrade like the iMac, but are still a great deal in consumer portables. They now stand like this:

500 MHz G3 in the bottom model, 600MHz in the others; bottom two have 128MB RAM, top has 256; 66MHz bus in the bottom, 100 in the top two; CD- ROM in the bottom, DVD-R/CD-RW in the top two; 15 GB disk in the bottom, 20 in the top two; and of course a 12.1" display in the bottom two and a 14" in the top one.

All the iBooks have 1 FireWire port and 2 USB 1.1 ports, a VGA out and a composite video out (w/ adapter), 56K modem, 10/100 ethernet, the small white power adapter, and the same bundle as the iMac.

The dimensions are 11.2x9.06x1.35" and 4.9 lbs. on the 12.1" models, and 12.7x10.2x1.35 and 5.99 lbs. on the 14" model, and the 12.1" models have a 42 watt-hour battery for an advertised 5 hours of power, with the 14" model having a 55 watt-hour battery with an advertised 6 hours of power.

Apple has done it again, offering the flat screen iMac starting at $1299 with a G4, even as many were doubting they could offer any flat screen desktop below $1499!

Re:Some specs

[frankie]

bottom model [iMac] has CD-RW, top two have DVD-R/CD-RWs
CD- ROM in the bottom [iBook], DVD-R/CD-RW in the top two

Close but not quite. Remember that "-R" means "Recorder" not "Reader". The correct specs are:

1. bottom: iMac has CD-RW, iBook has CD
2. middle: iMac and iBook have Combo (DVD/CD-RW)
3. top: iMac has Super (DVD-R/CD-RW), iBook has Combo (and 14")

And just to be anal, SuperDrive physically has DVD-RW capability, but Apple won't release -W support until the fight between DVD-RW and DVD+RW gets sorted out. Dumb reason, I know.

Re:Some specs

[anti-drew]

And just to be anal, SuperDrive physically has DVD-RW capability, but Apple won't release -W support until the fight between DVD-RW and DVD+RW gets sorted out. Dumb reason, I know.

Actually, it does have -W support, it's just not advertised. If you're lucky enough to have a SuperDrive and some DVD-RW media, try it ... it works! Burns and erases just fine.

Re:Some specs

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, Apple has done it again all right--bringing an overpriced, overhyped piece of shit to market.

Congratulations, Apple!

Re:So much for the Pro line. (photoshop)

[Dutchmaan]

I had heard over the weekend that the reason that Photoshop is delayed so badly is that they are rewriting it as a 64-bit application to take advantage of the G5 processor which appears to be slated for release around the same time.

Looks like MWNY will be for power users!

same DVD-General drive?

[klund]

Is the new DVD burner the same as the old Apple DVD burner? The one that won't actually let you do anything as useful as a CD burner will?
Quote:

What it quietly neglects to say is that you can't use it to copy or time-shift or record any audio or video copyrighted by major companies. Even if you have the legal right to do so, the technology will prevent you. They don't say that you can't use it to mix and match video tracks from various artists, the way your CD burner will. It doesn't say that you can't copy-protect your own disks that it burns; that's a right the big manufacturers have reserved to themselves. They're not selling you a DVD-Authoring drive, which is for "professional use only". They're selling you a DVD-General drive, which cannot record the key-blocks needed to copy-protect your own recordings, nor can a DVD-General disc be used as a master to press your own DVDs in quantity. These distinctions are not even glossed over; they are simply ignored, not mentioned, invisible until after you buy the product.

From John Gilmore's What's Wrong With Copy Protection

Re:same DVD-General drive?

[PCM2]

I'm not sure what this post was supposed to mean. The Apple DVD-R drive does everything a CD-R burner can. In fact, it is a CD-R burner, with the additional ability of being able to write to DVD-R media.

The "SuperDrive" is not an Authoring burner, no. Those still cost, last I checked, at least $1,000 more than a General class drive, and probably wouldn't be appropriate for a consumer machine anyway. Their primary market is the professional video production industry.

As far as I can tell, the only thing you're really criticizing the DVD-R drive for is that it doesn't let you use CSS encryption on your own discs. If you're against industry copy protection to begin with, then why on earth do you see that as a problem?

And BTW, yes -- if you use DeCSS-derived software on a Mac, you can make copies of commercial DVDs. The only constraint is that the data contained on the original disc must fit within the capacity of DVD-R media, which is not yet as sophisticated as pressed DVDs. Both Authoring and General DVD-R media can only hold 4.7GB of data, which is half the size of a mass-produced, double-layer DVD disc -- the format that most commercial DVDs seem to be shipping on these days.

Re:same DVD-General drive?

[Jeff DeMaagd]

Well, for one CSS has long been a useless defense against anything but casual copying (remember DeCSS), I forget how long it takes to decrypt a DVD, but I'm sure it takes longer to extract the actual data from the drive than it takes to decrypt that data.

So loosing that copy protection actually looses nothing now.

Re:same DVD-General drive?

[Anonymous Coward]

Duh. So what? The computer is designed and marketed for MAKING your own DVD's, not COPYING someone else's DVD content. What you are missing is that Apple has made it so easy to author movies and DVD's that anybody can do it. Even geeks.

DVD video discs are widely known to be copy-protected ... if you ever bought one with the intention of copying it you were already out of luck without any help from Apple.

Re:same DVD-General drive?

[Ab0rtRetryFail]

Suprisingly, many movies only take up a single layer on a DVD. A Bug's Life CE uses 1/2 of the 8.4 gig DVD for each transfer (widescreen and recomposed fullscreen), so you can burn a copy of either version once you've ripped and DeCSSed it. With all the added content on discs now, and with the multitude of audio tracks, it wouldnt surprise me if you could scrunch most movies to 4.7 GB once you remove extraneous audio tracks and compress the video a bit. Interestingly enough, Apple uses the OLD version of A Bug's Life to show off its widescreen TiBooks, at least at my local Apple store. If it had the Collector's Edition of A Bug's Life, it would look A LOT better.

Superdisk

[ZigMonty]

IIRC, you're referring to the Superdisk drive. Apple has named a product "Superdrive" before though, the 3.5" floppy drives that could read MS-DOS disks (late 80s).

It looks cool, could be a weapon.

[mx90]

It looks too much like a lamp to me. That little neck for the screen would be a good handle to beat someone over the head with the base.

I can see it now:

girlfriend: cmon, lets go out
me: just... one... more... frag...
girlfriend: you've been playing q3 all day
me: camper!
girlfriend: arrrggggggg!

Jobs' definition of victory...

[PeterClark]

This just brings to mind a quote that the Times Canada article (now pulled) had from Jobs: "Victory in this industry is survival." He goes on by saying that Apple intends to survive by "innovating." Well, we all know that "innovation" is buzzword-compliant and really doesn't mean much these days, but it is clear that innovation for Apple (at least with this iLamp) is more centered around form than function. Yes, there's the usual bit about how much easier computing is going to be. Ra, ra, ra. Great for the grandmas of the world that have lived all their life quite hapilly without such features as iPhoto and whatnot. The real question is, will this new form shore up Apple's declining business?
Personally, I would be concerned any time a business equated "victory" with survival. However, given the current tech industry, perhaps that's not so far off.
:Peter

Re:Jobs' definition of victory...

[Anonymous Coward]

The real question is, will this new form shore up Apple's declining business?

How successful in the business world you must be to disdain a mere $1,450,000,000 in revenue for the third quarter of 2001, compared with $1,425,000,000 the previous quarter and $1,431,000,000 the quarter before that. And if Apple has only $2,310,000,000 in cash and cash equivalents on hand (more than enough to run the entire company without any income for six months), I can only stagger at your cigar box of change.

Re:Jobs' definition of victory...

[crawling_chaos]

We are seeing a mature market at work here. For the average user there is very very little to differentiate modern desktop computers from each other. The average user does not care that his/her machine has a 2 Gigahertz peni^wprocessor, they just want to get e-mail, write letters and possibly mess with the pictures from their brand new one megapixel digicam that they got at Wal-Mart for a hundred bucks.

Why have so many PT Cruisers and new Beetles been sold? An old boxy Buick outperforms both cars and is so much cheaper. Many people with large disposable incomes prefer form over function. That seems to be Apple's target market.

Re:Jobs' definition of victory...

[imneuromancer]

The quote that you mangled and repuposed is "Form Follows Function" from Louis Sullivan, an architect of skyscrapers. The point of the quote is that if a creation is to be successful, its form must be molded from what you do with it.

In computer terms, then, it would make complete sense that Apple would try to create new forms of products that follow the function to which they are detailed. People use them on their desktop and look at them all day. It therefore makes sense that you try to meld the computer into their environment.

The current iMac does this in the following ways:
1) reduces the total number of cables you need. Theoretically, if one was to use AirPort and a wireless keyboard/mouse, one would have the power cord as the only thing mucking up the desktop. What cords are there come out of the back but are still easily reachable.

2) The high use of firewire and USB devices in daisy-chains with no power requirements (although many devices still have external power) further reduces the need for cabling.

3) The screen is highly positionable, making working with it much more ergonomic. Using LCDs are easier on the eyes, especially if positioned correctly.

4) The ease of postioning of the screen makes changing the environment easier... if the environment CAN be changed, but only with a great deal of work, then most people will not change it.

5) The power of the G4 (with a decent amount of RAM that is) is enough for most people... and by most people I mean even most geeks. Gamers would probably not like the iMac because you *CAN* get more powerful boxen for cheaper, but this is a very specialized use. For what most people use their computers, including developers, the new iMac is well within their power requirements (and if you need more, then you probably should be compiling or developing on a more powerful machine or a server farm).

So I think that you are completely missing the point about why Apple is doing such a great job. To put it in a "geek's" perspective, they are simply fulfilling the same goal as we (developers) want: to enable people to do stuff. Sometimes we do this in the form of a J2ee b2b app. Sometimes we make it easier to share files, sometimes we make burning CDs easeir... but the point of software is to make tasks that used to be impossible easy to do.

To those that hate Apple because they are trying to bring ergonomic Human-Computer interfaces to both hardware and software, I say get out of the business. You make all of us true developers look bad. Real developers realize that the end goal is not to satisfy some egotisitcal power trip (BOFH), but rather to maybe make the world a little better through computing.

And I personally think that Apple is doing that.

P.S. Apple's sales are down (isn't everyone's?) but their profits are still VERY healthy. Since Jobs has taken over, what was once a company on the edge of irrelevance and bankruptcy is now a pretty powerful company again. Beware in saying that people do not want well-designed Apple products: the numbers will say that you are wrong.

Re:Jobs' definition of victory...

[toddhisattva]

it is clear that innovation for Apple (at least with this iLamp) is more centered around form than function.

Hey, if Unix isn't function enough for you, what the hell is?

Re:Jobs' definition of victory...

[overunderunderdone]

but it is clear that innovation for Apple (at least with this iLamp) is more centered around form than function.

It is about form AND function - even about form FOLLOWING function. Moving to a UNIX based OS is function. Highly integrated software bundles that are "best of breed" (don't you hate that term - but these really are) in their respective niches is function. And while alot of the decisions about form factor are about what Steve Jobs finds aesthetically pleasing if you listened to the key-note the fundamental decisions about form were made so that form would FOLLOW function. The initial designs were like the "20th anniversary mac" a flat panel with the guts of the computer positioned vertically on the back of the panel. Jobs didn't like it BECAUSE it was form over function. Mounting it vertically lost you many of the advantages of having a flat screen (which was no longer flat) made the monitor difficult to adjust, entailed a perfomance hit on drives because they had to be mounted vertically. Having a flat screen that can be positioned however you like is FUNCTION having a very small footprint is FUNCTION. Having few wires is FUNCTION. Even where "function" was "sacrificed" to form it was a deliberate decision based on the specific functions required by the target market. Limited access to the guts of the computer and limited upgradability is a very deliberate, thought out decision based on the fact that the target - non tech-savvy consumers - don't tinker with the internals of their computers. They WANT it to be a "black box" that "just works" without bothering them about the details. That is an anathema to geeks but then this isn't meant for geeks, get the mini-tower if you want upgradeablity and access to the guts. And if a geek really likes the iMac for it's other features I'm sure if he truly is a geek he will hack around the limitations and even have more fun and a greater sense of accomplishment for having done so.

Am I Now Immune...

[pr0t0]

...to the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field? I guess I have to see one in person, but the new iMac looks plain stupid. I so wish I didn't feel that way. I saw the keynote at the Apple Store, and although we all clapped, many expressed disappointment. Under the hood, the improvements are stellar, but on the surface? I was hoping for wireless keyboard and mouse. Can video be sent wirelessly? How about an iMac that "senses" one or more wireless flat panels? H2H gaming! I really hope it does well, but I won't buy one.

Re:Am I Now Immune...

[Andy_R]

Can video be sent wirelessly?

Just imagine if this were possible! We could just put the screens in our living rooms, and people could broadcast all kinds of entertainment to us! It would be a sort of Radio but with moving pictures!

Ah, we can but dream of a time when such marvels might be possible!

Re:Am I Now Immune...

[Bearpaw]

...to the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field? I guess I have to see one in person, but the new iMac looks plain stupid. I so wish I didn't feel that way. I saw the keynote at the Apple Store, and although we all clapped, many expressed disappointment.

Now maybe I'm just relatively new to the Mac world, but my impression is that the supposed RDF is meant tongue-in-cheek. Whatever Steve announces, many Mac users express disappointment. He could announce the successful test of a warp drive, and some whiner in the back would be going, "Jeez, is that all? Boy, they really over-hyped it."

Re:Am I Now Immune...

[medcalf]

Can video be sent wirelessly?

Just imagine if this were possible! We could just put the screens in our living rooms, and people could broadcast all kinds of entertainment to us! It would be a sort of Radio but with moving pictures!

But then I'd be stuck replacing my TV....

Re:Am I Now Immune...

[Anonymous Coward]

You know moderation is broken when the zillionth link to BBspot's "iDildo" article gets modded up to (4, Funny), and this gets nothing...

Re:Am I Now Immune...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahh, you laugh now, but broadcast television is starting to go away ... as of January 1st, NBC dropped broadcasting in San Francisco entirely.

Re:Am I Now Immune...

[Anonymous Coward]

He could announce the successful test of a warp drive, and some whiner in the back would be going, "Jeez, is that all? Boy, they really over-hyped it."

Except that what he would be calling a "warp drive" would really just be a 1997 Ford Taurus with a new bodystyle that resembled the typical pile of junk in a suburban garage.

Re:Am I Now Immune...

[Stinger]

> Can video be sent wirelessly?

Just imagine if this were possible! We could just put the screens in our living rooms, and people could broadcast all kinds of entertainment to us! It would be a sort of Radio but with moving pictures!

Ah, we can but dream of a time when such marvels might be possible!

But it is! We just got 100:1 compression too! Now we'll be able to send full screen video over FM radio!!

Re:Am I Now Immune...

[Anonymous Coward]

WHOOOSH! that's the sound of a joke having flown over your head.

Marketshare PC Users

[mattscape]

I just saw the Keynote in the Apple store in Palo Alto. And I was pretty amazed too.
I guess I'm switching over and going to buy the new Ibook.

But for me the big question is:
How many PC Users will Apple get with the new IMac etc ?
Will Pc users adobt to the new apps and os ?

I hope so because the long discussed great mix of Unix and Mac Design in MacOSX and the GREAT hardware they presented today, I think this is worth more than 5 % marketshare.

Ohhh and PLEASE Apple Germany:
Make the price the same as in the US !!!
Why do I have to pay appr. 300$ more than in the US ?

Re:Marketshare PC Users

[Anonymous Coward]

Because, my friend, in your stupidity you insist on electing politicians who are more than happy to "provide" ( using your money) for all your needs in your little socialistic heaven.
Of course, this costs a lot of your money and this is why Macs are $300 more than in US.

Re:Marketshare PC Users

[mattscape]

not going to reply to that.
but in the case you come back.
i just read about a book.
maybe you would like to read it:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/080506388 9/ ref=rm_item

see you
matt

Re:Marketshare PC Users

[Anonymous Coward]

Because, my friend, in your stupidity you insist on electing politicians who are more than happy to "provide" ( using your money) for all your needs in your little socialistic heaven. Of course, this costs a lot of your money and this is why Macs are $300 more than in US. hmmm... with this kind of statement I'm *really* wondering who's stupid... Just a thought.

Re:Marketshare PC Users

[Anonymous Coward]

My observation is, that consumer electronics which is new and needs to gain market share, is sold for a much lower price in the US than in the rest of the world. Later, when the product is established, the prices are very likely to drop outside the US.

Basically the US Market is used to initiate the secondary market (Software etc.) which is needed to sell the product at all.

That's nothing to do with socialism. To my knowledge Mac's are comparably expensive, whether in Sweden or in the UK (which is the most un-socialistic country here in Europe).

Re:Marketshare PC Users

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly my thought when I read this. Thank you!

Re:Marketshare PC Users

[tequesta]

Try getting it in another European country. It's just 2200 instead of 2550 in the Netherlands, for example. A new keyboard is cheap.

Re:Marketshare PC Users

[mattscape]

well still "old" models like the ibook have a huge gap.
I mean I'm willing to pay more for a great product but not more because of a different keyboard.

I just checked: the gap at the new i book is appr. 550 euro !!!

Re:Marketshare PC Users

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm. right - I just cheked that too. I remember that there /have been complains/ against Apple Germany for their pricing policies. Somebody else made the hint, that they're much cheaper in Holland.

Anyway: I won't buy from Apple Germany.

Re:Marketshare PC Users

[Anonymous Coward]

I just checked the iMac: $1299 (not including sales tax) in the US, EUR 1599 (not including value added tax) in Germany.

If I calculate correctly, the german price is about $185 (or 14.4%) higher than the US one.

Too much, if you ask me, but nothing like the difference that you state.

I suspect you've looked at german prices including VAT (which goes to the state and not to Apple).

Re:Marketshare PC Users

[ghostdoguk]

errrm I guess you live in the worlds biggest democracy . Germany is in no way a socialist state.

It's pretty amazing.

[vought]

As much as people will probably bash it here, it's groundbreaking in a lot of ways.

The industrial design proves that you don't have to put a computer in a box. As consumers get used to having their electronics packaged their way, this type of talent will become more and more important.

Witness the 'shabby chic' home decoration that's become the rage among new boomers. They want things familiar and comfortable, not boxy.

Re:It's pretty amazing.

[gribbly]

"They want things familiar and comfortable"

In what sense, exactly, is the new iMac "familiar"? And it may be ergonomically comfortable, but that's not what you meant, is it?

grib.

I like the "dance around the pricing" statement

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, for the same price as a year ago...maybe they can sell some stock with that same line...

that's the crappy part

[xueexueg]

the 12" model is 1024x768. I bought the 12" because it crammed those pixels into a smaller area.

the 14" model is 1024x768. They seem to expect people to buy a computer just so it will take up more room in their briefcase/backback.

I was hoping the 14" would be at least 1280x1024 or something: it's really not out of the question.

Re:that's the crappy part

[pivo]

The iBook titainium is only 1152 x 1024 but it looks good anyway. Maybe that's because of the nice anti-aliasing. Anyway, I agree it'd be nice to have higher resolution. I really expected it in the higer priced titainium.

Re:that's the crappy part

[brianosaurus]

Yeah. Totally. My girlfriend's Dell laptop has a 14" screen with 1400x1050 resolution. Its totally sweet. My powerbook's 13whatever by 768 is so cramped in comparison.

I'm tempted to buy a new iMac to replace my 2-year-old iMac DV SE (400Mhz G3), but it's 15" screen is still only 1024x768, which is ridiculous for such a big screen.

- b

Re:that's the crappy part

[Anonymous Coward]

1152 x 1024 but still only one button for the touch pad.

Re:that's the crappy part

[mojo-raisin]

It's quite simple. I switched from Macs to PCs 4 years ago b/c you can get much cooler hardware for the PC. I naively thought this was about to change. Looks like Apple will be lucky to retain market share until they start thinking about THE SPECS of their machines (and not how cute they look).

Re:that's the crappy part

[Anonymous Coward]

Clue time: You are not the market Apple wants.

Cooler? Neither in the caloric nor in the aesthetic sense... well, not to anyone whose knuckles don't drag on the ground when they walk at least.

Re:that's the crappy part

[pivo]

Oops, I meant 1152 x 768

Re:that's the crappy part

[Jeremi]

Looks like Apple will be lucky to retain market share until they start thinking about THE SPECS of their machines (and not how cute they look).

This would be true if Apple's target market was Slashdot readers. It isn't. The people who are likely to buy one of these little cuties don't know from specs, they just know that it looks 'neat' and it does the things they want to do.

Re:that's the crappy part

[71thumper]

I went from a Dell 7500 with the 15.1" 100x1050 to a G4 TiBook. While I love the TiBook, the screen sucks in comparison.

The size is good, but it'd be better with about 20% greater resolution.

Re:that's the crappy part

[Ikari Gendo]

One of THE SPECS is that some people don't appreciate eyestrain.

Re:that's the crappy part

[bill.sheehan]

No, it's not. The iBook mainly appeals to kidlings, with their sharp eyes and clear vision. Us older folks have a problem with 1024x768 @ 12.1". I think I'm the market for the 14" screen. At least, I would be the market if the iBook weren't so woefully underpowered. Alas, the curse of presbyopia...

Re:that's the crappy part

[waterbug]

Well my girlfriend's laptop has something _wayyy_ sweeter than that!

Oh. Are we still talking about computers?

Re:that's the crappy part

[Cryptnotic]

Cooler hardware? Maybe if you're into water cooling or having 7 68dB fans in the average system (2xCase, 1xCPU, 1xMotherboardChipset, 1xVideoCard, 2xPowerSupply.

Apple systems are all about providing the best user interface available. If the processor power isn't sufficient, I expect someone to provide an auxilliary processing power solution soon (via a networked x86 machine in another room running Linux and a special Apple processing daemon).

Cryptnotic

Re:that's the crappy part

[Anonymous Coward]

Uhh huh uhh huhhhh....

Re:that's the crappy part

[Refrag]

I have an 600MHz iBook. It isn't woefully underpowered. Hell, it isn't underpowered. What exactly do you want to do with it?

What a huge letdown

[Reality Master 101]

Okay, I see they have a new iMac in a typically Apple-style weird case. Obviously not designed for me (like most Apple products), but hey, someone might like it.

But was this worth all the hype all week? "This one is big, even for us". "Beyond the rumor sites. Way beyond."

To be honest, I was really, really hoping that they would finally release OS X for standard Intel hardware. That would have excited me for the first time since 1984 when the Mac first came out (I was an original owner of a Mac). I really detest Apple the company, but that would have really excited me. The first viable operating system competitor to Microsoft in what, 10 years?

But again, Apple shows no vision and stays safe in their little niche market with the their safe crowd who forgive them anything and pay any prices.

Yes, I know Apple is a hardware company, but they shouldn't be. Microsoft didn't do too badly as a software company, did they?

Come on Apple, get a clue and, to quote someone, "think different". Get out of your comfortable limited world and enter the big world.

Re:What a huge letdown

[Anonymous Coward]

What is so hard to understand? Apple is one stop shopping for your Computer. They are a hardware and software company which makes probably 90% of all profits from hardware. Everything Apple ties into it's hardware. It is the bread and butter of the company. OS X is what drives the hardware, the only time you would probably ever see OS X on x86 is if Apple switches to x86 over PowerPC. Maybe some kind of stripped down OS X Server for Intel or a "professional" Darwin in a box, but I doubt it.

Re:What a huge letdown

[Anonymous Coward]

My God, this is the first time I've actually heard you say something intelligent!

But of course, the Apple fanatics who have moderation points have marked you as a troll (as they have any voices of dissent in this story). This is a real pity.

(Posted anonymously to preserve my precioussss karma)

Re:What a huge letdown

[Anonymous Coward]

Quoth the idiot:

They are a hardware and software company which makes probably 90% of all profits from hardware.

And this is the reason that they will never be more than a niche player in the computer market. Computer hardware has been commoditized. Apple has failed to recognize this, and as such, will never be a major player ever again.

The ladies dig it!

[capedgirardeau]

It looks nice enough, females of the species might not object to its prominent placement in my life.

What the heck is that thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Where's the rest of it?

possibly more significant (in the long run)

[SideshowBob]

... was the announcement that Mac OS X is now the default boot OS on every new Mac Apple ships.

At last the long awaited dream is realized: UNIX for the masses. The last, best hope of stemming the Redmond tide. Laugh at my hyperbole but Moms everywhere are a lot more likely to be UNIX users now than ever before. Thats really something.

Re:possibly more significant (in the long run)

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea all 2% of the market. woohoo.
Seriously until osx runs on x86 you are working with a capped market. Right now OSX is probably only at 30% market share for ALL macs out there. A few years from now you'll get a 80-90% but even then like I said you capped at apples 2% market share.

Re:possibly more significant (in the long run)

[staeci]

how long I wonder will it take until people realise that OSX doesn't make people into unix users - it makes them into Aqua users. Its a bit like saying that windows turned people into DOS users. I mean it is better than than the alternative but still...

No G5!?!?!? Let the bitching begin.

[cvd6262]

You should hear my co-workers who were convinced the new G5 was going to be announced. Now they're offended that Apple is upgrading the iMac, of all things, to a G4, while the power users' tools remain the same.

Re: No G5!?!?!? Let the bitching begin.

[fireproof]

Geez . . . Mac people can be weird sometimes. The bizarre ideas they come up with AND THEN BELIEVE are sometimes simply amazing. Anyone in their right mind knew that the G5 hasn't been stable for long enough to provide for an appropriate amount of time to adequately design and test components such as the logic board.

Disclaimer: I'm a Mac user, and have used machines such as a Plus (still have my first Plus, with the upgraded 4 megs of RAM and a fan that I added myself by cutting a hole in the top to reduce the heat it began to generate), IIcx, Quadras, and I now have a G4 tower and an iBook.

Disclaimer for Linux folk: Yes, I use Linux too. Love it.

At least Linux folk don't have LinuxOSRumours.com.

Re: No G5!?!?!? Let the bitching begin.

[Anonymous Coward]

At least Linux folk don't have LinuxOSRumours.com.

What for when you have Slashdot?

Re:No G5!?!?!? Let the bitching begin.

[Knobby]

There are more announcements on the way tomorrow! Don't rule out a G5 or a few more G4's in the Professional Quicksilver enclosures..

Low end limbo, not good...

[scotsalmon]

So for the low end, Apple now offers...well, nothing, really; Steve said that the lineup will be all flat-panels, which means the classic iMac is going away. The iBook is their cheapest "current" computer, but not everyone wants a notebook. Next is the basic new iMac at $1300 -- not available until the end of this quarter at the earliest.

It makes me wonder what will happen to all the old (2001) iMacs still for sale (and perhaps more to the point, when the classic iMac will lose its spot on store.apple.com). Old iMacs should be cheaper because they're obsolete now that their replacement has been announced, but realistically the replacement isn't replacing them if it costs 50% more, so it seems to me that there still ought to be decent demand and the price might stay put.

Whatever happens to the old ones, though, the fact that the cheapest new iMac is well over $1k and is, in fact, more expensive than their notebook is a Bad Thing. Not that I'm personally in the market for the low-ender, nor do I think Apple should complete strictly on price, but I do think if they're going to take an option out of their price/performance lineup they should be ready to legitimately replace it.

Re:Low end limbo, not good...

[Graymalkin]

Wait...how much did the original Bondi iMac cost when it was released? I've give you a hint, it wasn't 799$, 899$, or 999$. Also if you care to look at Apple's website they are still selling the 2001 iMacs for a while, most likely until all orders of them have been fulfilled. The CRT iMac WILL go the way of the beige G3 and All-in-one PowerMac but you'll still be able to pick them up used from plenty of places.

Re:Low end limbo, not good...

[cynical]

Apple still offers a CRT-based iMac for $799.

See the iMac/G3 section on the Apple website.

Re:Low end limbo, not good...

[MaxwellsSilverHammer]

$1299. Same as the baseline of the new one.

Re:Low end limbo, not good...

[MacGod]

Actually, Apple stills offers the old form factor iMac, now redubbed the iMac G3, starting at $799 for the low end. Go to www.apple.com/imac/g3 for details

If this was a regular PC company...

[scott1853]

it wouldn't be news. The other 96% of the market has had these options for awhile now.

Re:If this was a regular PC company...

[banky]

Which PC maker has a DVD burner shipping standard? Just curious, not trying to be smartass.

Re:If this was a regular PC company...

[scott1853]

Well, I'm thinking more along the line of individual component upgrades and not a prebuilt package, although any non-major pc manufacturer would gladly order a DVD burner and charge accordingly should a customer request it.

But what will the DVD burner really get you right now. CDRs are still good right now for many reasons. I can burn a VCD if I want, plus I can use the same media for my MP3 cdplayer as well as use it as a cheap backup mdia.

The average user doesn't need a DVD burner. It's like giving grandma a T1 connection when she can barely handle e-mail.

Remember though, I said "right now".

Re:If this was a regular PC company...

[__aajqwr7439]

if this was a regular pc company, all they'd have to announce is someone else's latest chip running somone else's latest os on industry-standard parts.

where's the fun in that?

xox,
dead nancy

Re:If this was a regular PC company...

[banky]

I respectfully submit that Apple is no longer targeting Grandma. It seems right now, they're targeting expatriate Win32 users who are tired of Dell/Gateway/Compaq. I, for one, am sorely tired of buying a Wintel PC. Servers, sheesh, that's easy, but desktop, it's a frigging dance I don't want to deal with anymore. They're aiming at people like me.

At the same time, yes, I agree that strictly speaking, no one REALLY needs writeable DVD, but I also think that's because no one has really made a killer app for it. It hasn't hit the masses very hard, so people aren't dying to get one. Apple's counting on 2 things: being there when it happens, and being there first.

Look at it like this: if Apple DIDN'T release a DVD burner, at all, and then Dell *did*, that would be bad. For Apple anyway.

Apple is the R&D Dept. and test market for the entire PC industry.... if DVD writers turn the Mac faithful into amateur Spielbergs, then Dell will ship them cheap and in quantity. If no one ever really finds a strong use for it, then they'll just kinda be one of those things that the Mac die-hards use as "we're better than you" fodder. :)

Re:If this was a regular PC company...

[bpowell423]

I think the difference isn't that you _can't_ do everything the new iMac can do with a PC, just that it's not standard in most PC's, and you definitely can't match the footprint. This new iMac is the sort of device you can give your grandma, along with a video camera with firewire output and she can start sending you DVD's of the local Bingo night. Nobody's doing anything in the computer business that's exclusively theirs, but Apple has been doing a very good job as of late in packaging things nicely. If I was in the market for a computer right now, I'd have to look at this new iMac. It'd definitely look nicer in the corner of my dining room (only place I've got for a computer right now) than my current beige box PC.

Re:If this was a regular PC company...

[yzf750]

Which PC maker has a DVD burner shipping standard?

Sony for one. $1199.00 but no monitor, and sold out online. Best Buy probably has them.

Re:If this was a regular PC company...

[jcr]

At the same time, yes, I agree that strictly speaking, no one REALLY needs writeable DVD, but I also think that's because no one has really made a killer app for it.

I disagree: the DVD makes a dandy backup device.

-jcr

Re:If this was a regular PC company...

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh, DVD-R == 4.7GB backup device...

That is one thing you can use it for while you wait to gain some creativity in your little brain thinking of all the other things you can do with the drive.

Re:If this was a regular PC company...

[stripes]

I disagree: the DVD makes a dandy backup device.

One the one hand more convent getting around 4G (4.7G?) on one disc, you can have more crap before you need to figure out how to split it up. Nice.

On the other hand it is $5/disc for DVD vs. $0.05 or less (I have 200 free CD-Rs so far) for CD-Rs. That's $0.001/M vs. $0.00007/M (assuming 4.7G for DVD, and a mere 640M on a $0.05 CD-R).

I donno, I'll stick to CD for my backup for now. I'll be happy to let others drive down the DVD-R prices.

(Ok, I'm off to write a perl script to help me back up my pictures...)

Server?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wasn't the Mac to be touted as a server? I cannot image a server room filled with these... YMCA perhaps?

Re:Server?

[Anonymous Coward]

Servers?
OS X, yeah maybe, but not on the iMac models.

evolution, not revolution

[markj02]

Apple reveals a bigger iBook, a not-so-low-end desktop machine with a built-in LCD screen at a not-so-entry-level price, and some software (did I miss anything?). That's nice and a logical evolution, but it doesn't extend Apple's product range or widen Apple's appeal. A few people may buy the iMac for its funky design, and others will likely not touch it. Some people will be convinced by OSX's (now standard on all models) better software quality compared to Windows, but most people probably don't know or don't care.

Notably absent was an Apple PDA, where Apple could have demonstrated fundamentally new technology (OSX, in contrast, has been is a great engineering effort, but is an evolutionary development from NeXTStep and MacOS).

The markets apparently weren't "blown away" either, as Apple stock is down for the day as of 3pm EST. I think Apple overhyped this one.

Apple is, and remains, a high-end, high-quality vendor for a niche market with a particular taste. In comparison, no matter how nice a car an RX-7 may be, not everybody will want to drive one. Apple will not take over the world, at least not with its current product range. Most sorely missing from their product range is a smaller, cheap desktop (a sub-$1000 cube, maybe) and an ultralight laptop.

Re:evolution, not revolution

[tao]

Apple is, and remains, a high-end, high-quality vendor for a niche market with a particular taste. In comparison, no matter how nice a car an RX-7 may be, not everybody will want to drive one. Apple will not take over the world, at least not with its current product range. Most sorely missing from their product range is a smaller, cheap desktop (a sub-$1000 cube, maybe) and an ultralight laptop.

You mean, like the $799 iMac (the non-LCD generation) and the TiBook (although 2.45 kg might not be ultra-light, it's still acceptably light, imho)?!

Re:evolution, not revolution

[markj02]

I can't buy the "$799 iMac" at CompUSA (I think it's a special educational deal) and it's a pretty limited machine even compared to $800 PCs. At 128M, it isn't really good for running Apple's now-standard OSX. That price is basically a closeout price for a discontinued model.

And, no, the TiBook is not an ultralight laptop by any stretch of the imagination. Maybe it's "acceptable" to you, but that doesn't make Apple's selection any less limited. In the PC world, you can get laptops weighing around 2 pounds (1kg), laptops with 10h battery life, and laptops with a wide variety of pointing devices. They sell because lots of people want those features.

Re:evolution, not revolution

[tao]

Yes, but Apple is one single vendor, and can't possible match the joint offerings from all the different PC-laptop vendors. They have to focus on a few products, and do those extremely well. Imho they've been quite successful.

As for the $799 iMac, it's available at the Apple online store, and is for everyone, not just students. But I agree, it's a limited machine. But you asked for a sub $1000-machine, not for a powerful sub $1000-machine in your original post...

Re:evolution, not revolution

[markj02]

Well, I didn't criticize Apple over their strategy--maybe there is nothing they can do. I'm just saying that if they can't figure out how to offer some really nifty sub-$1000 machines (comparable to what you get in the PC world) and a wider range of laptops, I think they will not achieve much more market share than they have. Maybe Apple could partner with Sony or IBM to broaden their product selection?

Re:evolution, not revolution

[shandrew]

Well, I didn't criticize Apple over their strategy--maybe there is nothing they can do. I'm just saying that if they can't figure out how to offer some really nifty sub-$1000 machines (comparable to what you get in the PC world) and a wider range of laptops, I think they will not achieve much more market share than they have.

Apple is doing better financially than most of the PC makers that make laptops, with the possible exception of IBM. The days of marketshare at all costs died with the dot-com bubble.

Re:Your Crystal Balls

[ttimes]

Like Apple or not, what I want to know is why so many get disappointed when they don't break the 3MHz barrier, solve world hunger, and quite the hardware business and go Intel/AMD only? For so many to fret as such, they must secretly hold a greater belief in Apples abilities. Do other computer companies suffer such bright derision?

new iMac

[aaronvegh]

Can you imagine a Beowulf cluster of these babies?

Re:New iMac

[AnimeFreak]

That is "Aqua," it is a hell of a way different than CDE.

I like how the Aqua bar "inflates" the icons on the bar whenever you put your mouse over it.

what were the designers smoking ?

[Anonymous Coward]

mushrooms !?

Profit losing?

[Anonymous Coward]

It looks great ,it's just too bad I dont buy computers for how they look !!!

If your math teacher convinced you that a $66 million in 3Q 2001 is losing money, your math skills exceed even your spelling and punctuation.

100mhz fsb not 133

[Perdo]

imac G4 is fsb crippled just like the celeron is a fsb crippled PIII. 700mhz speed grade is only available as 7x100 no multiplier of 133 will achieve 700mhz... fsb specs on the apple website are studiously avoided. Since no new towers were announced, this crippled G4 is their way of insuring propper product placement. Really too bad.

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[Wyatt Earp]

The iMac isn't for people that care about fsb.

The iMac is for the consumer, it's been 3 and a half years but alot of Slashdotters don't understand this.

The iMac is for people that want a computer they doesn't take knowledge of computers to use.

College kids that arn't in CS, Grandmas, Mothers, cousins, aunts. The Art kids or the math kids at my work, they don't give a shit about a front-side bus speed or a clock multiple. It's an iMac. It can connect to your digital camera without drivers or installing anything and it works. It'll burn CDs and DVDs too if you want it.

It's an iMac, it just works. That's why it's got a 100 MHz fbs. Because it's market doesn't care about 100 vs. 133 fbs or what kind of RAM is in it.

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[Anonymous Coward]

fsb specs on the apple website are studiously avoided. No, they're not. Bus specs are right there on the iMac specs page (http://www.apple.com/imac/specs.html) under Processor and memory.

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[tunah]

no multiplier of 133 will achieve 700mhz

Sure, the floppies are out of fashion, but that's no reason to *deny the existance* of the number 5 1/4!

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[SpacePunk]

Hell, I work with the damn things (computers) all day. Even I would like one I can just turn on and it works. Eventually ya just get tired of screwing with em.

-

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[Wyatt Earp]

That's one of the reasons I keep a Mac on my desk at home and at work.

I can do the Windows stuff I want in Virtual PC. I can do my work in OS X. I can what I need to get done on it.

I work on computers for a living, I don't want to be working on my machine just to keep it running. In my experiance, Macs just work.

Other people don't have the same opinion, some people get Windows to work for days and days without a reboot, I havn't seen that, I do see OS X boxes running for weeks, or months (my G3 266 AIO has 67 days of uptime).

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[Anonymous Coward]

Umm sorry, but a $700 x86 pc with WinXP is just a user friendly as an apple and will smear a $1800 mac on 99% of benchmarks out there.

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[Chazmyrr]

Except Grandma can't read the letters on that 15" screen (she has trouble at 640x480 on a 17"). If Apple offered a larger screen on the $1800 model instead of the DVD burner I might consider it. Then again all she wants to do is read email and surf the web, so a WebTV might be the most bang for the buck.

It's more the computer for the rich of us than the rest of us.

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[Hoi Polloi]

The increase in price for going over 15" in a flat screen would push it well past $1800. It isn't a simple 1 for 1 exchange with the DVD burner.

They had to think about pricing and the market and make some compromises.

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[Anonymous Coward]

where the f*ck are you shopping... i'm guessing it doesn't have a monitor (or if it does, it's a cheap standard one), and no drive equivalent to the 'superdrive'

Plus, I'd hardly call WinXP that user friendly...

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[Wyatt Earp]

My Grandma can read the letters on the 15 inch (14 real inches) screen of the CRT iMac at 1024x768

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[charon_on_acheron]

Neither can my wife. That's why she has glasses. If she's too stubborn to wear them, that's her choice.

Sounds like Grandma might need a new pair too.

And by the way, can WebTV print stuff out? I have never seen anyone use it before, so I don't know if they worked out that minor problem.

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[SilentChris]

A big reason why the original iMac was a success was, besides the innovations, it was a relatively bulky machine that was built tough and could stand abuse. The thing was built for the kid-set: even the dual headphone jacks reeked "elementary classroom".

The new iMac looks like a table lamp that belongs in a museum of modern art. The whole metal arm just looks fragile, and a kid with a backpack is a lot more likely to knock it over than a 15" CRT. Overall, I'm pretty unimpressed.

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[zhensel]

I always thought that your sig ment "To the stars through difficulty" - at least that's what they taught us in Kansas middle school (that being the motto that graces our state seal and all). The phrases are equivilent in meaning I suppose, but with my meager latin knowledge via minimal knowledge of other latin-based languages, I'd say that the middle school translation wins.

Good call on the apple-market-study there by the way. I'd say that one problem with these little buggers is educational use. My school was buying up quite a few of the cheaper iMacs when I last checked, but I imagine they'd be afraid of these things tipping over or simply being lifted and absconded with their small size and all.

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[instinctdesign]

The Art kids or the math kids at my work, they don't give a shit about a front-side bus speed or a clock multiple. It's an iMac.

Sorry, couldn't resist... I'm an art kid and I have a beautiful new(ish, best out there at the time anyhow) Athlon 1.4 system, PC133 RAM, etc. Though I suppose I'm in the minority on this one, my roommate has an iMac. :-)

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[Snuffub]

Youre almost right there with the market except for one thing. An imac with OS X is like a gift from heaven for any college kid interested in CS. it's cheap, it doesnt take futzing with to get it and the dev tools working properly, and best of all gcc runs perfectly on it. Our first programing assignment for my cs class was get your computer's compiler and such working. for windows this took two pages to explain for os x (and my trusty 400Mhz iMac) it was simple 'use gcc'

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[PMAvers]

Although, *I'm* a CS college student, and I want one hardcore. ;-) Go figure.

Re:100mhz fsb not 133

[Wyatt Earp]

Apple is still selling a couple CRT iMacs at this time.

For 799 and 999. My guess it's for schools and other places where a CRT is alright.

Personally, I want a SuperDrive iMac. I just asked my boss for one.

Wicked cool, but not as much as I hoped...

[jht]

OK - I love the new iMac. It's great-looking, finally a G4 is included, the screen looks real nice, and the drive combinations are right on. This is probably the Mac that the Cube should have been. The price is about $100 higher than I'd like, but I expect to see the price points all adjusted once the new Pro machines _finally_ ship. Even though they still have old iMacs around for now, they need to get the new one to the sub $1000 point ASAP.

iPhoto is a compelling new application, and I'm going to download it and play with it tonight - it supports my Olympus 3000 so I'll try it directly instead of just using the reader like I normally do.

The new reconfiguration of the iBook line is nice, too - and the 14.1" screen on the high-end model will be a plus.

But - what about the Pro line? Apple's margins are fattest on the tower Macs, and they're not announcing anything today. Unless they do something soon, expect a bad quarter. I don't know about Motorola's yields, but Apple must be pretty pissed at them since they obviously can't get enough G5 (or fast G4 - whatever) processors to announce anything yet.

So, they'll sell a ton of iMacs, but I was hoping for a little more this time around.

Re:Wicked cool, but not as much as I hoped...

[d-e-w]

OK - I love the new iMac. It's great-looking, finally a G4 is included, the screen looks real nice, and the drive combinations are right on. This is probably the Mac that the Cube should have been. The price is about $100 higher than I'd like, but I expect to see the price points all adjusted once the new Pro machines _finally_ ship. Even though they still have old iMacs around for now, they need to get the new one to the sub $1000 point ASAP.

To tell you the truth--I don't think that the consumer price point is sub-$1000 right now unless that consumer is willing to buy an Emachine or something similar (cheap hardware, off-brand.) After Xmas, we went shopping with my father-in-law for his new computer. Outside of processor speeds (which can't be compared on a one-to-one basis between Intel and Apple, anyhow) the machines we were looking at were very similar to the low-end iMac/Lamp. We could have picked up an open item for under $1000, but nothing from a name brand, even Dell (every time you clicked through the front page "deals" the price jumped!) The price range everywhere we looked (online, offline) was about $1099-$1399 for the system/hardware he wanted. This iMac, if it had been out (and if he was willing to go with an Mac, which would have been the bigger struggle ;) could have easily been in the running. And that's what really surprised me, out of everything announced today. $1,299 is pretty close to what is on the market right now. And it's a lot slicker-looking ...

Re:Wicked cool, but not as much as I hoped...

[jht]

I actually agree with you, pretty much. I think the iMac G4 is pretty close to what an equivalent machine from a top-tier manufacturer would cost (though the equivalent PC will be way ahead in raw CPU clock, of course - but otherwise pretty comparable). It's just that that price point is attainable in the Wintel market - even in stripped machines from the big companies.

The other thing is that Apple has been offering iMacs as low as $800 (though they were admittedly ultra-wimpy iMac models), and now they've dropped out of that market entirely, at least for the time being. They need some sort of presence in the lower-end, though Apple can't (and shouldn't) try to go toe-to-toe on price with all the Wintel bottom-feeders.

I do think Apple needs something in the $900-$1000 price point, even if it means keeping a version of the classic iMac around a while longer than they otherwise would like.

Re:Wicked cool, but not as much as I hoped...

[Dominic_Mazzoni]

My guess is that Apple will keep selling the $799 CRT iMac for quite a while - definitely until March, when the $1299 flat iMac is supposed to ship. (I just checked and all of the old iMacs are still available from the Apple Store online, at their old prices.)

Even after March, they'll still probably keep a few CRT iMacs around to sell to education for another year. Remember back when they got rid of the sub-$1000 iMac for a while? They still had one available for education customers only, which I think was a very smart move. I'd expect something similar.

Also, the street price of CRT iMac Special Editions should drop significantly once the flat iMacs start to ship - so I wouldn't be surprised if you could pick up a used iMac with a 600 MHz G3 and CD-RW drive for under $1000 soon. That's a great budget PC.

Re:Wicked cool, but not as much as I hoped...

[sp0rch]

definitly from massachusetts

Ok...

[Anonymous Coward]

Time for this troll to crawl back under his bridge.

Doofus.

Ugh...

[Arcturax]

I for one hate the look, but I suppose it has its niche markets...

I'd rather they have stuck with the original iMac design and done the following:

Flat panel monitor still leaving all that space that the CRT had taken up to allow the following.

A "hatch" on the back you could open to access the computer internals to upgrade the machine.
Replacable G4 processor
Replacable GeForce card in AGP 4x slot
1-2 PCI slots
More ram slots (2-4)
Maybe another hard disk bay or two...

Seriously, with the CRT gone there would be room for all this with maybe a bit of tweeking of the case design to accomidate the PCI slots.

This would have kept the tried and true iMac design but added the expandability everyone says that the iMac lacks but keeping it still a bit less than what you can expand a tower to so as not to cannibalize the sales of those. Seriously, that would have been quite cool in and of itself!

Re:Ugh...

[jd10131]

But that's not what the iMac is. I think you want a PowerMac.

The iMac is a consumer box, not a power users upgradable machine.

Ultimately, as the price of computers drops, they will become commodity components with virtually no replaceable parts. I can see the near future containing systems that put one or two GB of RAM right on the mobo, and tell you you can't add any more and opening the case will void your warranty.

Do you open up your receiver to add a better DSP, or a bigger amp? Silicon is cheap, and we are entering the age of the disposable computer.

Re:Ugh...

[Arcturax]

Dude, I know the difference between the PowerMac and the iMac... I'm simply saying they should have stuck with the old design and added a bit of expandability. With the "hatch" idea, it would be a bit like opening the hood of a car, possibly making it a bit more appealing to the "macho" gamer type who is stuck getting a budget machine and still keeping it appealing to everyone else with the added value of expandability. So what if some people never expanded it, at least the option was there for schools (major buyer of iMacs) to keep up to date while protecting their original investment.

If you think most consumers never want to upgrade parts, you should have seen the weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth when Apple discontinued the older ATI card support for OS X, leaving many earlier iMac users out in the cold since the GFX card is not upgradable. Made me very glad I had (and still have) a Beige G3.

So seriously, how could a bit of expandability hurt? For the price they want for that thing, it should at least be expandable beyond a couple of USB and firewire ports.

Re:Ugh...

[stripes]

Do you open up your receiver to add a better DSP, or a bigger amp?

Actually I own an upgradable amp ("The Little HeadRoom") and light (AlienBees B400). Granted they are both factory upgrades, but still...

Hmmm, come to think of it, it would be nice if Apple had a factory upgrade program...I wonder if they could make money on it and still have it priced cheap enough for people to buy...

Looks weird? Well that's what I thought...

[Penx]

I thought the new imac looked weird when I saw the Time cover shots this morning, but after seeing the keynote, and watching how the thing swivels etc. it takes on a whole new dimension... So don't knock it until you've seen it moving.

Just need to get some cash together... :(

No Its not

[Dante333]

It only has ONE button.

Re:No Its not

[Anonymous Coward]

If you'd ever had the "privilege" of trying to explain the use of a mouse to a first-time computer user, you'd count that as a blessing. To me, it seems dirt simple, right button vs. left, single- vs. double-clicking, etc., but for some reason newbies always have problems with it. And for the typical geek, it's about as easy to explain it to them as explaining how to breathe.

Re:No Its not

[thehamster]

So?

IIRC They chose 1 button because research proved ti was easiest for begginers to learn with. Its just stuck...

BTW later iMacs come with optical mice (a la the Intellimouse) which are far better than the original hockey puck deisgn.

Re:No Its not

[Anonymous Coward]

My Girlfriend's niece of 3 yrs was using a 3-button mouse with no problem the other day. I hardly consider the number of buttons to be intimidating to newbies.

Re:No Its not

[LordNimon]

As has been pointed out numerous times on Slashdot, you only NEED one button with Mac OS. I don't understand why this concept is so difficult to understand for some people. Imagine tat: a GUI that is designed specifically for a mouse with only one button!

Re:No Its not

[Anonymous Coward]

If that's true then how come you can still pull up the context menu by clicking and using the Apple key (or Ctrl - I always forget which). No OS needs more than one mouse button but life is sure a hell-of-a-lot easier with multiple buttons (especially the scroll button).

sigh

[onShore_Jake]

oh. a new shape.

unless they decide to slash prices of the PowerMac

[motherfuckin_spork]

hey, I can dream, can't I?

The really cool thing about the new iMac...

[Brian_Ellenberger]

Is the fact that it, based on the pictures, it doesn't seem to require any form of input! No more clunky keyboards or mice.

I'm guessing all that futuristic talk from Jobs was about the new telepathic interface. :)

Brian Ellenberger

A 14-*foot* display? That is*big*!

[Anonymous Coward]

Haven't been to the Web site yet, but this sounds ginger-peachy, typo or not.
The intro. mentions a "14' display". That ['] means feet, not inches, folks.

Enby in Waltham
who is about 5' 11" tall

Intellimouse sux

[Gorimek]

I've had 2 optical Microsoft Intellimouses, and I loved them, except for two things

-- Both broke the same way within a year. They started tracking worse and worse until they got unusable.
-- They're butt ugly

I'm now back to using the regular Apple mouse. I'd love if Apple sold a 2 button mouse with wheel and Apple design and quality.

Re:Intellimouse sux

[Anonymous Coward]

I always wondered how they worked on macs. They run great on my PC's. Been using one of them since they first came out (almost 2 years now?). I figured they wouldn't run as well on mac. As for ugly - I never really thought about it. The grey Intellimouse Explorer is kinda ulgy but the plain white intellimouse looks like every other non-fruity-mac mouse.

Re:Intellimouse sux

[Maserati]

The Intellimouse has a design flaw. There are hard plastic edges surrounding the join between cord and mouse. This will eventually cause breaks in the cord and the mouse starts acting erratic. When wiggling the mouse around turns the red light back on, it's time for a new one.

I called MS to bitch, and their program is: fax in a photocopy of the bottom of the mouse (with serial number legible) and they'll replace 'em. I had a half dozen replaced last year, that costs MS for shipping, customer service time, and of course the cost for the replacement meeses,

Scotch tape carefully inserted as padding around the cord entry point (tuck it inside the joint) will also extend the life of the mouse and may repair the damage in some cases.

And OS X recognizes the Intellimouse out of the box, with all buttons and the wheel working. Heck, OS X DP3 supported the Intellimouse.

Re:Intellimouse sux

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds Like you should get the wireless intellimouse instead.

Re:Intellimouse sux

[mlong]

I've had 2 optical Microsoft Intellimouses, and I loved them, except for two things

-- Both broke the same way within a year. They started tracking worse and worse until they got unusable.
-- They're butt ugly

Hmm I've had two since the day they came out and never a problem. Though I have the Explorer one (gray one...$70 I think it was). I know they have cheaper models out now which maybe have less quality..dunno

Re:Intellimouse sux

[Anonymous Coward]

Why? They are all USB, right? Why would they not work well on Macs?

For the record, I have an optical MS Intellimouse working on my Mac (for almost 2 years) and it has always worked great. It works the same as the one I have on my PC.

Re:Intellimouse sux

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I have had several MS opitical inellimeeses(?) for several years, and this has never happened to me.

Re:Intellimouse sux

[Anonymous Coward]

What does USB have to do with anything? It's the software (drivers) that matters. There are a lot of USB devices out there that don't work on the Mac.

Re:Intellimouse sux

[Anonymous Coward]

I have had several MS opitical inellimeeses(?) for several years, and this has never happened to me.

Re:Intellimouse sux

[Anonymous Coward]

nearly all usb mice can work with generic OS supplied drivers

Re:Intellimouse sux

[zaffir]

Try USB Overdrive. I use it to customize the buttons on my Intellimouse and Boomslang, as well as several PC joysticks. The only thing i haven't seen it work with was a PC steering wheel + pedal setup.

Re:Intellimouse sux

[S5o]

The same thing has happenned to me twice, about every 8 months, consistantly. Luckily, the mouse uses (what I guess is) a standard (sorry for getting technical) "internal mouse connector", despite it using USB and a PS/2 convertor.

The box, manuals and receipt were thrown away, and I pulled off the sticker on the bottom of the mouse when it started to peel, so I had no option to return it.

I peeled off the thin plastic "grips/slides" on the bottom of it to reveal the screws, and disassembled it. The first time, I just disconnected the end of the cord from the board, and replaced it with an a cord from a mouse that had been sitting around from years ago. It worked perfectly.

The second time, I wrapped the cord with a thin layer of electrical tape just at the "joint" in the path where the cord is bent at almost a 90 degree angle. Didnt seem to have much effect, but I still have 3 old, unusable mice laying around.

Re:Intellimouse sux

[Decimal]

and the mouse starts acting erratic. When wiggling the mouse around turns the red light back on, it's time for a new one.

Yeah, this usually happens to mine after I've been looking at pr0n for a few hours. The red light starts flashing, the wheel starts spinning, the mouse gets all hot and sweaty and starts to wiggle on it's own. I don't see how you can consider this a defect. It's really a big tur--

Oh wait, did you say erratic? Er... Nevermind.

Re:Intellimouse sux

[flipper28]

I've had the same problem - i'm experiencing it again - my mouse will start freaking out after a while or just give up. I've replaced several of them luckily I bought them from costco and they take everything back even if it's broken - I've had problems with microsoft in the past - it's always the consumers fault.

Digital Hub

[X_Bones]

The concept of the "digital hub" Jobs kept hitting on is a good one I think, but Apple's implementation of it is doomed to failure without some serious work.

From my understanding, Jobs is betting that consumers want a computer which seamlessly interacts with all manner of peripherals, while other computer companies are shying away from the PC as the center of the electronic household (as evidenced by PDAs, convergence boxes, etc.)

But right now, the target market for the new iMac is the subset of Mac owners who own at least one digital camera, DV camcorder, or whatever. Now I'm a pretty rabid Mac advocate but even I'll admit that this is a very small number of people. The way I see it, to make this concept more appealing to the wider (i.e., Windows-using) market, Apple has to ally with one or more makers of popular peripherals.

Right now, this digital hub strategy has the hub but not the accessories. Until far more peripherals have Macintosh drivers available (written either by Apple through reverse- engineering or licensing of IP; or by the makers of the hardware, possibly with some persuasion from Apple), Jobs' concept is going to fail.

Apple makes great hardware; now it's time to get the accessories to go along with it. Only after that, I think, will they be able to succeed.

Re:Digital Hub

[Anonymous Coward]

Why? Drivers? What are you talking about drivers. This isn't MS Driver hell. Any digital camera or digital video camcorder with firewire works without any drivers or anything required as long as they don't use a weird propietary format (Like sony's mini cd cameras, they work but sony has disabled file transfer from them on a Mac, but that's okay since there's a reason you bought a camera that writes to cds). Heck, lots of cameras even come with built in Quicktime support. Firewire cameras and camcorders are easy, Apple invented Firewire, there's no reason why these shouldn't work flawlessly. Apple owns movie making with imovie, idvd, and Final Cut Pro. MP3 players; the rio and other major ones work, but then there's the ipod. For PDAs, there's Palm Desktop or Pocket PC sync. Everything the hub needs is there.

Re:Digital Hub

[stripes]

Right now, this digital hub strategy has the hub but not the accessories. Until far more peripherals have Macintosh drivers available (written either by Apple through reverse- engineering or licensing of IP; or by the makers of the hardware, possibly with some persuasion from Apple), Jobs' concept is going to fail

Well iMovie supports every DV cam (you may need to buy different cables though), so that's not bad.

iPhoto has a pretty impressive list of supported cameras. I expect it will also support all new cameras (except the high end DSLRs that use FireWire) since Microsoft managed to convince the camera makers to get all future cameras to look a specific way on USB so they are all "zero work", except to maybe supply a picture of the specific camera. Plus it works with plain old CF cards or images on a CD.

iDVD supports the only DVD-RW drives Apple sells, but that is an easy target to hit. It apparently now supports a bunch of FireWire DVD-RW drives as well, which is nice.

That leaves us iTunes which does not have stellar support for portable MP3 players. Well it does have great support for the iPod, and support for maybe 12 or 20 or so other players, but that's not the whole market. It's interesting to note that is the one market where Apple decided to make their own device...

(unless you count the 1995ish QuickTake 100 still camera)

Are they really doing as bad as you think? Or even bad at all?

Re:same DVD-General drive? Yes, why not?

[Outlyer]

I suppose at $600.00 it should provide identical equipment to a $10,000.00 DVD studio? What about the fact that most DVDs are mastered to DLT tape before publishing? It's not quite the same as the GM system for data and music CDs.

For the record, it also doesn't support more than 90 minutes of video per disc. This isn't the holy grail of consumer video recording; but it's a convenient, powerful way to preserve your own video.

It's great

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple has done again... This is a really
great consumer/company desktop.

Sure, it's not really a nerd maschine... But I
think my parents and my little brother
will love it....

Wow - that's a big screen.

[nemesisj]

"Apple also announced other new products like a 14' display on some iBooks"

A whole fourteen feet of screen for an extra 200 bucks? Wow - and the battery even lasts an hour longer!

Phhht, yeah right.

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't have a girlfriend, you pasty, pathetic, lying geek bastard.

Then don't run it on a 486

[Walrus99]

OSX is running great for me. Have been using it as a web server for our office and it has been up for weeks.

Re:Reason for PowerMac and iMac processor situatio

[Anonymous Coward]

How do you figure that they are the same chip? I guess you buy the theory that they are just calling the latest generation of G4's G5?

I don't think so considering that the G5 is to be a 64-bit chip

mulitple monitors

[Anonymous Coward]

mulitple monitors

time to sell volkswaggon golf

[BRO_HAM]

I'm a designer at idealab!. Mostly I spend my day designing web graphics, presentations, or any other graphical widgets I am tasked with.

Recently, I had to make this purchasing decision:

• new volkswaggon golf
• Nine West designer glasses (square framed)
• rent payment on bay area 3000 sq ft loft apartment, or just have parents pay again.
• a mac G4 powerstation

Well, after much debate over the g4 powerstation, it just wasn't attractive enough sitting on my desk. I tried the different colors, but none of them offered the exact design and aesthetic appeal. I tried the iBook as well, but it didn't give my desk that extra touch of 'Jazz' that I was shooting for in a computer.

So I purchased a Volkswaggon Golf. It's ok, I've put an Apple logo sticker on the back so everyone on the highway is sure to identify me as a designer, not that anyone couldn't tell from my square-framed glasses, bananna republic wardrobe and my volkswaggon jetta.

But now I am having second thoughts, I've always said "I wish apple would just make a computer that looks like a lamp" - and what do you know, it's like they heard me and designed a computer to my exact specifications.

Time to sell the car, I need me a new desk accessory!!

Re:time to sell volkswaggon golf

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh goody, here wgo again. Just another overpriced Mac, gay-designer-packaged and soon to be available in Tangerine.

The MacMoonies will be wetting themselves, though. They tend to fall hard for packaging and baubles; Steve always manages to run The Big Con. And colors - don't forget all the pretty colors.

I'm sure they're just perfect for "producing" that latest mix tape, or a digital video of all your tattoos that nobody wants to watch. It will also look perfect plopped on every desktop on Castro St.

Will it get Apple beyond 2% market share? Nope.

Re:time to sell volkswaggon golf

[Emil Brink]

It's Volkswagen, d0rk. One 'g', and an 'e', not an 'o'. Jazz up your desk with a German dictionary, or something. Mumble.

Re:time to sell volkswaggon golf

[zulux]

It's Volkswagen [vw.com],

I some backward parts of Idaho, it's simply known as "Zie Kar."

Re:time to sell volkswaggon golf

[MessiahXI]

rent payment on bay area 3000 sq ft loft apartment, or just have parents pay again.

"But DADDY! Please please please pay my rent!! I simply must have this cute new computer that looks like the cutest little lamp. It would just look smashing on my desk next to Nathan Lane fashion figure. Please Daddy, PLEASE!!!"

I get the feeling that this guy meant to post to a different site.

Re:time to sell volkswaggon golf

[BRO_HAM]

As a professional designer, I spell it like that intentionally to add character and individuality to my writing style :)

As a designer, I have this drive to constantly set myself apart from the rest and do things completely differently. For instance - black, square-framed glasses are an essential to giving off that "designer image". It's hard for people to take you seriously as a designer when you're looking at them with naked, square-frameless eyes.

You might be saying: "well if all designers are wearing these square-framed glasses, you aren't too different are you?", which is a valid point, but it's all about what makes YOU feel different and individual. If all designers want to drive the same 'volkswagen', compute on an apple, wear the same glasses, talk the same talk, etc - it doesn't mean they're trying to fit into one particular stereotype - it means they're trying to be individual at the group level - don't you get it - it's artistic that we all look the same, and therefore - it's different. duh.

No USB 2.0?

[qurob]

Well, just put it on the list of upgrades for the next iMac.

It also doesn't have gig ethernet, like the other G4's do....

Re:No USB 2.0?

[Anonymous Coward]

and it's a good thing too..
Firewire is for the perofrmance things. USB2.0 what a waste... my keyboard and mouse communicate at 100Mbps... big whoop.

Firewire, the only sane choice... If I'm wrong, then WHY does every video camera have it and not USB?

Re:No USB 2.0?

[Penx]

Quite obvious why...

USB 2.. ever heard of firewire?

gig ethernet.. how many home users do you know that require this?

Re:No USB 2.0?

[qurob]

640k? How many home users do you know that require more than this?

Sarcasm aside....Most office LAN's don't have gig ethernet....but regardless, the rest of Apple's lineup have them

Re:No USB 2.0?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh please, it's not like USB 2.0 is actually better or faster than firewire. Your arguement works if USB 2.0 was actually that, but it isn't.

Re:No USB 2.0?

[qurob]

No, it's more of the fact that they'd include USB 1.1 (obsolete) in favor of 2.0

Re:No USB 2.0?

[Penx]

Thing is, last I heard anyway, there was a firewire/usb2 war going on so Apple aren't going to hop on the usb2 band wagon too soon...

Then use the macally one

[Toe, The]

The macally iOptinet mouse is a two-button, optical, scroll-wheel mouse. Works great, and looks pretty OK. 'Tis my mouse of choice.

But the macally MicroMouse just came out and seems even cooler. I'm thinking of gettin' me one of those....

Next month

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't there something happening in Tokyo about a month from now? Involving Apple? Thats when I think it is, anyway. Yes, now that the iMac is as good or better as the Pro line, it will need a revamp. But they (a) need to leave something for next month, and (b) probably haven't got the G5s (or Apollos for the pessimistic) quite ready. Look for them next month. Lets see a PowerBook G5, people!

Is it just me

[ReidMaynard]

Is it just me...?
(1) these things won't stack very well on the "bring out yer dead" carts wheeled about during downsizing...

(2) I afraid of the ($0.32 cost) $199.95 monitor arm after a few months and it gets a *little* loose, and *slowly* drifts down...slowly...like a glacier...

Re:Is it just me

[himself]

>
> I afraid of the ($0.32 cost) $199.95 monitor
> arm after a few months and it gets a *little*
> loose, and *slowly* drifts down...slowly...
> like a glacier...
>
"That's OK honey, it happens to a lot of displays..."

Re:Is it just me

[Anonymous Coward]

I have one of the old (first gen) 15" apple studio displays(one of the black ones) the arm on it still works fine even after 3 solid years of abuse!

Drivers

[SimJockey]

Drivers may not be that necessary. I borrowed a digital camera from my folks a couple of weeks ago, a Panasonic PDR M5 or something. Thought, just for the heck of it, I'd plug it into the USB port on my iMac DV without installing any drivers. Up pops the OS X Image Capture utility asking me what I want to do with these pictures from the camera. So cool.

Re:Drivers

[willith]

Performed the same task in WinXP with a Kodak DX3900--plugged it into the USB port without any drivers. The camera was immediately mounted as a drive and I could start fiddling with my pictures. No drivers, no fuss, no problem.

Re:Drivers

[Anonymous Coward]

wow.. you mean just like microsoft windows does?

Re:Drivers

[abigor]

It's nifty, I agree. KDE can do this too, with Kamera -- your digital camera (I have a Canon Powershot A20) can be browsed with kamera:// in Konqueror and you can drag, drop, etc. Pretty cool, since Konqueror is also your file manager...nicely integrated.

Re:Drivers

[gonerill]

Yep. The beauty of Macs. I did the same thing with my Digital Camera (a Canon) and my girlfriend's TiBook. Just plugged the camera in to see what happened. It worked right away, downloaded all the pictures without even blinking. And here's me unable to get gphoto2 to compile on SuSE. Ack.

Re:Drivers

[SimJockey]

All good news. Looks like I'll have to upgrade my Windows box and drag the Linux box up out of the stone age. Been too busy playing with the candy coated goodness of OS X to notice what else has been going on.

Re:Drivers

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd be surprised if you didn't have to play with scsi emulation, usb modules, and mount points before getting it to work.

I doubt you can just plug it into a linux box and, tada, it knows what to do, like XP or OS X.

Re:Drivers

[hyrdra]

Wouldn't you rather hunt for the latest RPM, and then hunt down the twenty others needed to satisfy it's dependancies? Or how about go the source route and have to download and compile a new version of gcc because said program doesn't compile on 3.0.x versions? Only to realize once you ./ it, it segfaults like crazy?

God, I love Linux!

Note: this is not a troll. It's an actual synopsis of what happened to me YESTERDAY.

Re:Drivers

[Chromalon]

Same thing over Xmas - I took stills and video of my family w/their new digital camera, tried plugging it into my TiBook via USB, and the image capture utility not only transferred the images AND the movie but put the pictures in my Pictures folder and the movie in my Movies folder, and opened both folders on the desktop! Yowza!

Oh, and one more thing...

[Lars T.]

There are no new desktop Macs - for now. OTOH, Seybold is just 6 weeks away :-|

Jumbo LCD screens

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple also announced other new products like a 14' display on some iBooks...

Apple Press Release for January 7, 2002 - For immediate and worldwide distribution

Today, Apple is pleased to announce the newest members of the iBoook families featuring the world's largest LCD displays. Thanks to our patented Slashdot-typo ® technology, these new notebooks feature screens 152 inches larger than any PC laptop's display and 144 inches larger than any desktop's screen. The best part is that one can buy these new notebooks for less than $3000. So don't bother upgrading your big-screen television and home theatre system for the soon-to-be-released The Lord of the Rings DVD. Just bring your new iBook into your favorite room, unfold your screen, insert the DVD and you'll enjoy the ultimate home viewing experience. Viewing your favorite web sites will also be an unparalleled experience as CowboyNeal appears life-size and in living color, make sure you take your Dramamine before viewing the biggest and fiercest animated pop-up ads you'll ever see. Our next version of iBooks will be even more amazing, featuring a drive capable of playing 3' and 5' CDs and DVDs as standard equipment.

Does it come with Mandrake 8.1 in dual boot?

[joestar]

That would be a nice combination and a real pleasure to compare the two best graphically-Unices in this world running on the same machine :-)

Re:Does it come with Mandrake 8.1 in dual boot?

[joestar]

Not a troll actually.

iBoob, iBook's Sister

[api]

I believe the new iMac brings new meaning to Apple's past "Rev. A, B, C and D" iMac versioning.

Already capable

[Anonymous Coward]

Due to the 'Quartz' graphics layer, it's a since to reorient a G4 mac's display output to any angle. In fact, at the most recent MacHack, someone wrote a little app to spin it around willynilly while a user was working on it - with zero slowdown.

Re:Already capable

[soft_guy]

"Apple Turn Over" (the hack you mentioned) runs under MacOS 9, not MacOS X. I'm not saying that MacOS X couldn't be hacked to do the same thing, it is just harder because there's a bit more to doing under X. For one thing, you have to be in kernel space instead of user space. The way that guy did it was that he moved the framebuffer location offscreen, then performed transformations to the image into video memory. Under X certain things are a bit harder to get to such as the FBBA (Frame Buffer Base Address). Under 9, you can drop into MacsBug and set the FBBA very easily. Any app can do it. Under X, you'll have to write a KEXT to do that and debugging said KEXT is somewhat involved - you need two machines.

Re:Already capable

[stripes]

I'm not saying that MacOS X couldn't be hacked to do the same thing, it is just harder because there's a bit more to doing under X.

Maybe, the graphics system supports rotations (and paths and the like). Maybe you can rotate to coordinate system for the root window and the rest will "just work", if you can get access to the root window.

Failing that you might be able to sneak in a shared library and rotate each window's system just after it is made (you will have to call through to the real library, easy with ELF .so's, and I think OSX uses them). Of corse it may not work for classic, unless it makes normal window calls...

Or you could do it with a KEXT like you suggested.

First the cube.... More over-heat potential?

[penguin_dance]

I liked the Cube and its look but it had overheating problems.

This isn't nearly as cute--the comparison with a lamp is dead on. I can't see this doing much better in the cooling department. Also doesn't look very upgradeable.

Form is great as long as it FOLLOWS functionality.

Re:First the cube.... More over-heat potential?

[overunderunderdone]

Form is great as long as it FOLLOWS functionality.

This is why the new iMac is so good. The form factor is different BECAUSE it follows function. What is the function of a flat panel? To have a small footprint, to be light and easily adjustable. Then why strap it to an entire computer and lose all of those advantages? Puting the flat panel on an articulated arm is form FOLLOWING function. Having it on that arm even enhances the "function" of positioning. You can move the monitor around even more freely than if it was a seperate component. Even the choice to make the base a half sphere probably has some functional advantages of stability.

Now there were trade-offs between features. The decision was made that the form would have small size as a feature at the expense of expandability as a feature. There is no "right" answer here - especially since Apple makes another machine that makes the same trade-off the other way. Choose which feature you prefer. In a certain way even limited access to the "guts" and limited upgradability can itself be a "feature" to a non tech-savvy consumer who doesn't want to be bothered with technical detail, or even made to feel an implicit responsiblity to do so.

Screen distance

[Gorimek]

That might be great, but remember that the screen would be 2-3 times as far away from you, so you'd need real good eye sight.

Inevitably underwhelming thanks to the hype

[ambclams]

The new iMacs do look pretty cool, but I can't help but think that the keynote was bound to be disappointing in light of the amount of hype it received.

After all, the Mac community is filled with sites tracking the latest Apple rumors. Even at a 'normal' MacWorld, the community-generated hype leads to people expecting Apple to announce something that's totally revolutionary, and whatever actually does get announced pales by comparison.

And this time Apple gave themselves even higher expectations to live up to by creating their own hype too. For the first time anyone can recall, they publicized the expo, with new slogans on their website every night: 'a backstage pass to the future', 'way beyond the rumors sites', 'to boldly go where no PC has gone before', etc. Surely Apple must have realized that new iMac, iPhoto, and larger iBooks, while impressive, couldn't live up to people's expectations with that much hype?

(And claiming that they were going to announce something 'way beyond the rumors sites' was surely a mistake. These are the same rumors sites, after all, that were expecting LCD iMacs many months ago. This expo's predictions included the iWalk PDA, much faster pro-line desktop machines, and even a G5 Dodecahedron or two.)

It seems to be the case that people will always be somewhat disappointed with whatever Apple releases. But Apple doesn't need to make it worse by claiming that they've created something revolutionary and amazing; this new iMac just can't live up to that standard.

Re:Inevitably underwhelming thanks to the hype

[macshit]

My experience with the Mac world is very limited, but all the stories about it I've read on slashdot have given me the impression that these `mac rumor sites' are always completely and utterly wrong in their predictions.

Are they really that awful? Do they sometimes get something right? Do they have a reason for existance?

Re:Inevitably underwhelming thanks to the hype

[ambclams]

My experience with the Mac world is very limited, but all the stories about it I've read on slashdot have given me the impression that these `mac rumor sites' are always completely and utterly wrong in their predictions.

On the whole, you're right. Occasionally they do come up with something vaguely accurate, but that's usually purely by chance, given the large amounts of just-plain-wrong stuff they predict. I usually don't follow them, but I understand that many have been expecting LCD iMacs for months -- but I don't know of anyone who predicted the form factor we ended up with.

Are they really that awful? Do they sometimes get something right? Do they have a reason for existance?

Of course they have a reason to exist: to provide us with amusement. They are, after all, some of the best humor sites on the net, even if that's totally unintentional. I can't find it anymore, but my favorite was the rumor that Apple would announce a G5 Dodecahedron to take the G4 Cube's place.

Re:Inevitably underwhelming thanks to the hype

[stripes]

(And claiming that they were going to announce something 'way beyond the rumors sites' was surely a mistake. These are the same rumors sites, after all, that were expecting LCD iMacs many months ago. This expo's predictions included the iWalk PDA, much faster pro-line desktop machines, and even a G5 Dodecahedron or two.)

Plus the suggestion that Jobs was going to unveil a whole new planet just for Mac users... (MacNN I think, but it could have been MacSLASH)

this

[Anonymous Coward]

i think this thing could go in a art museum. I would call it "upside down bowl meets flatscreen on a stick".

That thing kinda looks like a left over prop from 2001: a space odyssy or something...

bizarre looking thing.......

Ahhhhh, I see the use...

[gnovos]

The REAL use for this baby would be to mount it upside down from the top of the shelf on my cubicle. Combined with a wireless keyboard and mouse, and my desk will be so incredibly CLEAN!

Re:Ahhhhh, I see the use...

[Eightlines]

Just try to insert the CD upside down...

Re:Ahhhhh, I see the use...

[gnovos]

Foiled again... They were SOOO close... All they had to do was make it so that it had sticky or screw feet and it could be mounted anywhere, on the wall, under shelves, etc. This could have been *the* Apple I was looking for...

Re:Ahhhhh, I see the use...

[etceteral]

Actually, that brings up an interesting question. Why DID they not include a slot-loading drive with this?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but SuperDrives are available in slot-loading format, right?

Was it price? availability? aesthetics? Or perhaps specfically to prevent people from mounting it upside down? :)

Re:Ahhhhh, I see the use...

[Slump]

My guess is cooling. I can't find it mentioned anywhere, but if it is a fanless design, engineering a convection cooling design that would work at any angle would be a pretty serious feat of engineering.

I'm sure they thought about it, and maybe even tested it.

Re:Ahhhhh, I see the use...

[overunderunderdone]

The REAL use for this baby would be to mount it upside down from the top of the shelf on my cubicle. Combined with a wireless keyboard and mouse, and my desk will be so incredibly CLEAN!

That would require a little hardware hacking but is a GREAT idea! (flipping the DVD-RW drive, and of course the logo, maybe have to alter or reposition the arm?) I'm seriously going to look into doing that. Thanks.

And you are not too far off as to the "REAL" use (as *intended* by Apple). Obviously a small footprint on the desk was one of the primary goals of the design.

eyemack

[rewtbeer]

Nice machine for the volkswagen bug driving vegan, but really, how long can Apple last? Do enough people really buy these things to keep Apple afloat? How much money does M$ put in? (They have a boatload of Apple stock)

Until you can play Counter-Strike on an iMac, I can't take them seriously ^^

Re:eyemack

[Graymalkin]

Hmm Apple went public around what 1980? That's about 22 years or so and they were first formed in 1977? So I supposed they can last AT LEAST that long. And just to make you look extra retarded, Microsoft bought 150 million bucks worth of common stock which as you may or may not know has no voting power, 150 mil is pretty insignifigant for a company with an 8.2 billion dollar market cap in 2001. About a whole .01% of the cap or so. You, out of the gene pool!

Re:eyemack

[Anonymous Coward]

And just to make you look extra retarded, Microsoft bought 150 million bucks worth of common stock which as you may or may not know has no voting power,

OK, you just defeated your own point. ROFL

Re:eyemack

[nomadic]

Hope that gene pool doesn't need math skills. 150 million is more like 1.8% of an 8.2 billion market cap.

Re:eyemack

[rewtbeer]

like i said dork, until you can play counter-strike on it....

Re:eyemack

[Graymalkin]

Whoops. Note to self: your position at NASA will be secured if you keep making decimal point errors.

!!!

[motardo]

That is teh funnay to teh max!!

-motardo

Reasoning for Lack of PowerMac Upgrade

[eAndroid]

Steve knows that PowerMac sales will be weak. I believe that he has done this in the hopes of boosting iMac sales. Apple really can't afford to have this iMac turn out a flop. By cannibalizing their own products they are trying to guarantee strong iMac sales.

That one's gone

[Toe, The]

Apple got rid of the "puck" a long time ago. The mouse they've been using for the last year or so is much more ergonomic, and the entire mouse is a button. Still only has one button though.

Look at the bottom of the iMac page for a small preview.

Here are the full details on it, though this is yesterday's model. It looks like the new one is white but otherwise unchanged....

Re:That one's gone

[Anonymous Coward]

Plus, the current Apple mouse is optical.

A bit more innovative...

[meman2000]

After reading through the Time leak and watching the keynote, there was one thing left that I was secretly hoping for. Wouldn't it have been cool if Apple had come up with some sort of connection port for the monitor, so that not only would it be on that hand/swivel thing, but you could also, say, push a little button at the top and the thing could pop off for easy storage? This feature would also allow for bigger monitors, or whatever else comes down in the next few decades. Imagine just being able to pop off the monitor and slide the computer in your desk drawer for safe-keeping.

Don't operate during takeoff, landing or inflight

[dalleboy]

Environmental requirements:

Maximum operating altitude: 10,000 feet

2 words... UG LY.

[vermicious]

Not the coolest looking device to say the least, I guess I'd have to stand in front of it and give it a few torqes and see how that arms stands up.

G4 or G5? Good question

[Infonaut]

Yeah, it's not exactly clear. Whether they call it the SuperG4 or the G4+ or the G5, the next chip we see in Macs should be substantially faster (let's hope so, after all this waiting!).

Architosh has some interesting info about the PowerPC roadmap.

GeForce 2 MX?

[Y-Crate]

Why in the world do they have to give you an non-upgradeable GeForce2 MX?

My bet is that they will still be using it in 2005, just like the pathetic Rage 128 that they kept in the machines from 1999 until today. While the PC world moves ahead and Mac users struggle to play new PC ports on their ancient video cards.

The whole-mouse-button doesn't work fer me

[Toe, The]

I love the look and feel of the Apple ProMouse. But when I rest my hand on it, I tend to accidentally click a lot.

Also, in my cramped mousing space, I tend to bump it aginst things a lot, which also sometimes results in a click.

Thus my move to the MicroMouse.

Re:The whole-mouse-button doesn't work fer me

[DevNova]

I had that problem a lot too, but under the mouse is a sensitivity wheel with three settings. I switched mine to the third setting and have had NO accidental-clicks since.

There Steve goes again..

[CaptainSuperBoy]

Throwing that word around.. the word is supercomputer. Every damn Apple ad, every new machine they launch is called a supercomputer. It's got the same old, clunky 800 mhz G4 processor, which they have the nerve to call 'pentium-crushing'? AMD and Intel have processors running at 2+ times that clock speed.. gimme a break.

Am I the only one who's bothered when Apple says with a straight face, "The PowerPC G4 with Velocity Engine can perform complex calculations two to four times faster than processors found in run-of-the-mill PCs"? I'm sure they're still using their old, tired Photoshop benchmarks to back up those statements. Only Apple could get away with calling an 800Mhz G4 a 'pentium crushing' 'supercomputer.'

They even mention Quake on the page.. how about they pit that puny Geforce2 MX against a real PC? Let's see.. lowest iMac has 700mhz CPU, 128MB RAM, 40GB HD, CD-RW, flat panel. You can get an AthlonXP system with all that, and money to burn on a Geforece3 card. Then see which one is the 'supercomputer'.

Re:There Steve goes again..

[brodiedreamyou.ca]

excuse me? i dont mind people who bash apple, but at least get your facts right the imac is technically a supercomputer, did you not bother to read an article earlier this week about how the U.S just lowerered it's regulations on export of supercomputers? before then, you were not allowed to export g4's to china the definition of supercomputer is really outdated, but g4's are supercomputers and also, obviously you are a sucker of the megahertz myth, you cant measure a processor only by mhz, you can say that you p4's are faster, but please dont say it's because of the mhz. and actually i've checked, try to find my a computer for that price with a QUALItY lcd, and dvd burner? and a QUALITY os.. brodie

Re:There Steve goes again..

[Anonymous Coward]

Go to pricewatch.com. You will see CPU/motherboard combos of 1 GHz Athlons for about $100 which will smoke a G4 like there's no tomorrow. Yes, $100. What crack are those Apple guys smoking? Someone better tell Jobs about AMD processors.

Re:There Steve goes again..

[Anonymous Coward]

excuse me? i dont mind people who bash apple, but at least get your facts right the imac is technically a supercomputer, did you not bother to read an article earlier this week about how the U.S just lowerered it's regulations on export of supercomputers? before then, you were not allowed to export g4's to china the definition of supercomputer is really outdated, but g4's are supercomputers and also, obviously you are a sucker of the megahertz myth, you cant measure a processor only by mhz, you can say that you p4's are faster, but please dont say it's because of the mhz. and actually i've checked, try to find my a computer for that price with a QUALItY lcd, and dvd burner? and a QUALITY os.. brodie

Cite this, please. Dont give me URLs to some Mac related site either.

Re:There Steve goes again..

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a crap load of articles in places like arstechnica you troll, go look up US export regulations too.

Re:There Steve goes again..

[tunah]

AMD and Intel have processors running at 2+ times that clock speed.. gimme a break.

That is *exactly the point* I remember a while ago (when the G4s were quite new IIRC) apple had a thing about the new chip being a pentium killer. They did some tests (yes i'm sure they were biased but the point stands) that showed the G4, with less MHz, ran just under 3 times as fast as the pentium, although the pentium had a higher clock. Remember, stuffdone/second = stuffdone/cycle x cycles/second. These chips were doing (at these particular tasks) just over 3 times as much as the pentiums in each cycle.

Hertz aint everything.

Re:There Steve goes again..

[tunah]

More info here: http://www.apple.com/g4/myth/

Re:There Steve goes again..

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would you get an Athlon ZP system when the latest P4 has such a higher clock speed. In fact, the difference between the Athlon XP's clock speed and the G4 is almost as much as that of the Athlon XP and the P4.

Oh yeah, I forgot, the truth. MHZ and GHZ are no the most reliable indicators of a processors performance capability.

BTW how fast do those processors in Sun Servers run? here look http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/2001-11/sunf lash.20011106.4.html

That is 900mhz. Are you gonna say that Sun's products suck and that they should switch to Intel processors.

If you are gonna talk the clock speed shit, then do it consistently.

No go do a little homework on RISC architecture to find out why the clock doesn't need to be cranked so high to get them to perform.

Re:There Steve goes again..

[foqn1bo]

The reason why people like you can never appreciate the G4, or apple hardware, or pretty much anything apple ever does for that matter, is that you never actually use your computer to *do* much of anything. Quake? Please. Quit playing your little games and grow up. Photoshop is a real world application used by untold legions of graphics designers in professional situations. The software that is G4 optimized on the Mac platform is heaviliy optimized, and many are creative applications. So I think that the Photoshop benchmark is a fantastic one, because coming from the position of an artist:

I don't give a flying fuck how fast it compiles the linux kernel.

Conclusion? When I'm using a measly 667 MHZ G4 with my custom designed Audio DSP/Video processing patch in Max/MSP/Nato .0+55+3d (Macintosh Only), taking video input through a firewire digicam and distorting someone's face with realtime glycerin effects and filters and convolving the pixmap with a pvoc'ed sample of Mr. T's voice, all whilst controlling the whole thing with a Powerglove,

I fly, I've got an assload of CPU power to spare, and you've just fragged your millionth bot. Good for you. Buy an Xbox, loser.

Boring people use boring computers.

Re:There Steve goes again..

[CaptainSuperBoy]

Grr how could i start this again.. i swore off arguing with crazy Mac zealots.. use your inferior computer, see if i care.

Re:There Steve goes again..

[ainsoph]

The reason why people like you can never appreciate the G4, or apple hardware, or pretty much anything apple ever does for that matter, is that you never actually use your computer to *do* much of anything. Quake? Please. Quit playing your little games and grow up. Photoshop is a real world application used by untold legions of graphics designers in professional situations

Ok Ok OK. Obviously, us usual, a Mac lover knows not a godamn thing about computers and acts like a freeking expert. The collective idiocy of your subculture is astounding. The breath of fresh air has been MacOSX. I love going into Macintosh channels on irc and listening to people talk about compiling. It gives me hope. You my friend, do not.

Yes Photoshop is a 'real world' application used by real designers. And yes, it has effects that use the CPU quite nicely. BUT. Quake is a real world technological feat, and I would venture to say, that quake 3 would stress your hardware a hell of a lot more than your piddley little Photoshop. In fact, thats why certain demos are created (like massive for example) and are used universally as benchmark tests for hardware. Even by non-gamers.

Ok, I will agree that the new realtime effects in the video realm being advertised are quite impressive. Cool! That and the Unix inderpinnings of OSX may be enough to consider buying a Mac again, but not enough to consider jihad.

Your linux kernel compile comment again just make seem a moron. Yeah people who know nothing about a computer would think compilation of source code means nothing.

If I were a total ass I would venture to say, people like you should not be using computers, due to your complete lack of expertise in the matter. You dont put people on racehorses that dont know what they are doing, why should we on computers? Oh right. Thats why we have Mac OS, for people like you.

goodbye.. goodluck. enjoy that stupid ass mouse and claims of supercomputerdom. You dont have a clue, and thats why you still by computers that cost 5000 bucks.

only idiots use computers made by a huge corporation that uses the age old technique of pretending to be a revolution in order to inspire religious convictions in usually non-intelligent follower types.

Re:There Steve goes again..

[Anonymous Coward]

AMD and Intel have processors running at 2+ times that clock speed.. gimme a break.

according to your logic you would put 2 ghz intel cpu
over a 900 mhz intel xeon as a server.

boy intel must be pulling a fast one on people paying alot more for the xeon!

youre an idiot.

Re:There Steve goes again..

[ainsoph]

The software that is G4 optimized on the Mac platform is heaviliy optimized, and many are creative applications.

Umm.. Are you paying attention there? OPTIMZED. Yeah, and YAWN, we have all been through the Adobe optimizing for the processor due to the joined at the hip business relationship Apple and that company have.

Yawn...

The thing about mac folks is, like Resident Bush, you make it too easy..

Re:There Steve goes again..

[shandrew]

Compilation of source code for completely different hardware architectures is a horrible benchmark. You aren't even performing the same operation, and compiler efficiency varies widely.

Re:There Steve goes again..

[Anonymous Coward]

"If I were a total ass I would venture to say, people like you should not be using computers,
due to your complete lack of expertise in the matter. You dont put people on racehorses that dont know what they are doing, why should we on computers? Oh right. Thats why we have Mac OS, for people like you."

So we can assume that you allow yourself to drive a car because you are a mechanic, right? I mean, you wouldn't want to go around _using_ something you don't _completely_ understand? Right?

And that's also the same reason that all good Quake players have to have looked through the source code? :P

Sheesh.

Apple and the makeup accessory trend

[Darlington]

I don't understand Apple's trend of making low-end devices that look like makeup accessories. The first iBook (in orange and pink, I think) looked for all the world like a Barbie Makeup Case. Now they give us an iMac that is clearly modeled after a makeup mirror. What gives? Does Steve Jobs have an adolescent teenage daughter making design decisions or something?

G4 slower than x86?

[Refrag]

Not significantly. My 600mHz iBook torches my 600mHz Pentium 3 workstation when crunching numbers (SETI@home), or ripping AC3 from DVDs. A 800mHz G4 processor can probably hold its own with a 1.6gHz Pentium 4 and will beat it on apps that use Altivec.

Re:G4 slower than x86?

[qurob]

True, but remember that: 600mhz P3 = 1998 600mhz G4 = 2001

Re:G4 slower than x86?

[mjolnir_]

Ever drive a big American car made in the 70s? With a big-block V8?

My friend Dennis had a `76 Caddy Fleetwood with a damn big engine. The car probably weighed two tons, it was huge, and it had pickup. Redlined at 5k RPM.

A few years later, when I was in college, my roommate Dan had a Ford Escort GT. It was tiny, it had a small engine with hoses everywhere, and it redlined somewhere in the high 6ks IIRC.

The Caddy was way faster.

Mot G4s are like that compared to Intel x86: they push more through, less often. The difference isn't big enough to say that an 800 mhz G4 can top a 2 ghz P4.. Just need to remember that MHZ /= MHZ on different CPU types.

-mj

Re:G4 slower than x86?

[stepson]

I have a toyota celica GTS. Its light, about 2500 pounds, revs to around 8200RPMS (redline is at 7800 though), and has 180 Horsepower. A corvette, which is heavier, and has a pushrod engine, will still smoke it. Despite my cars technical abilities ... sometimes, you're just too far behind.

Re:G4 slower than x86?

[Refrag]

My iBook has a 600mHz G3 processor, not G4.

Re:G4 slower than x86?

[Anonymous Coward]

U R DUM.

very very DUM

Re:G4 slower than x86?

[mallie_mcg]

True, but remember that: 600mhz P3 = 1998 600mhz G4 = 2001

Please note that the original author was comparing his iBook 600 MHz to a PIII, this means a G3, which is the same era. And ergo a fair/sane comparison.

It's cute, but...

[Animats]

• The $1300 price is high for an entry-level machine. And that's without DVD capability. This thing needs to be selling for under $1000 by next xmas, with DVD play. If Apple can bring that off, they have a chance in the consumer market again.
• It's a bit late to be introducing a GEForce 2. GEForce 3 is the current product, and it's already had a mid-cycle speed bump and price drop. GEForce 4 is coming this spring. I suspect they're actually using an NVidia Nforce chip, or some variation thereof, for audio, video, networking, I/O, etc. That offers GEForce 2 compatible graphics, and would bring the parts cost down.
• It's amusing that the pictures don't show any cables, even where there should be some. Apple has a mania for "little boxes all over the desktop", which dates all the way back to the Apple II. And they never make them so that they stack. Look at the cute little speakers, cluttering up the desktop.
• Looks like Apple gave up on case colors. White only this time.

I've been saying for a while that the obvious next step was to put the computer in the monitor base and get rid of "slots" for PC boards, along with the floppy drive. I wasn't expecting a hemisphere, though. That's very cute.

Re:It's cute, but...

[Toraz Chryx]

I'm kinda surprised they aren't doing a version of the imac with a chrome or titanium case..

that would actually have a certain amount of style to it :)

Big Display

[coug_]

Apple also announced other new products like a 14' display on some iBooks, and iPhoto - the iTunes of digital photos."

14 foot display!!! Holy cow!!

Re:Big Display

[Darth RadaR]

Actually, it's got a 15" display.

Same optical mouse

[geoffb91]

Jobs said that the new iMac comes with the same optical mouse they already ship (but that and the USB keyboard on the stage appeared to be clear and white and not black).

I think that mouse is fine and comparable in quality to the Logitech optical USB mice that HP has been shipping with Vectra series desktops except for the second button of course (since I prefer a trackball I picked up an optical Microsoft Trackball Explorer for my G4 desktop).

-G

Re:Same optical mouse

[gig]

The new iMac has the same Pro Keyboard and Pro Mouse that they've been shipping for a year or so, except that where the keyboard and mouse were previously black, they are white on the new iMac. They are both basically clear with either black or white accents.

iBreast (So much nicer than iTit, I think...)

[MsGeek]

Actually if you wanted to look at just the guts and the way they are put together IBM did this two years ago with the NetVista. However the NV was a crippled i810 chipset based PC, with no way of turning off Vampire Video or the crappy on-board sound. This might actually have decent stuff on the inside of it.

Missed opportunity for a pivoting screen, though. Portrait/Landscape on-the-fly would be schweet.

Re:I wish that laptops had the cool screen arm thi

[Anonymous Coward]

If you put the base of the arm on one side and designed it right, you could probably keep the center of gravity within a stable locus.

It does seem hard to design something lightweight, compact and durable, not to mention finding materials that are inexpensive enough.

Would be VERY nice, though - my biggest complaint about using a laptop is that the screen is so close to the keyboard.

This begs the question...

[tswinzig]

I remember a few years ago when they announced the IMAC, I listened the keynote on streaming audio. I was amazed.. Today I watched the keynote on QuickTime.

So how did the first iMac sound?

i attend, therefore i report

[fishboy]

wow chrisD, that was the lamest keynote report i have ever read. talk about stunning analysis. do you go to school for that kind of gripping cutthroat prose?

was there any advantage in having you there? could a better report have been written from my desk at home with the flawless quicktime webcast?

i shall be more specific? why is linux more powerful than osx? because you were at the keynote? why don't you fill us in, because, like i said, we weren't there and i'd like a little more background. were the cracks in the cubes really because of overheating? did they mention this at the keynote? and what a bomb adobe dropped! photoshop on osx, who ever would have guessed! i was glad you were there to scoop that photoshop betas have been available for over a month.

and these few sentences: "The keynote was terrific, but in the end, not so outstanding." or "[the imac's] got a good price/feature spectrum..." and then one sentence late "...It's not particularly a good deal" at the keynote did you have trouble making up your mind?

iphoto is not a source of revenue for apple-- or if it is you can bet the shareholders don't give a shit about it. it is a hook to bring customers aboard. tell us that, tell us why it is interesting that a hardware/software company bundles these services with the software they are giving away. tell us why that is significant. did the slick powerpoint presentations leave you speechless? these items are so much more important than iphoto being a good cataloguing program. that is why you went to see the keynote. because apple makes a photo program more than a photo program, just like they make a computer (somehow) more than a computer.

please. learn how to report.

Re:i attend, therefore i report

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with Mr Fishboy here. The report is
a disgrace. Very vague, pointless... and badly
put together. He is impressesed and he is not
impressed, he expectes and he does not expect.
He is not on his was to the Pullitzer, that's
for sure...

Biggest reason desktops will still: the display

[tgd]

The iMac looks nice, but a 15" 1024x768 screen won't cut it. Home users are okay at that, but professional mac users aren't going to work at that sort of extremely limited screen resolution.

For a while I was thinking this might be my first foray into the world of Macintoshes, but the unusually low resolution for a 15" LCD ends any interest in my mind. They should've used screens like the one on my mother's Dell notebook: 15" and 1440x1024 or something close to that.

Re:Biggest reason desktops will still: the display

[maggard]

The iMac looks nice, but a 15" 1024x768 screen won't cut it. Home users are okay at that, but professional mac users aren't going to work at that sort of extremely limited screen resolution.

Which is why the iMac line is the consumer one (doi!)

Apple has 4 main lines:

1. iMac - Intro/consumer line. All-in-one design with quality components & limited expandability ('cause most home folks never change anything and lots was built in anyway) at a low price.
2. Tower models - really the professional desktop line which does cross over into home users with specific needs. Opens easy, slots for cards, customizable.
3. iBook - Laptops for the masses at a great price/product point. Lotsa built-in goodies in a durable case with long batter life.
4. PowerBook - Take-no-prisoners complete desktop replacement offering performance and features at a high but competitive price.

As for Mac's vs x86 boxes - the prices aren't all that far off. Yes one can throw together a Frankenstein PC at lower cost but for a warranteed product from a major manufacturer with quality components (and Apple does use quality displays & such) with the OS included they're generally a good deal, certainly when one considers the integration.

No, they're not to everyone's taste but MacOS X is a great unix and coupled with this hardware it's damn enticing. Besides - it's getting more unix out to more folks then anyone else ever has.

Re:Biggest reason desktops will still: the display

[krisbrowne42]

Just for point, comparing the base-model iMac to equivilant: Dell -- $1381.00 Compaq -- $1403.00 That's once you add a decent video card (remember, in the price they quote, they only include an 8mb card with no 3d accelleration), Sound, and 15" flat panel, and around 1.3ghz P4 (which a G4 will smoke) And you still don't get the style factor.

Luxo Jr.

[h4x0r-3l337]

Somebody needs to redo the Luxo Jr animation starring this new iLamp...

Learning mouse buttons vs. newbieness vs. age

[Toe, The]

A 3 year old may learn mousing much better than a 50 year old. Kids learn fast. Adults can get stuck in their ways.

I've seen people spend a day trying to get used to a mouse, and still not get the hang of it. It depends on age, intelligence, and... nerdiness. Some people have it, some don't.

Re:Learning mouse buttons vs. newbieness vs. age

[Anonymous Coward]

I find it's not the number of buttons but how often you need to click them. I know so many fairly advanced users who still double-click hyperlinks. When you want then to single-click anything you practically have to yell at them. Last I remember Mac's still use double clicking in places.

One Thing Missing

[medcalf]

There is really only one thing missing from the (high-end, at least) new iMac: if it's to be the center of the digital house, why does it not have more USB ports? Admittedly, you can buy a USB hub, but the iMac is supposed to be "the" digital hub.

Re:One Thing Missing

[mattscape]

3 is enough if you think that many will just use 1 eg: mouse and keyboard

Re:One Thing Missing

[aengblom]

I totally agree. USB Hubs are cheap now, but this is supposed to reduce clutter not add to it. Plus, this machine is supposed to be about connections, which it has too few of.

USB: Mouse and Keyboard
USB: Printer
USB: PDA
USB: IPOD
FIREWIRE/USB: Scanner
FIREWIRE: Video Camera..

Re:One Thing Missing

[Refrag]

It has five USB ports. How many did you want it to have? (three in the back of the unit, two in the keyboard)

Re:One Thing Missing

[medcalf]

Well, one of the ports in the back holds the keyboard, and one of the ports in the keyboard holds the mouse. That adds up to 3 usable ports. Hook up the printer, camera and Palm cradle, and I'm done with USB ports. For now, that's OK, but what happens when I add something else? Guess I could plug the camera into the keyboard, since I could then easily swap that cable with whatever device I might need to add next.

Re:One Thing Missing

[Anonymous Coward]

quote: "USB: IPOD"

iPod uses firewire. thats why it can get a full album onto itself in 10 seconds.

Re:One Thing Missing

[Maserati]

USB hubs are dirt cheap these days.

Re:One Thing Missing

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, what else exactly are you going to add? A video camera? That would go into the Firewire port anyway. CD burner? It's internal. External HD? Maybe, but I imagine somebody shelling out for one of these will be using a Firewire drive.

Also, if you're keeping your digital camera plugged into the computer all the time, you're taking WAY too many pictures of your desk.

OT: Taco Get Off Your High-Horse

[Anonymous Coward]

Is anyone else tired of listening to Taco constantly bashing the Macintosh? Maybe this is because OSX is a closed-source Unix-based OS that works much better than any open-sourced OS.

Re:OT: Taco Get Off Your High-Horse

[MessiahXI]

GUI aside, I'm not sure you could say that OSX works "much better" than anything.

Interesting response to Apple shows...

[bryan1945]

Almost every Apple event gets mucho hype by the rumor community now. People speculate like mad, heck, I know 2 guys who actually made bets on what was going to be announced.

Then, after each show, a large number of people are disappointed and a few are wildly happy. A couple of in between the 2. But mostly people are just disappointed in Apple for not living up to their expectations! Granted, this time Apple _did_ beat their own drum way too loudly, but I can't think of any other computer hardware company that gets this kind of press, rumor mongering, and vast discussion after the event.

Just wondering if anyone has a good idea why Apple inspires all this? Is it Steve-o and his RDF? Because Apple is the underdog? Apple's penchant for always pushing the boundry on HW design (like, love, or hate it)? Personally I think it's because Apple keeps innovating, whether it's a success like the original iMac or a failure like the Cube, keeps people wondering "Just what the hell are they gonna pull next?!"

Re:Interesting response to Apple shows...

[cowscows]

That is it exactly. The only other place that the computer industry moves is in numbers. It's nice to see processor speeds go up, or watch HD sizes increase, but it's not suprising. It's expected and demanded. Apple changes the way computers look, work, and interact with people. It's exciting.

Re:Looks weird? Well that's what I thought...

[Anonymous Coward]

You're absolutely right. When I first saw it in the pictures, I thought "What the hell is that thing"; but once I saw it up close, it was just the most beautiful thing. That's one of Apple's main problems (and why the now have retail stores); a lot of their products don't photograph very well.

Re:So much for the Pro line. (photoshop)

[Anonymous Coward]

that's pathetic. any real app can be compiled on 32 or 64 bit machines without changing the code.

Re:Reason for PowerMac and iMac processor situatio

[frankie]

new, faster G4s (or call them G5s - same chip, regardless)

I certainly hope not. While it'll be nice to see the Apollo chips running above 1GHz, they're just the same 32 bit G4s with a little speedbump. Calling that a G5 would be evil marketing crap.

The real PPC8500 is a 64 bit monster running on DDR.

For Linux Users Have A Look At IBM X-Series

[Anonymous Coward]

The new IBM NetVista X-Series computers which have been available since last year have a similar (if not smaller) form factor than the new iMacs... and they can run Linux, have a more powerful processor (P4 1.6-1.8 GHz)... bigger flat monitor (17") and start at $1,500... too bad IBM doesn't have someone like Steve Jobs to hype them up... but they certainly are better value for my dollar than the new iMac!

Re:For Linux Users Have A Look At IBM X-Series

[Anonymous Coward]

Okay, let's look at the X Series vs. the new iMac:

For $1799, with as similar a configuration as possible you get:

X Series: 20 GB drive
iMac: 60 GB drive

X Series: 48X-20X CD-ROM drive
iMac: CD-RW/DVD-R drive

X Series: ATI Rage 128 Ultra 4X AGP AGP Graphics with 16MB SDRAM
iMac: GeForce 2 MX with 32MB SDRAM

Yeah, looks real competitive there.

Time Canada advance press release

[Anonymous Coward]

Ooooooooooooooooh - Slashdot is gonna get in trouble for reporting this!

The Time Canada/iMac advance press release was planned:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/23563.html

"Apple had given the Canadian edition of Time magazine a sneak
preview of the new iMac, hours ahead of its unveiling at
MacWorld Expo in San Francisco this morning."

You Slashdotters are pathetic with your "Time Canada is gonna get in trouble" theories. You obviously should get out more.

Re:So much for the Pro line. (photoshop)

[zaffir]

Oh goodie, that means that when i go to MWNY i can sit through another Photoshop Bakeoff(tm). Anyways, i think that MWNY is meant for the power users. Last year they announced the Quicksilver G4, but only upgraded the iMac line a little. Last year's SanFran saw the introduction of the Powerbook G4 (aka the best laptop ever) and the "new" iBook. You never know with Apple rumors. Where's the iWalk? Or the G5? Sometimes the rumors sites come close - they predicted the cube, only it was a little different than they claimed - and they've even gotten a few things right, such as the optical mouse.

But...

[Asikaa]

...can it run Windows XP?

*duck*

Re:But...

[Anonymous Coward]

Mac run XP? are you joking?

Why would you want it to? Mac OS in all of its incarnations has always been easier to use and more stable than Windows. It took me all of 5 minutes to get used to the MAC OS with its stability and clean interface.

I have an old 603e 275mhz mac running on my desk with OS 8.6. Next to it I have an Althon 1.0 ghz with 512mb and Win XP. Wanna know which machine I use more for my everyday computing . . . the mac.

You could get a pretty new version of the OS (say 8.6-9.0) and still get it running pretty decently on a Mac from 1996. Is there any PC hardware back in 1996 that would even run Windows 95 efficiently?

Re:But...

[Asikaa]

Yes I was joking, hence the *duck* after the comment. And no, it was not meant as a troll.

Re:But...

[Maserati]

Yes, in VirtualPC 5

About the only thing VirtualPC won't run is Windows versions before 95.

Re:But...

[MaxwellsSilverHammer]

"Troll" ????
I thought that was funny, myself.

Re:So much for the Pro line. (photoshop)

[TedTodorov]

I don't know about a G5 re-write, but I am convinced that the release of the new PowerMacs will coincide with the OS X release of Photoshop.

What's a new PowerMac without a Photoshop demo? And Steve will never do another OS 9 demo.

However there is no way in hell they will wait until MWNY -- their Pro sales would go down to zero and they'll have a major user revolt on their hands. March is the latest possible date.

Ted

Re:I wish that laptops had the cool screen arm thi

[FatRatBastard]

Simple Solution:

USB Keyboard/Mouse and one of those adjustable monitor arms to place your laptop. Maybe not the most elegant, but will work in a pinch.

What, no iWalk?

[nobodyman]

Guess that older story, (and the story before that) was a hoax. Oops. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice...

new imac

[tHepUg]

this thing is gonna melt and its ugly

G4 vs. Wintel Processor Speeds

[rob.eberhardt]

I always hear people on /. complaining that the G4's are slow compared to the latest Intel/AMD chips, but I wonder how many of you have actually used both systems in production.

For the past 6 mos. I've been using a 733Mhz G4 (OS9.x) and a dual-1Ghz Dell Dimension (Win2KPro) for AfterEffects work, and during renders the single-chip G4 beats the pants off the Dell. Almost twice as fast. So, like Steve is always trying to remind us, all Mhz are clearly not created = =.

Re:G4 vs. Wintel Processor Speeds

[schvenk]

Yes! There seems to be this idea among many /. users in this discussion that G4s are significantly slower, and that somehow that's Apple's biggest problem.

MHz don't match up across processor families. Architectural considerations, not to mention OSes, come into play too. While the discussion I've seen seems to call into question whether G4s are actually 30% faster than P4s per MHz, there's clearly enough evidence to indicate that the G4 can hold its own! Why, then, this insistence that it doesn't measure up?

Re:G4 vs. Wintel Processor Speeds

[Plebis]

Well sure, but what kind of gfx card do you have in the two machines? This will make a *big* differnce, eh.

Re:G4 vs. Wintel Processor Speeds

[GauteL]

While I do recognize that speed != MHz, you are using a very high end G4 to compare to a currently pretty low end x86. While the 1GHz x86 is a dual-CPU box, this is never the same as higher clocked 1-CPU workstation.

I'm pretty sure a 1.5GHz Athlon will beat an 800MHz G4 for most purposes.

Re:G4 vs. Wintel Processor Speeds

[jamieo]

I think you should correct what you say, rather than "the single-chip G4 beats the pants off the Dell" you should be saying "the single-chip G4 running MacOS 9 beats the pants off the dual 1GHz (what P3?) Dell running Win2k".

Running pre-MacOS X it should be bloody fast - you're running in effect a 15 year old technology OS (and I don't mean it's no good) on modern technology. And everyone knows Windows (in all flavours) just makes decent hardware run like a 15 year old machine ;)

Surely the point is, the GHz/MHz doesn't matter, the G4 is fast enough for the uses required and that's that.

Re:G4 vs. Wintel Processor Speeds

[Roger_Wilco]

all Mhz are clearly not created = =

In case this still needs to be emphasized, the Sun Enterprise 5500 (a decently fast machine :P ) has CPUs at only 464 MHz.

PowerMac G5.

[hotsauce]

Exactly. I thought the high prices on the tower line (they had been /raised/ recently) meant for sure G5s were due. When I saw the G4 iMacs, there could be no question about it.

So I let the stream run, waiting for "One more thing...". Nothing. Can you believe the gall of the man, he just left!

The only thing I can think of is Macworld Expo Tokyo in a month. They like to send clear messages, and for now they want the iMac on the cover of magazines. It also makes sense that they save something for Japan.

This is an ABORTION

[Anonymous Coward]

Just think, when you try to return the iMAc to APPLE when it needs repair, and you have thrown the original packaging away, how the hell are you going to pack it back up? Apple will not honor warranties where physical damage occurs. What a fucked up design. All you numbnuts who LIKE it can go BLOW GOATS.

Re:This is an ABORTION

[Anonymous Coward]

If you throw away the packaging for any expensive piece of electronics within the warranty period, you are a stupid goat fucker who should still be using a typewriter.

And anyway, in the more than three years the original iMac has existed, I have supported many, many of them and in that time only two have ever needed repair. And then we called the service provider, and they picked them up and delivered them to us when they were fixed. Mere mortals can take them to the nearest Apple Authorized Service Provider to get them taken care of, no packaging required.

Re:This is an ABORTION

[deisom]

It's quite simple, really. Apple will send you a mailing box overnight, with delivery fees prepaid.

PCs still cost much less (50%) if you ignore style

[Anonymous Coward]

It's goofy to think that the costs are the same. You can, of course, get a much cheaper brand name PC with better specs e.g.:

EMachines 4155 (P4, CDRW, DVD, etc.) $800
High quality 15" LCD Monitor (e.g. Samsung) $400

The EMachines machine is missing firewire, but has a much faster CPU, slots, etc.

That's $1200 vs. $1800. Apples cost 50% more, as usual.

And if you use a normal monitor instead of a LCD, the price differential is even higher.

iMac is a patent on the future desktop.

[Anonymous Coward]

All I can say is congratulations Steve. You have patented the future of desktop computers.

Why (isn't it obvious)?

It is the only design that meets the criteria, other than a round cone shaped base. This is the only way you can have a swivel tilt flatscreen attached to a base, with 180 degrees swivel and full tilt in any position.

I have sat here with my Solidworks program ( I quickly modeled this thing), and can see this was the creation of necessity. Nothing else will work as well, and allow the same amount of interior space.

The base must be round to give the maximum interior space and allow the monitor to fully swivel and go full down or tilt in any position. Furthermore, the hemisphere is superior to the cone in that it provides the maximum interior room for the design, while meeting the viewability criteria. Greater room inside and outside means cooler temperature as well.

And of course you can bet apple will sue the pants off of anyone who infringes on this patent.

This is a very well thought out unit.

Re:iMac is a patent on the future desktop.

[SouthSideMike]

What's so innovative as compared to this nearly one year old design from IBM?
IBM NetVista X-Series

FireWire vs. USB (no 2.0?)

[DeadBugs]

I noticed that the new IMac is using USB 1.1 instead of the much improved 2.0 . With such a shiny new machine I would have expected to see 2.0, but then I am not much of an iMac user. I'm sure Apple is more in favor of FireWire, but I still wonder why no 2.0. Unless OSX does not support it

Link to download streak of Keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone manage to find a link so us less fortunate to see the broadcast that was sent out live (Apple cannot even get that right, tried for over an hour, kept getting timeout's!) and capture it or whatever.

A link to a .mov foile would be great.

I found that it was being broadcast on satellite, from here, MWSF keynote to be available via satellite.

Telstar 5/Transponder 25 KU Band
Orbital slot: 97 degrees west
Downlink Frequency: 12144 MHz
Polarity: Vertical down
Audio Subcarriers: 6.2 and 6.8

Galaxy 3R/Transponder 5 C Band
Orbital slot: 95 degrees west
Downlink Frequency: 3800 MHz
Polarity: Horizontal down
Audio Subcarriers: 6.2 and 6.8

crt replaced by lcd?

[Anonymous Coward]

A quick visit to the Apple store reveals that Apple-branded CRT displays are no longer available. CRTs will get the final boot from the Apple line when the current-generation imac is taken out of production in the near future. The 'death of the crt' was even made mention of in the keynote. One can only hope....

You think you got it bad?

[los furtive]

I'm stuck with an iBM iSeries!

-okay, so maybe it's not that funny.

New iMac

[Nonillion]

This thing sure has a different look to it.... But does anyone else notice that the desktop looks similar to the CDE desktop????

rm -r windows

Developers *need* to tune the app for 64-bit

[yerricde]

any real app can be compiled on 32 or 64 bit machines without changing the code.

True, but today's compilers won't give nearly the same performance as a specially-tuned version, and Adobe is not going to put the PHOTOSHOP® name on a product that performs like a dog.

Re:Developers *need* to tune the app for 64-bit

[Anonymous Coward]

Adobe is not going to put the PHOTOSHOP® name on a product that performs like a dog.

You're being sarcastic right? I've never met an Adobe program that doesn't run like shit on anything but Mac. It seems they only care about writing for the Mac and everything else is written like shit.

Re:Developers *need* to tune the app for 64-bit

[Anonymous Coward]

You are seriously tripping if your believe what you just wrote. I use the entire Adobe line on both Windows 2000/XP and OS 9.2.2. They are head to head.

Re:Developers *need* to tune the app for 64-bit

[Anonymous Coward]

You use the entire Adobe line? Somehow I doubt that you use all ~60 products that they currently have (including eBook Reader and ActiveShare?). Either way - tell me you have never had Acrobat lock up while opening it via plugin in IE or Netscape? Never closed it just to find it still running in your processes? I won't even start with the bloat that is Photoshop and Premiere.

Re:I wish that laptops had the cool screen arm thi

[Anonymous Coward]

A Road Tools CoolPad (either the smaller one for travelling, or the larger one for a wide laptop) would do some of what you want.

Re:Don't operate during takeoff, landing or inflig

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope, you can use it in an airplane. Remember that even if you're 20,000 feet in the air, it's not the same 20,000 feet environment inside the cabin.

I'd buy an iBook if

[mojo-raisin]

It had a
13" 1280x1024 feed foward LCD display
700MHz G4
DDR Ram
Mobile Radeon
DVD
DVI connector
FireWire2
USB2
Gigabit Ethernet
Airport
Irda
Bluetooth
PCMCIA

and weighed 5lbs and cost $1800

Anything else is a lame waste of hype... Let's see people buy into this crap next time.

Re:I'd buy an iBook if

[PMan88]

13" 1280x1024 feed foward LCD display
it's got a 15" LCD. 1280 rez on a 13" monitor?!? what are you thinking?
700MHz G4
800MHz, even better
DDR Ram
it could use ddr ram, but macs generally don't need ram that fast because the processor speed and bus speed are generally slower than pc's. ddr would be faster than needed
Mobile Radeon
geforce2 mx
DVD
superdrive (that's a DVD burner and reader,m cd burner, and cd reader in one)
DVI connector
wait for the 17" model. if u need a bigger monitor than that, u should be getting a powermac anyway
FireWire2
no such thing
USB2
there aren't many usb2 things yet. firewire covers what you would need usb2 for anyway
Gigabit Ethernet
it's got 10/100. again, if you need 1000, you should have a powermac
Airport
it has airport. just get the card and put it in
Irda
irda is slow compared to usb or airport. also not as compatible
Bluetooth
could interfere with airport. noobs wouldn't like that
PCMCIA
it's not a laptop

Re:I'd buy an iBook if

[Anonymous Coward]

The desired specs were for an iBook, not the iMac.

Your cramped mousing space

[gaudior]

will get a lot bigger with the new iMac. More desk space, along with all the high-powered guts under the hood.

Re:PCs still cost much less (50%) if you ignore st

[Dragonmaster Lou]

I would hardly call EMachines a good "brand name" though. EMachines is pretty much the Yugo of the PC market.

If you want to compare prices, you're better off with something like a Dell that charges a bit more because of their having a reputation as being a solid manufacturer.

they forgot #4

[option8]

According to Steve Jobs the top 3 things we asked for were put into this new design. 1. Flat Panel screen 2. G4 processor 3. Superdrive (DVD burner on one of 3 models)

they forgot #4, and i think the loudest of the reactions to the old design: a 17'' screen.

they can very easily upgrade the new line with a 17'' option - and i think it will be the first thing they do when they revamp the line in a few months (along with dropping the price). look at it: just lengthen the swing arm a bit and put a larger display at the end of it; hell, it's almost something a user could do on his own...

Re:they forgot #4

[etceteral]

In a way, they kind of have.

Remember, this is a 15" flat-panel display, it has nearly the effective display area of a 17" CRT monitor.

It may not be a 100% increase to 17, but it's definitely a decent size increase over the old iMac's 15" CRT.

Re:they forgot #4

[option8]

or, for that matter, a different aspect ratio, like a cinema display, or one of the other, wide format displays they sell...

hmm.. then maybe it would be worth watching a DVD movie on.

Re:they forgot #4

[Stormie]

In a way, they kind of have. Remember, this is a 15" flat-panel display, it has nearly the effective display area of a 17" CRT monitor.

Truly. I just built a new PC, after selling my old one and moving to the other side of the world, and this time went for a flat-panel. A Hercules Prophetview, to be precise, which is a 15"-er. Measured up against the 17" CRT on a friend's machine, this is the tiniest bit smaller.. maybe it's equivalent to a 16.5" CRT.

This is easily the coolest thing I've ever bought for a PC, it's absolutely beautiful, takes up so little space, it's ultra crisp and flicker free at 1024x768, blurs up lower resolutions attractively rather than just doubling up on some pixels like the shitty display on my old laptop, and has no ghosting at all even roaring around in Serious Sam or Wolfenstein. I'm delighted, and if the screen in the new iMac is similar quality, I can guarantee you that anyone out there in consumer-land will be equally delighted.

Re:they forgot #4

[weave]

It may be 17" viewable, but it's only 1024x768. I don't know if I could step down that far. I'm used to a lot of screen real estate (1600x1200 on a 19" CRT).

I'd feel like I'm looking at the world thru my old 532x320 original mac display again, where one had to turn off all toolbars and other crap just to be able to see more than a paragraph of text in my doc.

Still, I'm seriously thinking of buying one. It'd look real good in the living room. A perfect recreational machine.

Re:they forgot #4

[Anonymous Coward]

Cost. Weight on the arm. both would bring things down

Re:they forgot #4

[Brownian Motion]

In case you missed it. A 17" CRT monitor is roughly equal to a 15" LCD. Look at the "viewable area" on your average 17" monitor. The viewable area on a 15" LCD monitor is 15". So apple gave users a '17" display'.

But yes, I'm sure that eventually Apple will make an iMac with a 17" LCD. The previous iMac would have gotten too big with a 17" CRT.

Who's the borg now, huh?

[snilloc]

Cubes. Partial Spheres. Hmm.....

Time to rethink which company gets the "borg" icon...

Re:PCs still cost much less (50%) if you ignore st

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget the DVD burner. Those still aren't cheap. (And you can't just dismiss the FireWire, either.)

Re:I wish that laptops had the cool screen arm thi

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, I agree! Until that day, laptops will still be a pain in the neck (literally).

installing iPhoto as i post...

[AtaruMoroboshi]

As a lifelong Apple computer fanatic, I was tickled pink by this keynote. The new iMac is wicked!

I'm currently the owner of an iBook dvd 500, and will probably be in the market for a new mac by the end of this year. I will be interested to see what they do to the powerbook line...

Re:PCs still cost much less (50%) if you ignore st

[Altus]

realy?

does that come with the DVD burner?

Interesting

[paro12]

Does anyone else find it odd, that this new imac which is being heralded for its 10.6" diameter base is the first imac (not to mention the first mac of any kind) that i have seen shipped with a full size keyboard (http://www.apple.com/imac) in a long time. I mean, i hate those stupid little keyboards as much as anyone, but doesn't it make sense to package those in with this unit?

Just a random observation
~trizout

Re:Interesting

[HerrNewton]

Ummm... Apple has been shipping the full 108 key keyboard for at least a year now.

Re:Interesting

[Decimal Dave]

Quite right about that. The new iMac does, in fact, appear to have a new keyboard. This was not mentioned durign the keynote but the keys are now white instead of black and the mouse interior is silver. Too bad about the mouse... I sort of preferred the "bead of mercury" effect the old optical mice had.

Dell does

[S. Allen]

not a smart ass, but just as smart.

I like it but...

[Asikaa]

Just a few thoughts...

- If you had the screen adjusted in a low position (because of your seating position, setup or whatever), wouldn't you have to move the screen up every time you want to change disks in the drive?

- How are they cooling this thing? I can see a vent around the top, but if it has a fan surely two vents would be needed, intake and outflow?

- Apple should have made it an option to mount it upside-down, effectively hanging it from the top shelf of a workstation. The screen would need to be rotatable through 180 degrees and the drive would need to be capable of being remounted upside-down too. Maybe it's hackable.

- How long before we see the colors that the existing iMac demographic love so much? :)

Re:I like it but...

[davidhan]

- If you had the screen adjusted in a low position (because of your seating position, setup or whatever), wouldn't you have to move the screen up every time you want to change disks in the drive?

That sounds easier than what I have to do to change disks with my mini-tower PC located on the floor beneath my desk. Its set far back down there so I don't keep kicking it, so I have to bend down so my head is under the desk in order for me to reach the drive.

There's not enough room on the desk for me to put it on top.

Re:I like it but...

[hether]

Mounting it upside down is a great idea! It would mean having 100% of your desk space available, something I could really use.

Re:I like it but...

[Anonymous Coward]

i just did the math, and that means that your keyboard, mouse, and speakers would take up 0% of your desktop. What kind of magic input devices are you using, by the way?

Re:I like it but...

[hether]

I have one of those *magical* keyboard and mouse trays that go under the desk and adjust to any height, and I usually wear headphones. Thanks for asking!

colors

[bay43270]

Rather than their typical life-saver colors, I would love to see this in earth tones. Mustard yellow, two shades of puky green, some shade of brown with a bit of grey. It just reminds me of a "modern" lamp from the 1930s. Maybe they should run with it.

Re:colors

[tibbetts]

To get the full 1930s effect, just imagine a Bakelite Mac, à la Art Deco telephones.

EfDTT, under 1/2 KB, uses only 10% CPU

[yerricde]

I forget how long it takes to decrypt a DVD

EfDTT by Charles Hannum, whose source code fits under half a kilobyte, can descramble CSS data in real-time using only 10% of a G4 Cube's CPU power. Think of what an implementation that uses more tables can do.

'new' boomers?

[Anonymous Coward]

Baby boomers are, by definition, like 50 years old. They don't really qualify as "new", and it's pretty hard to suddenly become one... :)

Perhaps you're thinking of yuppies or something...

Re:'new' boomers?

[Anonymous Coward]

"new boomers" are their children.

"WHAT WILL WE DO WITH 72 MILLION?

Americans aged 18 and under are coming of age. In an effort to prepare marketers to increase their sales power to these 72 million children and teens being raised by baby boomers, American Demographics magazine (October 1995) released an eye-opening marketing analysis on "The Next Baby Boom". The article's author, Susan Mitchell, issues a wake-up call regarding the state of the next generation: "Like the baby boom before them, their huge number will profoundly influence markets, attitudes, and society. Their true power will become apparent in the next five years as the oldest members come of age. Their habits will shape America for most of the 21st century."

In what ways does American Demographics see new baby boom children as different from their parents? In general terms, this new generation is far more diverse. They differ radically from each other racially, socio-economically, and in family arrangements. They are facing a new and complex set of challenges and problems that their parents never experienced. Their world is tainted by AIDS, crime, violence and divorce. And finally, they are forced to assume adult responsibilities at younger and younger ages because so many more parents are in the work force.

But what are the specific ways in which this new generation of children and teens will be markedly different from their parents?

First, they will accept mixed races. Only 67 percent of this generation fall into the category "non-Hispanic white". American Demographics believes that since so many children and teens are of mixed racial origin, this will be the first generation to seriously question all traditional racial categories. Evidence of this trend already exists as minority culture influences the majority. For example, more than half of all hip-hop rap music albums are purchased by white middle-class male teens. Minority music, fashion and language is crossing over. Still, there is some concern that racial divisions and hatred among some new baby boomers may widen.

Second, the new baby boom will be characterized by non-traditional families. Original boomers asked, "What does your father do for a living?" The new boomers will wonder, "Does your dad live with you?" Family arrangements will be varied and often will not include a father. Of particular interest is that as children of divorce, the next generation will grow up determined to have strong marriages for themselves. Already, three-fourths of children aged 13 to 17 believe it's too easy to get divorced and 71 percent believe divorced people didn't try hard enough to save their marriage.

Third, they will see their parents as "cool". Unlike their own parents who were on one side of a wide generation gap, today's children and teens will continue to long for and seek close bonds with their parents as a way to find security in an uncertain world. Children surveyed said their parents' opinions matter most when it comes to drinking, spending money, and questions about sex.

Fourth, today's children and teens will become more tolerant and accepting of "gender-bending". Shifting attitudes on sex roles will bring bout changes in who works where and how tasks are divided around the house. While the article didn't mention any specifics, one is left to wonder what the implications of "gender-bending" will be on sexual attitudes and practices.

And finally, the new baby boom will be economically uncertain. Their financial future is far from secure and is getting "worse". There will be a stark contrast between the haves and have-nots as some children are given an earning advantage because of their training and skills with computers and modern technology.

The article concludes, "They (the new baby boom) may one day surpass their parents to become the largest and most influential generation in U.S. History. " If this is true, what will be the legacy they leave? The Center for Parent/Youth Understanding challenges parents, youth workers, and churches to shape that legacy by actively responding to the distinctives of the new baby boom. Here are some suggestions:

Children and teens should be given opportunities to participate in cross-cultural missions and service projects. These experiences should be used as part of an overall strategy to break down walls of prejudice and teach about Biblical justice, missions, and the selfless life of discipleship.

While they will long to enter into stable and healthy marriages, many children of divorce never have the opportunity to observe and learn healthy marriage skills. Churches should go to great lengths to drive home the Biblical model of marriage through teaching, preaching, intense pre-marital counseling, and the use of older already married mentor couples.

Parents are cool!?! Don't ask questions. . . just do something about it! Parents must be challenged to invest their time and involvement in the lives of their children and teens. Churches and youth workers should raise parental awareness by teaching about today's youth culture. In addition, workshops on Christian parenting and communication skills will enable parents to more effectively and positively fulfill their role as the primary nurturers of their children.

The trend towards gender-bending requires instruction on God's design for male and female. Uniqueness should be celebrated. And, as more and more of the new baby boomers grow up and move into the work force, they must be reminded of their need to be active and involved mothers and fathers.

Finally, the new economic challenges will create a climate for a continued unhealthy and sinful materialistic emphasis on seeking value in money and things. The "He who dies with the most toys wins!" mentality should be countered with an emphasis on teaching the new boomers about the dangers of money and wealth from Jesus' perspective.

The legacy of the new baby boomers is up for grabs. What will you do to mold that legacy in ways that reflect the image and will of the Maker of today's children and teens?



HOW TIMES HAVE CHANGED

Compared with their parents, the next baby boomers are growing up in a more dangerous and complex world.

Here are 10 cultural attributes of the original baby boom and the next baby boom:

Original Baby Boom -> Next Baby Boom

cold war -> regional wars

nuclear threat -> terrorist threats

mother's care -> day care

"Father Knows Best" -> father isn't home

TV Dinners -> low-fat fast food

network TV -> cable TV

45s and "American Bandstand" -> CDS and MTV

Ma Bell -> Internet

VW buses -> minivans

free love -> condoms

Source: American Demographics"

That's a revolution in a nut shell

[Gorimek]

Why is this revolutionary? Aren't things like this mostly old hat with a nifty interface?

Well, you're right except that doing old things in a new way is exactly what most revolutions are.

After all, a computer is just a slide rule with a nifty interface. And a car doesn't do anything that you can't do by walking.

Re:That's a revolution in a nut shell

[Anonymous Coward]

apart from 100mph

Re:That's a revolution in a nut shell

[pcb]

Well, you're right except that doing old things in a new way is exactly what most revolutions are.

Actually it is more interesting than that, revolutionary originally meant "to go full circle" or "to go a full revolution"; that is, "to go back to the way it was".

Now, of course, it means to do something new rather than go back and do things like the "good old days". Funny how words change meaning.

Re:That's a revolution in a nut shell

[MrAndrews]

I think that's the exactly the argument for iPhoto, too.

The "future" now.

[TheGS]

Now that I've had a few hours to digest the new appearance, it seems to me that the new iMac looks like a terminal/workstation out of a futuristic anime. I could imagine seeing it in an episode of Cowboy Bebop.

design

[Sebastopol]

I'm amazed at how only apple manages to sell weird designs.

* Dell quietly discontinued a similarly designed box.

* Intel has demonstrated many similar designs to this since 1997 at their IDC. (remember the fish-bulb thing, and the ziggurat?)

* Even AMD had the flat-screen-on-a-bun concept box (interchangeable neon colors)

However, only Apple actually sells any of these weird shapes. I wonder why they take the risk of weird designs when Dell, Gateway, Compaq and IBM don't.

I also wonder how many times the new iMac it can handle being hoisted by the "neck".

Re:design

[Anonymous Coward]

"I wonder why they take the risk of weird designs when Dell, Gateway, Compaq and IBM don't."

Cause the apple corporate market is like .25% not 25% 1/4 a percent.

People who use apple will buy it no matter what it looks like. For them its kinda like "oh this is the new imac?" "well whatever I need a new mac"
Trust me I worked retail and sold apple for a long time.

People buy apple for three reasons
1)They have kids who uses macs in school.
2)they edit video or in photoshop all day.
3)They have been using mac for years.

So who writes the screenplay?

[yerricde]

The computer is designed and marketed for MAKING your own DVD's

Only if you have an expensive video camera.

What you are missing is that Apple has made it so easy to author movies and DVD's that anybody can do it. Even geeks.

And it'll lack big explosions because the effects software still costs upwards of five figures. And it'll most probably be horribly acted, directed, and edited. And it will probably lack plot because most users are not professional screenwriters.

Re:So who writes the screenplay?

[maggard]

Yes, and books that aren't written using 10,00-feature word processors aren't worth reading either...

Re:So who writes the screenplay?

[sulli]

remember Clerks... non-crap movies do get made on low budgets, you know. not every movie requires Jerry Bruckheimer

Re:So who writes the screenplay?

[Anonymous Coward]

One of my favourite sayings: The piano tells no lies. You can have a Bosendorfer put if the 'musician' can only play chopsticks, then it ain't the racket.

How's that for interleaved metaphors?

=ac=

Re:So who writes the screenplay?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maya for OS X is $7500
After Effects is $1200

exactly what can't I do with one or the other?

New iMac first thought:

[A_Non_Moose]

{insert Gingerbread man voice}

"Not my gumdrop buttons!"

{end voice}

That's it.

Vote on the new iMac here

[Jchrome]

I set up a poll, curious to see some stats. Vote if you want here:
http://www.jchrome.com

Conspiracy theory

[Have Blue]

Why would Apple bring the iMacs nearly up to the level of the Power Macs? Perhaps they really are trying to reduce demand for the towers. Remember that every time Apple introduces new pro hardware, there are supply problems and tons of bitching from people who get them weeks or months late. Perhaps if they can draw ome of this audience off to the iMacs, they will be able to introduce the G5 and get fewer negative responses (plus supplies of this chip are supposed to be pretty tight anyway).

Re:Conspiracy theory

[Toraz Chryx]

It should be noted that the G4 in the imac isn't backed up by Level 3 cache (as far as I can tell), AND it has a 100Mhz system bus...

so even a 733Mhz PowerMac G4 should be able to outrun the iMac 800Mhz quite comfortably.

QNX can do this...

[Anonymous Coward]

Not sure about the other OS's, but QNX can do this, just use the devg-rotate90.so lib with your graphics display and rotate it 90 deg no prob, don't like 90 deg? add another devg-rotate90.so to the graphics line... keep going till you rotate it 360 deg :)

Dual Head iMac

[pneuma_66]

Don't forget the new, but unannounced Dual Head iMac. This is the perfect machine for one or two people to use, it even has the option of running with two simultaneous users. Or, you can use it in traditional dual head mode, and it also comes with a lazy susan, so you wont scratch up your desk. order now!
</humor>

Re:Dual Head iMac

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, I thought you meant the bathroom iMac.

Re:Dual Head iMac

[rob.eberhardt]

I was only half-joking about this with a friend earlier. I need dual-head for video editing, and if they one of these I would go order it today rather than waiting for a G4/5 tower.

Not for the masses

[MrMrBen]

As other comments have pointed out, the new iMac is still much more expensive than comparable (or faster) PCs. The main attraction is that we finally have a computer that looks something like what Star Trek and other Sci-Fi has been promising they will look like for so long. I don't think most people will be too surprised if the fancy monitor arm weakens over time, or if the machines all turn into puddles of melted plastic. Most people who buy it will be looking for something cool to put in their room. If you can browse the Internet on it, then all the better. I'm sure that you can spend more than $2000 on a nice designer table or whatever. For designer furniture, the iMac is priced just right. It's just important to recognize that this is not a computer for the masses, it's a computer for well-off people who like cool-looking stuff.

My quick response

[Anonymous Coward]

CNN had this article first.

http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101020114/cover .h tml

One great thing about the new iMac...

[megaduck]

is that it doesn't look like a computer. Love it or hate it, you have to admit that Apple is the one computer company that is doing anything original with case design and form factor. Sony has the most stylish x86 boxes out there, but they still look like... boxes. We've hit the point where we don't HAVE to build computers that look like bricks, but you wouldn't know it by looking at PCs these days.

Kudos to Apple for daring to do something a little different, even if it does make us think of a desk lamp. ;)

Re:One great thing about the new iMac...

[Dutchmaan]

Too bad they couldn't mount a small lamp on the arm to light up the keyboard and mouse area...

Re:One great thing about the new iMac...

[jmb-d]

My first thought was that it looked a whole lot like Luxo Jr.

Re:One great thing about the new iMac...

[Gogo Dodo]

Don't worry, somebody will modify one of the USB-powered keyboard lights. After market, third-party opportunity.

Why a Mac?

[HoaryCripple]

I do not intend to troll, but here's the low-down:

The new iMac looks really F-ing cool. I want one. That aside, here's what I do with my x86/Linux boxes:

1. Firewall
2. mail/dns/ftp/http servers
3. desktop OS for entertainment purposes eg.
a.)music (xmms, cd ripping etc...)
b.)photo editing with gimp and associated tools.
c.)Usenet reading/posting with Pan
d.)web via Mozilla
e.)video via Mplayer
f.)games - I only play q2,q3,wolf
4. Full network transparency with X so that I can log into my other computers from a central location.

So, is there any convincing reason that I should get an iMac, or any other Mac (based on my needs) other than the fact that the hardware and OS X look cool? I guess that I am afraid to spend $1000-plus on cool looking hardware and then find that it does not have the flexibility of cheap x86/Linux machines.

Thanks for any input
Crip.

Re:Why a Mac?

[benad]

Yep, it can do all of this (including Linux). Plus a lot of Linux stuff had been ported to Mac OS X: look at Fink. I use both Linux and Fink on my G4 all the time.
OK, maybe not too much games. Even though those that you mention are on Mac OS 9/X, most others are not ported.

But it's not worth the price if you're a regular Linux user/hacker. Macs shine for video/music/image editing and a bit for desktop publishing. If your needs don't fall in that (or the "digital hub" concept), then you're better off with a good x86. You don't really need the G4, Gigawire and Firewire stuff. And that "easy to use" stuff... ;-)

And it's a "Mac fan" talking here, so I know what I'm talking about. OK, time to download iPhoto...

- Benad

Re:Why a Mac?

[HoaryCripple]

Thanks for not flaming :)

i did not realize that apache ran on mac. Very good to know. Now what about bind (dns) and something like qpopper (mail)? It does not have to be unix software....just *decent* software. Is there a list of mac applications out there...something like freshmeat?

thanks,
Crip.

Re:Why a Mac?

[tequesta]

Well, there's a BSD [1] under the hood. Just about anything from the *BSD archives should compile cleanly, and much does. Seeing as most software that you refer to is standard Unix server stuff, yes, almost all of it should run.

[1] Yes, yes. It's Mach with a BSD personality and a couple of twists. But for the apps in question, that's really nitpicking.

Re:Why a Mac?

[MrDBCooper]

> Linux [linuxppc.org]

Or try this.

> Plus a lot of Linux stuff had been ported to Mac OS X: look at Fink

Why not use the real thing it was modeled after instead?

Re:Why a Mac?

[William R. Dickson]

I just checked, and BIND appears to be included, but I haven't tried using it. Apache is, as already mentioned, included. I compiled qpopper on it a few months ago without any problems, and it worked nicely. Sendmail works fine, too.

Basically, you can do just about anything on OS X that you can do on FreeBSD...plus the Mac-specific stuff as well.

Re:Why a Mac?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, you CAN do these with Linux, but the user experience is just SO MUCH WORSE it's hard to describe. I used to run Linux. I used to watch as month by month the desktop experience got better.

Then I tried a Mac. They are farther ahead in usability than they ever have been. Plus you still have a Unix machine. I will NEVER go back -- Linux can't even prevent the UI gap from growing, let alone start to close it.

If you really are just as happy with the Mozilla experience as with IE, or with StarOffice as with MSOffice, or with gimp as with PhotoShop, then it's not time to upgrade. But ask yourself, do you really believe this, or do you just want to because "open source is just better"?

Re:Why a Mac?

[HoaryCripple]

I understand that the UI of a Mac is much more polished than that of X on top of unix, but, that is not the point really. What I want are tools to do a specific job efficiently, and i'm not talking about office apps or even web browsers. There are just so many tools available for Linux (once again, freshmeat) that it's incomprehensible. I assume that the unix command line tools will compile easily on OS X, but what if they don't? Where are the mac equivalents? And for the record, I do enjoy the mozilla experience more than IE, but you are correct in that staroffice is cumbersome. A cool UI is really just a bonus. As is opensource.

cheers,
Crip.

Re:Why a Mac?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because there are dozens of different UNIX flavors, UNIX apps are written to be portable. There's a large community of UNIX developers porting a ton of UNIX software to Mac OS X. Anything you can do on Linux will eventually be possible ( if not already ) on OS X. There's already an open source X11 Server (XDarwin) that let's you run X Windows applications. Try OS X, you won't go back to Linux.

No...

[Anonymous Coward]

...it IS one button.

LINUX Has POWER and NetBSD, OpenBSD, etc. DO NOT?

[lerici]

I beg to differ with this statement:

> Linux and the Macintosh are very different things. I
> don't want to bore anyone with poor analogies, but when > Macintosh has glitz, Linux has power. This isn't about
> Linux though, it just kept on striking me how much Linux > lacks in the desire department.

LINUX HAS POWER??? And what you are saying is that Tru644, SUNOS (pre-Solaris), BSDI (the ISP's server workhorse UNIX), etc. DO NOT? Linux still has yet to succeed in coming up with a reasonable reliable threads model!!! This is a nightmare as any CORBA or Java programmer will tell you! PUHleeeeeeze! Criticize Apple for their shortfalls as so many love to do. Boycott Apple ala' Stallman. BUT DO NOT even think about comaparing the technology in NetBSD with Linux. Memory Management all by itself is way beyond Linux. Sheesh and I suppose Bill Joy wrote vi originally for LINUX and the "ex" regular expressions model was contrived by Torvalds. And I suppose that UCBVax and Seismo were running Linux when they were the hubs of the whole damn Internet...

Yet another Linux bigot...

One button schmun button

[Toe, The]

I've been using Macs almost exclusively for... well for almost as long as there have been Macs. And one of my favorite innovations in the Mac was the advent of the Control-click (ie, contextual menu). Then when Macs went USB and people started making Mac drivers for two-button mice, it was like heaven. I love contextual-menus, and it's much easier to get to them from a mouse button than from a Control-click.

Maybe in a few more years Apple will finally figure this out. Oh, and the scroll-wheel is a wonderful invention that Apple needs to think about too. OTOH, the 3rd party mouse makers are probably quite happy with Apple's doggedness, and it does make it easier for the novice.

Re:One button schmun button

[Anonymous Coward]

I always wondered how people view sites like this or use Excel without a scroll button mouse. I mean do you click on the scrollbar all the time? I hate when I have to work on a machine with an old fashioned two-button mouse (i.e. my server at home).

Re:One button schmun button

[ethereal]

Me, I press the conveniently-labeled "down arrow" key, but I hear you have to have a fancy newfangled 101-key keyboard to get that trick to work...

Re:One button schmun button

[Troed]

Oh, and the scroll-wheel is a wonderful invention that Apple needs to think about too.

... yeah, we want Mac users to get the same instant RSI problems as PC users have gotten used to.

Really, the scroll-wheel is the first thing to disable on any new computer.

(and of course, don't use a mouse, use a trackball. preferably one that's not operated with one but with both hands. take the time to _switch_ from keyboard to trackball, and back. you're not stressed. really.)

... been there.

Re:One button schmun button

[MtViewGuy]

Really, the scroll-wheel is the first thing to disable on any new computer.

You have got to be kidding.

One reason why I use a scroll wheel is the very fact that you can scroll up and down a page very easily without the extra mouse pointer movements needed to move the scroll bar on the right side of the screen. It's a major timesaver, to say the least.

Anyway, if you get a good mouse pointer with scroll wheel that comfortably fits into your hand (I have a Logitech Wheel Mouse Optical and it comfortably fits my right hand like a glove), RSI problems should not be an issue.

Re:One button schmun button

[Troed]

• You have got to be kidding.
• It's a major timesaver, to say the least.
• RSI problems should not be an issue.

"Timesaving" is a cause of RSI. Slow down. You don't need to rush. And I really don't see why you feel you need to tell someone with RSI and who knows how to avoid it what you _think_ ...

You're simply just wrong.

Re:One button schmun button

[Skeletal_Disco_Infer]

The same way that I did it for 15 years before: arrow keys and pgdn/up keys. My wheel mouse on my work computer has spoiled me.

That's no moon .... it's a Space ....

[ebooher]

Is it just me, or does the bottom of this new iMac look like the top of the Death Star? Although, I have to admit, I've been trying since the Keynote ended to get Apple to take my MasterCard information. Steve's Sphere of Unreality strikes again, and I had just told myself that I'd probably never use a mac again.

Yet, there is something about this new machine that just speaks to me. It's probably the voices in my head, but I am intrigued by this new iMac. I've been saying for a long time now that they need to include a flat panel display into them, and here is the fruit of that labor.

The most interesting thing to me, though, is that they are using the G4 processor in their new "consumer" line. This just helps to enforce the fact that at the next Apple event they are set to introduce what ever is going to be termed as the G5 processor for the Pro line. They did it with the first iMacs. Remember the Blue and Whites?

There have been plenty of people point out the fact that the mac line as a whole doesn't have the Ghz numbers it needs to dominate the field. I have to ask, though, what does anyone really and truly need with a 2 Ghz machine? Let me qualify this question.

My current main workstation is a dual Pentium II 300 Mhz machine with 128 MB of RAM and Windows 2000. I have two SUN SparcStations (a 2 and a 10) one of which (the 2) has a black and white framebuffer. I have five Socket 7 based Pentium machines at varied Mhz's and a Power Macintosh 8500/120. Oh, and my 486 33Mhz Linux router.

I do everything I need to do all these machines. Run services, send and receive email, run some websites, encode digital video, both MPEG1 and MPEG2, encode digital audio, watch streaming applications and DVD's, etc, etc, etc, ad nausium.

Then again, I'm a professional UNIX / Cisco user, not a professional game player. Though Diablo II runs just fine on my main workstation. What *are* you people running?!

Now I sit here ranting away on Slashdot, because I can't get the Apple store to accept my order for a new iMac that I have no actual good use for in my home. Sure, being able to burn DVD's will be fun for a while. Playing with the UNIX'esque kernel of Mac OS X will be a real hoot. Wonder how much Linux software still needs to be ported.

Come on, I don't care who you are, you have to admit that it does look kind of cool. Yes, it is a laptop on a stick, I guess. But so is the Gateway version of the same style of unit. LCD screen with an integrated CPU all in one type of deal.

So why didn't I rush out to buy the Gateway when it came out months ago? Hmmm .... *snaps fingers* .... Oh yeah! I don't ever expect to upgrade a mac. Those always sit as they come, regardless of what people tell me. An x86 machine *has* to be in an ATX case, because there is always something new and fun to put in them.

Oh well, guess I will go see if the Apple store has decided to play friendly yet, and leave you nice people alone.

Linux die-hards?

[sulli]

It isn't, in the end, a machine for the linux die-hard

A Mac OS machine, not for the Linux die-hard. Who knew?

Re:Linux die-hards?

[MrDBCooper]

For those who don't know yet: Macs are lovely Linux machines. Pity they're going for nVidia again with the new iMacs, but fortunately they didn't make the same mistake for the PowerBooks. :)

Why DVD-R? DVD+RW makes more sense

[axis-techno-geek]

The DVD-R drive is good, but limiting in making of actual "DVD" compatable disc. They do not suppport lossless linking or variable bit rate MPEGs. I think a DVD+RW drive would have been the better choice.

Check out DVDplusRW.org for more info.

Re:Why DVD-R? DVD+RW makes more sense

[allenw]

A few months (or was it a year) after Apple released the machines with DVD-RAM, Steve Jobs admitted they made a mistake--people weren't ready to give up on CD-RW yet for mass storage. With that in mind, he announced the 'SuperDrive' machines--they were capable of reading and writing not only DVD media (DVD-R, DVD-RW) but also CD media (CD-R, CD-RW) in July of 2001.

IIRC, this would have been -before- DVD+RW actually had usable drives for the cosumer market! Even according to the website that you quote, it would appear that the DVD+RW Alliance didn't announce products until Aug 25. Way Too Late.

So what about new products? If they switched to DVD+RW now, you face the same backwards compatibility problem that plagued the DVD-RAM conversion... and for very little gain on the Joe Consumer front.

Re:Why DVD-R? DVD+RW makes more sense

[shandrew]

The DVD-R drive is good, but limiting in making of actual "DVD" compatable disc. They do not suppport lossless linking or variable bit rate MPEGs.

The iDVD consumer software doesn't support those features, but the pro version does. The features are not functions of the hardware.

Furthermore, the Superdrive actually does support one of the DVD-RW standards (I don't recall which one), but Apple doesn't advertise the feature because of the lack of solid standards currently.

Disappointed

[pressman]

As a long time Mac faithul, I have to admit to being disappointed. I think the new iMac is a very cool piece of hardware and I actually wouldn't mind having one, but this was not "way beyond the rumor sites". Far from it. Nothing short of actually shipping G5's or a PDA (I know... I know.... ain't gonna happen) would have actually impressed me.

The iMac singlehandedly brought Apple back from the brink three years ago and the home consumers and educators are very happy with their iMacs and iBooks, but us power users are getting the shaft. And WE'RE the ones that actually cruise the rumor sites!

I'm especially disappointed as I'm in film school and we're gonna be learning FCP3 very soon and I really wanted there to be a G5 DP machine at school!

800 is just fine dammit

[cbuskirk]

I am a poor unemployed Network Tech. Right now for all of my gaming needs I have a Power PC 66mhz machine and you know what... I play Starcraft on in as well as some of the PC I used to play it on with 4x the specs. I can just imagine what I will games I will be playing on an 800mhz machine when yet another Bush has f'd up the economy a dozen years from now.

UUUUUGLY

[Glanz]

The last one looked more like a vacuum cleaner from the fifties than a computer, and this one looks more like one of those motion detectors you screw to the outside wall of the house to detect intruders. WhhhhaaassssUP with dem guize anyways? Are they trying to appeal to the kitsch set, or to everyone with no aesthetic tastes at all?

Re:UUUUUGLY

[mutatron]

Expand your mind. Go to an art museum sometime. There's more to industrial design than plain beige boxes.

Re:UUUUUGLY

[Glanz]

Maybe if they made one the form of your expanded ass.

The DVI is a HUGE difference

[king_ramen]

Noting that you can pick up a 15" flatscreen is very misleading. The difference between DVI (http://www.ddwg.org/) and Analog (SVGA) is amazing.

Matching a digital screen w/ an analog input is a bastardization that best belongs on the Island of Doctor Moreau. Having end-to-end digital costs a couple hundred bucks (generally) but makes all the difference in the world.

They should have called it...

[irregular_hero]

Judging by its looks alone, I'm wagering that someone in Apple's marketing department MUST have suggested calling it the "iStalk"...

dude

[Anonymous Coward]

iPhoto looks damn useful to organize my pr0n collection

Troll?

[Gehenna_Gehenna]

How the fuck is this a fucking troll? Overated? Certainly. Troll? WTF. Grab your fucking ears and pull until you see daylight you cock gobling cum guzler.

The average user

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would the average user waste $1299 for a intro Imac when they can spend ~$700 and get a comparable X86 machine for "writing letters and putting pics up on the net"?

I just don't see the logic. If it was $900 and you are a mac diehard maybe.

As far as the top of the line goes, sorry but for that much cash I am getting a 2.0 GHz box that mops the floor with MAC on all apps.

Re:The average user

[gowmc]

Although I have limited experience with Windows XP, I know for a fact that with OSX, it is surprisingly easier even to write a letter or put a picture on the internet. Although its not exactly feature rich, Text Edit is very good looking, and is easy to use. Printing out that letter is also easy. Plug in a printer, and print center will recognize it and let you print. As far as putting pictures on the internet, Apple provides good integration with its iTools, which will let you place your pictures on your own website in only a few minutes. Of course its not as capable as having it on your own computer, but I doubt the average user wants to have to work with Apache (although it does come with OSX) and it already looks nice. I am sure this may seem too Macish to some slashdot users, but for the guy who just wants to put some pictures on the internet, what more could yo ask for (ok, there are some things, but work with me here)

ROTFL

[Anonymous Coward]

it's been ages since I last laughed at an imac mockup. (The iBrator, the iDildo, ...)

this one is really really really funnny. Took 10 minutes to recover :-)

doesn't this look vaguely like...

[jci]

something like this?

Re:I wish that laptops had the cool screen arm thi

[Sloppy]

That's a pretty good idea, dude. I've never bought a laptop. But the "John Harrison model" display just might pry open the ol' wallet.

Snowfox's point.

[Dwain_Snyders]

Snowfox makes a very good point here. There are a lot of things that must be considered when testing the performace of CPUs. Apple likes to make out that they have a processor that's blazingly faster than Intel/AMD processors, but in reality, the tests that they tout can't be verified entirely - in other words, the applications used in the testing would need to be audited by independent software engineers to ensure that they are compiled and optimized appropriately for each platform. On purely technical grounds, the fastest processor range in the market is currently the Palomino Athlon XP series. However, all processors, including the G4/PPC series, have their good points. The good thing about this is it encourages competition and allows processor architecture to advance more rapidly.

ooh

[nomadic]

Steve Jobs is terrific at just that, Creating Desire.


Good god yes. I saw a pic of this and instantly felt the familiar sensation of total geek lust.

How is it amazing?

[Anonymous Coward]

They make a round IBM netvista X??

Also in case you were wondering I have an old compaq presario in the basement that is an "all-in-one" unit which predated the Imac by 5 years. The only difference is it does not look like a piece of fruit. I'm surprised Compaq or acer which also made a similar model never sued apple.

Re:How is it amazing?

[The Dark P]

sorry to point this out but... Apple have been making all in one units since the beggining... first there was the Mac Classic (one of the most reliable computers i have used) then there was the performa range which actually looks like many a compaq unit but existed before if anyone should have sued, apple should have sued compaq

Re:How is it amazing?

[chrsbrwn]

Dude... you must be younger than me :)

The Mac Classic was quite a few years from the first all-in-one that Apple shipped (seven, to be exact)... the first was the Apple Lisa (shipped June 1983), and then released several months later, the Macintosh (January of 1984, note, no model designation). After they released the first revision, the Mac 512k, they started calling the first one the Macintosh 128k (the amount of memory it had :) ).

Following that, they released the 512ke, the Macintosh Plus (the first with external SCSI, and the one I owned), the Macintosh SE (the first Mac with internal expansion slots and an internal hard drive), then the SE/30 (the first to use the 68030 processor) and then in October of 1990, they released the Classic.

More info for the terminally curious is available at Lowendmac.com

New PowerMacs coming

[blindauer]

This happened before: when Apple started shipping the 2nd rev iBook (the SE model), it had specs matching the then-high-end PowerBook. This did destroy PowerBook sales, until they started shipping the Titanium PowerBook G4 a few months later.

So I'd say it's very likely we'll be seeing updated PowerMacs in the next month or two. Now, the next major trade show is Seybold, in late February. Seybold is the show for media professionals, so what better place to announce hot new Pro model computers?

New Nick Name...

[Anonymous Coward]

iMaLamp!

Microsoft's no longer invested in Apple

[guttentag]

See this article in the San Jose Mercury News:

Microsoft said it no longer holds any of the $150 million in Apple stock it bought four years ago, when Apple was struggling.

Let's look at that clunky 800-MHz G4

[Weasel Boy]

From http://n0cgi.distributed.net/speed/

PowerPC G4 @ 800 MHz: 8.2 million RC5 keys/sec
AMD Athlon @ 1600 MHz: 5.7 million RC5 keys/sec
Intel Pentim 4 @ 2000 MHz: 2.9 million RC5 keys/sec

Now let's talk again about how clunky the G4 is.

Re:Let's look at that clunky 800-MHz G4

[Pemdas]

From that same page:

DEC Alpha 21264 @ 725 Mhz: 1.4 million RC5 keys/sec
SUN UltraSparc III @ 750 Mhz: 1.5 million RC5 keys/sec

Wow! You've opened my eyes! An RC5 benchmark, which has at it's core under 100 instructions, along with similarly representative kernels from Photoshop benchmark tests which are extremely suited to Altivec optimization clearly show that the PowerPC is more than 6 times as fast as the servers sold by Sun and Compaq today! We can really trust Apple to select good impartial benchmarks of processor performance because those Apple folks are just such nice people! All those industry standard metrics of processor performance, such as SpecBench, which show the PowerPC to be roughly on par with the Athlon/PIII in core efficiency must be bogus!

In related news, the tobacco industry tells me that their tests not only show that smoking is not addictive, it doesn't cause cancer or anything else bad, either. Now I get to go be like the Marlboro man!

[cue Rawhide theme]

Re:Let's look at that clunky 800-MHz G4

[Weasel Boy]

"... benchmark ... clearly show that [A] is more than 6 times as fast as ... [B] and [C] ..."

That is the point of benchmarks, isn't it? Note that the PPC didn't beat these other machines by just a little, it totally crushed them. And if you wanted to show that an X86 was better, you'd pick a benchmark in which it crushes the others. The X86 processors have SIMD instructions too. As pure CPU-flogging benchmarks go, I think RC5 is fair.

The original poster condemned the G4 solely on the basis of its clock speed; all I did was point out one real-world circumstance that shows that MHz isn't necessarily the only factor. Why don't you object to me pointing out that the Athlon benchmarks nearly twice as fast as a P4 with a 25% higher clock, but the argument is just as true there.

As for servers, they are not designed with top CPU speed in mind. Servers must be ultra-reliable and have high I/O bandwidth. CPU performance is third priority (or below) in servers. Single Alpha and SPARC CPUs haven't ruled the integer performance heap in a long time (although they do have great FP). They are at their best in scalable systems with lots of CPUs.

Re:Let's look at that clunky 800-MHz G4

[ainsoph]

A great book!

Trust Us, We're Experts: How Industry Manipulates Science and Gambles with Your Future

But don't apply that to Apple, cos Apple uses figures like HH the Dalai Lama, Jack Keroac, and other like them to make people Think(different) that they are somehow not being a big Mega corp who expolit Asian workers, patent technology, profit greatly, use media players as virus's to wreak havoc on file typing of your system, use legal might against the small guy.

Nope, smug ol Apple pays some big ad agency to figure out things like "Ho Hum, Another day, another revolution". The zelots eat that shit up. And they should, cos its a real live revolution.

Ignorance is bliss...

[Uttles]

...you can pick up 200$ 15" tft displays at Fry's and lets get real, the G4 (Excepting the velocity engine stuff) isn't that fast of a chip at any available speed compared to the x86 world.

Ugh. How many times do we have to see comments like this? There are hundreds of reasons why this machine can go toe to toe with a Pentium 4 at 1.5 Ghz or whatever. Most of them have nothing to do with the CLOCK SPEED of the Processor. The G4 runs circles around the P4, unless you're taking the lowest end G4 up against the highest P4. "This Velocity Engine stuff"... look, that's just a marketing term for a new version of the controller or something like that. All it means is that the G4 takes instructions in a little differently before it actually starts chugging away at them, and it improves efficiency by a little bit. Like I said before though, the TOTAL MACHINE SPEED is what matters, and Apple is really good at making fast machines. Of course, if you only use a Mac just to start it up and run a Windows emulator or something equally stupid, you won't see that speed advantage.

Re:Ignorance is bliss...

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course, if you only use a Mac just to start it up and run a Windows emulator or something equally stupid, you won't see that speed advantage.

What other use is there for a Mac, really?

~~~

detachable?

[masada555]

Would be cool if the monitor was detachable from the base, for easy transport/storage.

Guess not, though, what with Apple's "integrated" philosophy...sigh...

That's not a benchmark

[CaptainSuperBoy]

Come on.. rc5 as a benchmark? It wasn't written as a benchmark, it measures NOTHING that could actually be considered productive in the real world. Apple has fallen back on a single Photoshop benchmark for YEARS. Back in reality, PC photoshop is now faster than G4 photoshop for MOST tasks, as well as the hands down winner for games, and do I have to mention application support?

If you bought a computer because it was faster at RC5 you have problems.. seriously..

Re:That's not a benchmark

[Weasel Boy]

"Come on.. rc5 as a benchmark? It wasn't written as a benchmark, it measures NOTHING that could actually be considered productive in the real world."

OF COURSE it wasn't written as a benchmark! It is an application... you know, a program that real people run to do stuff. This particular program is designed to flog the CPU as hard possible, and is optimized to the gills for x86.

And how can you claim to be a Slashdot reader and not think cracking RC5 is productive? ;-)

Rather than relying on the crutch of some misleading numbers, why not try actually using a machine before you dismiss it.

"...do I have to mention application support?"

Yes. Please do. Sure, 90% of all applications don't run on the Mac. 99% of all applications are crap, and I wouldn't run them on a PC either. The point is, when you want to do something, can you get the job done? I say you can. Prove me wrong. Name one PC activity that cannot be performed with any Mac application.

Re:That's not a benchmark

[CaptainSuperBoy]

Name one PC activity that cannot be performed with any Mac application.

Bah. I'm sure you'll say, "but I'm not a gamer, games suck anyway." but here goes.

Max Payne
Civ III
Return to Wolfenstein

Yes, Mac users are consistently shafted when it comes to quality and on-time game releases. Also, I hope you're not getting an iMac for the video chipset.. Geforce2 MX isn't exactly cutting edge any more, not to mention only 128MB of RAM on the low end model.

Another activity that can't be performed, would be using a mouse with more than one button.

Re:That's not a benchmark

[Anonymous Coward]

Another activity that can't be performed, would be using a mouse with more than one button.

I also hear Linux can't run Xfree86 because the default install brings up a terminal window. The difference is, I know I'm spouting bullshit, and you don't.

Re:That's not a benchmark

[NilObject]

"Another activity that can't be performed, would be using a mouse with more than one button."

Uhh... Damnit, why's this Microsoft 4 button mouse here if I can't use it with Macs... Wtf!!! What's that printer doing too!?!? And the scanner, dot matrix printer, mp3 player, cd-burner, and hard drive dangling off my USB chain!?!? Or that TV screen mirroring my DVD movies... What's going on?!? Macs are supposed to be useless!

And oh crap! Look out! There's the webpages I've made, the magazine I run, the relational database I made for the magazine, or those apps I've written, or even the giant spreadsheets I've made!!! Look out! Well shit... Why do I have a 802.11 connection?!? And then there's the upgraded HD, the 4 hours of DVD watching on battery, my instant messengers, and... Games?!?! Deus Ex, Myth 3, Quake 3, UT, Oni, Survivor, Rogue Spear, The Sims, Tony Hawk, Baldur's Gate II, Red Faction, Giants: Citizen Kabuto, etc etc etc...

And darnit, why do I have UNIX under the hood!?!? With Apache serving some personal pages, I must be stupid! Damn Macs! They're useless!

Really, list ONE task that the Mac can perform. One useful task. Remember, Macs are useless.

Re:That's not a benchmark

[Anonymous Coward]

Eh?
Max Payne is being done by MacSoft (news reference here).
Civ III is available here.
And Return to Castle Wolfenstein is being done by Asypr.
Games aren't exactly targetted towards Macs, but that doesn't mean the popular ones aren't available.
Also, mice with more than one button are supported, assuming you bother to use one.

Re:That's not a benchmark

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny the apple website shows the iMac with Return to Wolfenstein on it. Guess it will be out soon. I thought Civ III was already or almost here, but I am not a big gamer myself.

And finally yes you can use a mouse with more than one button, but you have to buy it :-(. However it works great immediately after you plug it in (no software needed--or available yet). Right button brings up context menus like Windows does. Wheel works as you'd expect

Re:That's not a benchmark

[Anonymous Coward]

PC photoshop is now faster than G4 photoshop for MOST tasks

At least until Photoshop for MacOS X comes out (real soon now as Adobe said in the keynote).

Re:That's not a benchmark

[Otis_INF]

Prove me wrong. Name one PC activity that cannot be performed with any Mac application.

- Running a VB application
- Compiling C# programs
- Developing software with tools like Visual Studio, with features like Intellisense and real time syntax checking
- Looking at your SQL server installation from your MMC snapin, while administrating the rest of the network/applications

(Should I go on?)

I can do all that from a 800$ box with win2k on it. (or winxp home edition, if you find win2k too expensive).

What RC5 ONLY shows is executing code from cache using a very small inner loop. What RC5 DOESN'T show, is real life code execution: fetching, decoding, executing, prediction, cache misses, etc etc. _THAT_ makes applications slow. A 100mhz fsb then definitely doesn't help, especially with a RISC cpu.

But you're free to bark about how your 6xx mhz risc cpu beats a 1600mhz athlon any time :)

Re:That's not a benchmark

[mkoskimi]

I know replying to this kind of stuff is the worst kind of procrastination, but I can't resist it. :)

- Running a VB application
- Compiling C# programs
- Developing software with tools like Visual Studio, with features like Intellisense and real time syntax checking
- Looking at your SQL server installation from your MMC snapin, while administrating the rest of the network/applications

Mmhmm. VB and C# are Microsoft's programming languages, which they haven't ported to the Mac. Thank god for that. Of course, this has nothing to do with activity that cannot be performed with a Mac application. Those languages are used to create the application, and the same task can be done with a dozen other languages.

And yes, Visual Studio... do you really think there aren't any software development suites for the Mac? It doesn't need to be made by Microsoft to be useable. (trying to resist from making obvious remarks) I personally haven't ever seen the need for using such software so I can't tell you if the Mac development suites available have "Intellisense", whatever that might be, but I'm pretty sure most of them have real time syntax checking.

Come to think of it, even Apple provide such software (ProjectBuilder) for free with MacOS X on the Developer Tools CD. I don't see Microsoft doing that.

Far as SQL goes, I have absolutely no idea what MMC is -- another Microsoft tool? Rest asure there are graphical front-ends for SQL databases on the Mac, as well as ones for other system administration tasks.

(Should I go on?)

Please do, and try to mention actual activities. You can develop software on a Mac, you can administer databases, applications and networks on a Mac. And I'm betting you can do all of it just as easily and efficiently as on a Windows box.

I don't think there really is any significant segment left that wouldn't be feasible to use a Mac for. Of course, if your company has chosen to develop code with C#, you can't very well use Macs for the development. But then, if it's chosen to develop with Objective C, you will have to use Macs. :) The point is though, the tools for performing tasks within every segment do exist, and any platform dependence issues are only the result of more specific choices, such as that of a specific programming language.

Just about the only relevant area I can think of that Macs don't have the software for is .NET. Sure, it's yet another Microsoft concept and thus it's principally questionable that Macs should be required to support it, but unfortunately Microsoft have the power to push it into such a de-facto standard that other operating systems (not only MacOS though) may be forced to adopt it. However, considering Microsoft's commitment to Macs (what with continuing to port Office and stuff) and the fact that they allowed Mono to be created, it seems doubtful that MacOS wouldn't get some sort of support for .NET as well.

As far as the everlasting MHz war goes, does anybody really care whether an 8xx MHz G4 can outwin an x86 with twice the clock speed? (Though shouldn't it suffice that it outperforms one with the same clock speed?) Or whether, in general, the fastest PPC processor is faster than the fastest P4? Sure, we all want our programs to run smoothly but I really doubt that this has been a processor speed issue for years, apart for maybe games that actually have gotten a lot more complex.

Re:That's not a benchmark

[fitten]

1. EverCrack.... er, EverQuest 2. Dark Ages of Camelot 3. Anarchy Online 4. Ultima Online 5. Asheron's Call

Re:That's not a benchmark

[Triv]

Bah. I'm sure you'll say, "but I'm not a gamer, games suck anyway." but here goes.

Max Payne
Civ III
Return to Wolfenstein

All three of which are on their way, so stop worrying. No, you don't get them immediately, but they WILL come. Just be patient. :)

Triv

Re:That's not a benchmark

[stripes]

Apple has fallen back on a single Photoshop benchmark for YEARS. Back in reality, PC photoshop is now faster than G4 photoshop for MOST tasks

Actually at every MacWorld I have watched (missed this one, had to work) it has been a different PhotoShop benchmark. They have all be a save of actions done by a real artist to design a real movie poster (I'm pretty sure they were all movie posters) for a recent or soon to be released movie. They all had the Mac vs. the PC running live.

So you can bitch that pretty much all they benchmark is PhotoShop (and VideoCleaner and a few other apps) you can't really say it is always the same old benchmark. I don't think you can even really assert that PC PhotoShop is faster "in the real world" since they were not a canned benchmark of a single operation done again and again, but use of all the tools needed to go from a blank page to a finished poster...

Re:That's not a benchmark

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, I bought Civ III at MacWorld, and played the beta of Wolfenstein. I didn't look for Max Payne, but it will be out sooner than you think. So will a couple of the better commercial MMUDs.

iMaLamp!

[bentobox]

Pixar must be proud.

Re:iMaLamp!

[Refrag]

Pixar is doing the first commercial for this iMac for Apple. Having the same CEO/Founder helps.

I'd wish the "base" was squareish, though

[MtViewGuy]

After looking at pictures of the new iMac in TIME magazine, while I think the machine is an engineering masterpiece, I'd wish that the machine had a rectangular box for the CPU unit instead of that half-sphere shape. The rectangular box would have looked a bit more professional in corporate environments, where I expect a good number of the new iMacs to be used.

$300 15" flat screen crap...

[69calicojack69]

someone said they could get a $300 flat screen at compusa or somewhere.

LET ME TELL YOU THE DIFFERENCE.

fast-change pixels. without them, the screen is useless (like most cheap flats are) to play dvd's or quicktime movies without the 'GHOST' effect.

GO BUY YOUR CHEAP PIECE OF SHIITE. ***THEN*** you will find out the shortcomings, be $300 further from a real one, and stick your head in the sand yelling 'mine is just as good as a mac!!!!'

this refrain will sound familiar to anyone who has ever heard a peecee user debate a KNOWLEDGEABLE mac user.

the reason apple macs are a little more expensive is that you get a QUALITY product, engineered to work perfectly from the start as an integrated whole.

the only possible competitor in os wars, going forward, will be the new sony os, when it comes out. OS X is as far ahead of XP as mac gui was over DOS. (oh wait, i forgot the whole directory structure of XP was lifted right out of dos- but m$ SAYS there is no DOS underneath, and they WOULD NEVER LIE, WOULD THEY?)

Re:$300 15" flat screen crap...

[ClosedSource]

"GO BUY YOUR CHEAP PIECE OF SHIITE. ***THEN*** you will find out the shortcomings, be $300 further from a real one, and stick your head in the sand yelling 'mine is just as good as a mac!!!!'"

You can't even buy the new Mac yet but you already claim that its flat screen is superior. Why don't you wait and see what the quality really is before passing judgment?

"...oh wait, i forgot the whole directory structure of XP was lifted right out of dos - but m$ SAYS there is no DOS underneath, and they WOULD NEVER LIE, WOULD THEY?"

Well, if you have some proof that there is DOS underneath XP, then by all means enlighten us.

Re:$300 15" flat screen crap...

[DiscoOnTheSide]

"You can't even buy the new Mac yet but you already claim that its flat screen is superior. Why don't you wait and see what the quality really is before passing judgment?"

I'm mainly a PC guy, but I also just got a Powerbook G4, and I've used several macs belonging to my friends. Every LCD Apple puts it's name on is the best. From the 12 inch iBook screen to the monsterous 22 inch Cinema screen, and my G4 screen is no different. Apple knows how to make an LCD and the iMac screen looks just like their 15 inch screen they sell with the G4 towers just mounted differently.

And while the new iMac DOES kick ass (I want one..) and the 14inch iBook screen is awesome too (makes it a little closer to the TiBook) it's no Apple PDA, which would have made me a very happy (and mac portable) guy.

Re:$300 15" flat screen crap...

[rob.eberhardt]

--You can't even buy the new Mac yet but you already claim that its flat screen is superior.Why don't you wait and see what the quality really is before passing judgment?

The Apple Studio Displays have been out for a couple of years now and look phenomenal. You really should see one in person to see how good they look.

Re:$300 15" flat screen crap...

[Colin Bayer]

the reason apple macs are a little more expensive is that you get a QUALITY product,

"A little"? I don't call $1299 vs. $800 for an entry-level system "a little more expensive", I call it "50% more expensive and not upgradeable, either". And if they're "QUALITY" products, why was there the big fuss with the cracked/miscolored G4 Cubes and why did 5 out of 10 iMacs my old school got fail within the first year? And why does the new iMac's monitor swivel arm look like it'll break in half the instant someone as much as looks at it wrong?

Save your Mac bigotry for the Mac sites, fanboy.

Re:$300 15" flat screen crap...

[dhartshorn]

So what are you buying for $800? Compaq's Presario 5000, similary equipped, is $1258. It adds a floppy, a 1.1GHz Celeron, and you have to pay for shipping. It lacks FireWire and an Airport slot. It also only has an 8MB shared memory video system.

I'm not sure what miscolored Cubes you are referring to, and the vast majority of the "cracks" - weren't.

As for your broken iMacs, you would know better than I what happened, but iMacs are not prone to 50% failure.

Does the monitor arm look fragile? Perhaps, if you're the Rock.

With regard to your concern for spreading platform bigotry, why not rein yourself in before you spew all over /. again?

Re:$300 15" flat screen crap...

[Toraz Chryx]

XP is based on Windows 2000, which in turn is based on Windows NT, which in turn evolved from OS/2

no dos there dude :)

Scrolling with one button

[Toe, The]

I still have one 1-button Mac, and the ways to scroll are to use the arrow keys and/or the page-up/page-down/home/end buttons and/or the spacebar. All work well without too much hastle....

Re:Scrolling with one button

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesn't that require either taking the hand off the mouse or using your left hand? Either way, I tend to sit back away from the keyboard when I am just reading something on the screen. That's why I have a comfy chair and a wireless mouse.

Re:Scrolling with one button

[Toe, The]

Doesn't that require either taking the hand off the mouse or using your left hand?

That's the nice thing about the space bar for scrolling in Explorer. I've found I can sit back on the couch and smack the spacebar with my foot. That or pull the keyboard into my lap and left-hand it....

Oh...

[Anonymous Coward]

I was off a year. Yeah, I must've bought it in 1999. In any case, I need a new computer to play wolfenstein. 14 fps on the beach in the test is crap.

Sending Wireless Video

[Anonymous Coward]

I am pretty sure they have products that will send video without wires right now. I used it to send video from my vcr/cable box in the basement into my tv upstairs. RCA makes it and it uses the 2.4Ghz spectrum, so the other 802.11b stuff may not like it too much. But getting power to the display would require a battery or a cord.

Mouse Buttons and I like iPhoto

[ender-]

No OS needs more than one mouse button but life is sure a hell-of-a-lot easier with multiple buttons (especially the scroll button).

I think this is quite a valid point.
I see it like this:
You could drive a car with just 1 pedal. Push it to go, and let off to stop. But adding a second [brake] pedal sure makes it easier to control, doesn't it? And then there's the clutch pedal for those who want even more control.

So the way I figure it, sure, a 1 button mouse is certainly functional, and if that's all you need, then use away. But the second and third buttons make the system much more friendly for anything more complicated than surfing the web.

On another note, as a long time mac-hater, I have to give props to Apple. They are finally making things that *I* would consider paying money for. I've never had a problem with their hardware, but their OS and software have just never seemed to have enough of an advantage over Windows and Linux to be worth paying for. However,I LOVED the demo of iPhoto. That's just bad@ss!
It seems to solve all of the issues I have with taking pictures with my digital camera.
1. I tend to lose them. I just never seem to get around to burning them onto CD [my fault I know]
2. Getting them set up to be put on my web page is a bit of a pain
3. Most of my family isn't connected. Making it THAT easy to have photo prints made is a work of genius on the part of Apple [yeah I know WinXP is supposed to make it that easy, but not only does that PhotoBook look sweet, but I SERIOUSLY doubt the MS software is as well integrated and usable as iPhoto. Resizing the thumbnails like that was just tight as hell :) ]

The point is, they are finally starting to make computers what I dreamed they would be growing up, and what I've seen of OSX makes me think Apple will keep it all going in the right direction.
Unfortunately,I'm less than fond of the new iMac [not enough power for me], and I'm sure when the new PowerMacs come out, they will be WAY out of my price range.

What a crappy dillema! :^(

Ender

Looks like a Zelda Goober

[Anonymous Coward]

Those little monsters you hack in Zelda and other Japanese games that are sort of like little blobs with two eyes.

It looks like one of those, but with a monitor sticking out of the goop.

here are some prices from CompUSA.

[markj02]

Well, take a look here: Compaq Presario, 1.5GHz P4, 512M, 40Gb, CDRW, Windows XP for $1000. Or here: T4150 Minitower, 1.5GHz P4, 256M, 40Gb, CDRW, Windows XP. $749 And for an LCD monitor, here: Envision 15" for $349. This is CompUSA, so these aren't even rock-bottom prices; you can get these brands even cheaper.

As for DVD writer, I was comparing entry-level machines. If you want to add a DVD-writer, the cost differential is roughly the same in the PC and Mac world.

Re:here are some prices from CompUSA.

[Malcontent]

Well I didn't look at all of them but I looked at your first link (compusa). The price you quoted does not include a monitor or a DVD writer. It also has a couple of lame software packages but nothing special. It's also big and ugly and takes up a massive amount of space, it's also noisy, no firewire ports, oh yea one more thing. It's piece of shit compaq. I don't know of anybody who is happy with their compaq. I think you do yourself a disservice when you include links to second rate machines and try and compare them to a well made one. Sure I can piece something together with a bunch of crappy hardware but it does not mean I am going to be happy with it in the long run.

Re:here are some prices from CompUSA.

[angelo]

I second the hatred of Comcraps. Nothing but trouble, and the built-in 'internet keyboard' software locks up the OS often.

My mother and grandfather both bought a Compaq, and it was against my best advice. They now know why I told them to stay clear.

The PC market fights for prices instead of uncompromising quality. That is why my next machine is going to be a iMac. I gotta face facts: the latest upgrades to my aging PII450 (within the last year) were a CD-RW drive (VeloCD 24x), another 256MB RAM, and a SoundBlaster Live! audio card (to replace my rotten ISA card).

It was $20 for the ram, $60 for the soundcard, and 113 for the Burner. And the system would still need another 350 for a monitor, and I can't even find a DVD-R/CD-RW drive for the PC market yet (and if it does exist, I expect it to cost about $300+), and I'd also have to plunk down $80 for an optical mouse and $200 for a new motherboard (which, undoubtedly, cause millions of compatibility issues under losedose.)

All is not lost, I could convert this old beast into a web server, or a home .ogg player. Or it could go on the pile with my p200 and my multia.

Use the correct tool for Copy Protection...

[nedron]

Gilmore was not correct (as well as misleading) when he said that the drive prevented you from copy protecting your media. So far as I can tell, it's only with the free iDVD that you can't set these features (MacroVision, CSS, region, etc.)

I own DVD Studio Pro and I have access to all of the features that Gilmore says aren't available.

The main difference between the DVD-R for General and DVD-R for Authoring drives is that the DVD-R for Authoring writes an additional lead-in that is required at the duplication plant. With this extra info on the DVD, a DVD-R can be used as the master rather than a DLT.

Note also that Apple did the right thing by using the Pioneer drive as DVD-R and DVD-RW are the only writeable formats endorsed by the DVD Forum. DVD+R and DVD+RW are not sanctioned.

Re:Use the correct tool for Copy Protection...

[Anonymous Coward]

The other difference, I think is that the mpge2 codec supports Variable Bit Rate encoding so you can jam more video on the same platter. iDVD does a fixed bit rate encode, I believe.

"Pride Goeth before the Fall, and sometimes in winter as well..."

Re:Use the correct tool for Copy Protection...

[nedron]

You're correct, there is more control over the encoding rate in DVD Studio Pro, but it is not VBR. It is a straight bitrate that you set. I've encoded three hours of footage for a DVD-R with acceptable results (appr. 2.8 Mbps). Basically, you subtract the size of your menu files (Photoshop format), audio files (compressed with Dolby Digital to save space), etc., from 4700000. The remainder is the space you have left for the encoded video. A couple of simple calculations based on the length of your video footage gives you the highest bitrate you can use and still fit everything.

VBR would be a nice addition to the QuickTime MPEG2 encoder that Apple includes in DSP.

Another item that Apple needs to add is support for DTS audio streams.

Re:Use the correct tool for Copy Protection...

[stripes]

You're correct, there is more control over the encoding rate in DVD Studio Pro, but it is not VBR. It is a straight bitrate that you set

Wow, I would have assumed it supported assisted VBR (where you can basically tell it which parts need more bandwidth, which could get by with less). That's a big part of the post production on DVD releases. I think they re-train colorists to do it...

It's not the software but the talent

[yerricde]

Yes, and books that aren't written using 10,00-feature word processors aren't worth reading either...

You're correct that a movie script written in Word and a movie script written in Emacs are essentially the same text file. However, without good writing (no matter what text editor used), good acting, and good editing, there's no movie. Even Hollywood seems not to fully understand this.

Trashcan lid Computer. Amazing.

[GodWasAnAlien]

The design proves that you can put a computer in
a trashcan lid.

Of course, George Lucas showed us this with robot designs.

Re:Trashcan lid Computer. Amazing.

[waterbug]

Of course, here's the natural progression:

http://kan.org/misc/iMacD2.html

Re:LINUX Has POWER and NetBSD, OpenBSD, etc. DO NO

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux is the gold standard by which all other Unixes are measured. That is a fact for the year 2002. Two operating systems are gaing market share - Linux and Windows. That is the world of the 21st Century. Deal with it.

USB devices for Mac

[Toe, The]

I think "a lot" is overstating the case. The great majority of USB devices I've seen do work on Macs. I recently got a Brother fax machine for work and was pleasantly surprised to notice that it not only had a USB port, but also a Mac driver. I'm pretty sure Mac drivers are pretty dang easy to develop.

The USB devices that are the most Mac-specific are keyboards, since they're different for Macs vs. Windows.

Flush...

[Weasel Boy]

"...what will happen to all the old (2001) iMacs still for sale..."

Manufacturers try to 'flush the channel' before introducing new products; that is, they stop shipping the old stuff and hope that retailers' inventories dwindle to nearly nothing before the announcement. Ideally, nobody has any stock of the old stuff left to sell. This isn't just Apple; it's everyone.

Times are a-changin'

[rho]

Well, we have it. It's done. Consumer oriented flat-panel computers are here. CRTs will be relegated to pre-press shops and collectors.

If you look at LCD monitors in the light of Apple's success with pushing USB, expect to see imitators abounding in a few months.

To those who pooh-pooh the price, I ask to you show me a comparable machine by any competitor that fulfills the same criteria:

• Fast machine
• CD-RW
• LCD monitor
• Small footprint
• Full complement of ports
• Equipped with software that allows you to:
  • Easily make movies
  • Easily manage your digital music
  • Easily manage your digital photos
  • Easily allows you to get a printed and bound book for $30 (Christmas gifts ahoy)

And do all this for $1300. Show me the comparables, please. And, consider the inevitability of production ramp-up. LCDs are cheaper now than a year ago. With Apple's push towards commoditizing the LCD market, imagine what the economies of scale can bring!

Will this significantly alter Apple's market share? Not likely. There are too many people who look at a problem and readily come to the wrong solution, i.e. "Let's go buy a computer based solely on the price, rather than what we want to accomplish with it". This is not Apple's market, just as they are not GNU/Linux's market. Apple is selling to a group of people who want the computer to be a part of their lifestyle, not as a keeping-up-with-the-Joneses consumerism.

Bravo, Apple. I look forward to the future devices you have in store.

Re:Times are a-changin'

[Anthony Boyd]

To those who pooh-pooh the price, I ask to you show me a comparable machine by any competitor that fulfills the same criteria:

Well, you're listing off the wrong criteria, and you even know what the real criteria is, since you mention it later in your post: price. Sure, Apple's new iMac is not only fairly priced for what it does, it's a good deal (in my opinion). But that's not what the critics are criticising. They're talking about the low-end offering, which is typically the eMachines/BYO/$400-Compuserve-subsidy computer. The iMac has traditionally been Apple's competitive offering in that area, with a $799 price point. Yes, to these people it is all about price and not features. If Apple releases an iMac with a 12" display, 10 GB drive, 8 MB graphics card, CD player (no R, no RW, no DVD), and keeps the G3, that would be fine if they hit a price of $699 or $799 or even $899. But they don't.

I think what Apple, and even my friends on /. haven't put their fingers on yet is why and who goes for the cheapie boxes. It may be some cheapskates, and some college kids, but a lot of low-end sales are by people who already have a "main" computer or two, and now they're fleshing out the satellites, if you know what I mean. They're building up the peripheral boxes to round out the home. I'm probably an extreme of that, I have 7 computers (including this Samsung NoteMaster 486 laptop, 20 megs of RAM, 75 mhz, which I just got Red Hat onto, cool!). But most families I know nowadays have 2 or 3 computers, and only 1 is good. The others are basically Web/email/solitaire terminals scattered around the house. That's the low-end market, and Apple has just moved out of that market. It may be that the $799 price point just wasn't profitable at all for Apple. But I suspect that it's something else: Steve simply refuses to rip out features to hit the price the critics want. He just won't offer something low-end. It's not Apple's style. I think that's unfortunate, because what I'd really like to do is get an Airport hub, buy one obscenely fast and tricked out Macintosh, and then populate the house with 2 or 3 other el-cheapo Macs. That can't be done with the new line of Apple products.

Re:Times are a-changin'

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh this IS done right now with the older iMacs, which will be continued to be sold at that price point.

Re:Times are a-changin'

[hearingaid]

It can be done with eBay though. There are plenty of earlier iMacs that turn up on there: you'd want to get relatively recent Macs to play with, for the AirPort support.

Used computers. That's the way to go for your situation.

In fact, it's generally the way to go, period. Unless you want a true badass machine; new computers have passed Ludicrous Speed and are heading for Too Fast To Use Sensibly.

Re:Times are a-changin'

[rho]

Remember when the iMac was released? It was a >$1000 machine. It s-l-o-w-l-y came down in price as Apple was able to produce them cheaper.

Steve refuses to remove features (that, to his and my thinking would cripple the machine)? Good for him! Apple should stop up their ears when PC-centric magazines hammer them on irrelevant criticisms. Don't like the price? Wait, or save up more money, or go elsewhere. What they all forget (or ignore) is that Apple produces machines to make money, and to enhance the lives of their customers. That has always been the driving force behind Jobs, and I'm for one glad that he's stuck to it.

Any monkey can punch out me-too boxes. Apple makes hardware and software that push the edge and expand the envelope of what people can do with computers. For that ability, you will pay more money. It's a bargain, if you have the wit to see it. If you don't, you can go chain yourself to Redmond and some anonymous Taiwanese clone maker.

Finally, the primary market for cheap computers are whiny magazine columnists, not purchasers of multiple PCs. The standard way for multiple PCs to show up in a home is for the primary computer to be upgraded, and the older computer relegated to the kids, or grandma, or something similar. You are the exception, not the rule. The people who buy $699 Internet Specials are those who think that they have to get on this Interway Supernet thing like the Jones have next door. This is not a prime market: indeed, it's a huge drain on support services. There aren't that many people in that segment of the population, but they take a disproportionate ammount of support to keep happy. These are the same people who set their 28.8 modem to 56K in their control panel and yell at the tech support desk that their modem isn't any faster.

Re:Times are a-changin'

[Anonymous Coward]

you can go chain yourself to Redmond and some anonymous Taiwanese clone maker.

You're chained to Apple, a vendor so capricious and unethical they make Microsoft look like Ben and Jerry. Ask them about the 1997 machines that were sold with a promise that OSX would support them, or their commitment to Cocoa as a viable cross-platform API, or their support for the PPC reference platform. OpenDoc. Newton. You name it, they've reneged on it.

We support a competitive market. Adam Smith's invisible hand is our ally, and a powerful ally it is.

Re:Times are a-changin'

[praedor]

One minor question that REALLY prevents me, up to this point, from considering coughing up for an LCD flat panel: How does it handle graphics-intensive games? Hows the lag? I seem to recall that early LCDs were NOT what you wanted if you played FP-type games (in particular)due to lag/refresh speed issues with LCDs.

Re:apple

[Anonymous Coward]

unless it's a yeti's dick

14' display?!

[nvrrobx]

Whoa, a 14 foot display? Where do I sign up?

Key feature of digital hub

[jaoswald]

What everyone seems to have missed, (and I almost missed, listening to the keynote.)

5 (FIVE) USB ports. And 2 Firewire.

Re:LINUX Has POWER and NetBSD, OpenBSD, etc. DO NO

[nagora]

Java programmer

Contradiction in terms there.

TWW

Vegan? Try Fruitarian

[ablair]

"How long can Apple last?" Gimme a break, I was hoping for at least an "Apple/BSD is dyeing" header on /.

"Do enough people really buy these things to keep Apple afloat" Apparently, and even profitable

"Until you can play Counter-Strike on an iMac, I can't take them seriously" I guess if games are what it takes for you to take a platform seriously instead of real apps that help you get work done, you take the Xbox a lot more seriously than Linux.

Steve does like optical drives

[billstewart]

At least they're not the old NeXt flopticals...

iBush

[Tanjou]

http://tanjou.org/bushhat.jpg

New from Apple: The Dalek XP

[Superfreak]

This looks like a Segway-inspired version of a Dalek.....

I'm sorry, but that's what it looks like to me - as soon as I saw the thing, I just kept hearing

"EXTERMINATE ------- EXTERMINATE"

Then again, that's probably just the cold medication.

Prices for Germany

[Anonymous Coward]

And Apple Germany produces Road Apples again. Heise Newsservice has got the prices for Germany. You can expect the same prices for the all of the Euro-Zone:

http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/adb-07.01.02 -0 00/

700/CD-RW : 1855EUR (=$1657)
700/DVD-RW-Combi: 2087EUR (=$1864)
800/Superdrive:2551EUR (=$2279)

So don't buy, unless the make fair prices.

Re:Prices for Germany

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like all of Europe's Apple-sites have been updated with the prices:

I'm giving here the price for the SuperDrive Model:

Austria: 2638E (!!)
Germany: 2550E
France: 2199E
Spain: 2199E
Italy: 2199E
Netherlands: 2199E
Switzerland: ~2308E (not Euro-Zone)

1Euro ~ $0.89

So If you're in germany live near the dutch border, you can get one in Amsterdam, spend the 350E you saved for high quality drugs.

OR! Take a last-minute flight to Spain, make yourself a nice week in the sun and buy a new iMac while you're there.

Yeah, but try to add a drive... whoops...

[Anonymous Coward]

Guess those towers ARE still useful for something...

Re:Yeah, but try to add a drive... whoops...

[MoneyT]

Not for the home user, never confuse the home user (the people who would buy an iMac) with a power user (the people who would add a drive) two different markets

Re:Yeah, but try to add a drive... whoops...

[dnelson]

I don't get it... why not use a firewire drive? I guess the only thing you cannot do is upgrade your nvidia gfx card, or add some other pci device. also, unless someone does a cool hack, you get stuck w/ a 15" monitor. would be cool to see a $2k 22" monitor on one of those $1800 imacs. probably tip it over though.

Re:Yeah, but try to add a drive... whoops...

[MoneyT]

Doesn't mean you couldn't run a cable from inside the imac, out the bottom and to the 22 inch monitor placed conveniently elsewhere, but I think a 22 inch LCD would be wasted on an iMac, even witha g4 in it.

The last person on Earth...

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, you must be the last person on Earth to know the difference between RISC and CISC.

Re:I wish that laptops had the cool screen arm thi

[sulli]

Compaq tried shipping a multi-piece laptop (Compaq Concerto) back in the days of Windows for Pens. It was terribly unwieldy, so I'm not at all surprised that laptops with separate screens haven't been available since.

"Mac OS X.i is what Linux-on-desktop People Crave"

[Dr. Pantzo]

An article by Michael J. DeMaria over at networkcomputing.com.

slashdot humor content

[Anonymous Coward]

and lets get real, the G4 (Excepting the velocity engine stuff) isn't that fast of a chip at any available speed compared to the x86 world.

You're joking, right? Oh, wait, no, you're a slashdot editor.

Macworld isn't over yet.

[Anonymous Coward]

Duh.

iMac and PowerMac G4 speed parity

[HerrNewton]

Seybold is coming up in 6 weeks. Apple is far more likely to announce revisions to its pro desktop models at Seybold--Seybold being a publishing and design expo.

Just wait till the last week in February and the desktops won't seem so shabby anymore.

Add a second internal drive to your iMac...

[Anonymous Coward]

Guess what... you can't.

The tower is more expensive, but I can go down to Best Buy and pick up a $289 120 GB WD ATA drive and be up and running in five minutes. I can't do that with the new iMac. FireWire? Perhaps, but not for digital video, where trying to work with DV on a FireWire drive is still asking for trouble (and dropped frames)...

Yeah, but rectangular is, you know, square...

[mutatron]

That thing would look butt-ugly with a square box, upset the whole aesthetic! Maybe you guys that think the new iMac is weird need to expand your artistic frontiers a little. In two years it'll be old hat anyway.

Re:Yeah, but rectangular is, you know, square...

[Zagadka]

It's already butt-ugly. A dome, a stick, and a rectangle. How is that aesthetically pleasing? The original iMac looked "cute". The flat-panel version looks obvious, boring, and ugly. I was wondering how Apple was going to make a flat-panel imac that looked good. Now I see that they failed. Oh well... :-(

Re:Yeah, but rectangular is, you know, square...

[MtViewGuy]

If they had designed the CPU box with a rectangular box but with the right proportions, it would have looked very professional and I'd approve immediately. The new iMac design with its half-sphere CPU box design just looks too avant-garde for business environments, IMHO.

Re:Yeah, but rectangular is, you know, square...

[Yakko]

I don't understand this whole "aesthetic" thing.

That being said, I couldn't care less what the damned thing looks like anyway, as long as I can take it apart without destroying it.

I wouldn't know "good looking" from a hole in the ground, anyway. Thank you, beige-box clones.

Re:Yeah, but rectangular is, you know, square...

[Zagadka]

Saying it looks avant-garde is giving them too much credit. It looks dopey. It probably took about 5 minutes to design.

"Okay, so we need a container for the CPU, and a flat-panel. How about a box connected to the panel by a stick."

"No, not a box, iMacs are round. It needs to be round."

"Okay, fine, a ball connected to the screen by a stick."

"Then it'll roll off the table."

"Okay, fine, half of a ball."

"Perfect!"

If someone had asked me 6 months ago to draw the worst possible design for a flat-panel iMac, it would've looked remarkably like the real thing. I really can't believe how dumb they made it look.

Maybe they figured cubes were jinxed or something? After all, Jobs has had bad luck with 2 cubes so far... At least both of the cubes (Mac & NeXT) looked good, which is way more than I can say for the truncated volleyball.

Re:Yeah, but rectangular is, you know, square...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, everyone was just wringing their hands about how ugly it was, weren't they? Have fun in whatever reality you live in.

Re:Yeah, but rectangular is, you know, square...

[Anonymous Coward]

Everybody who wasn't high on Steve-Jobs's Kool-aid, yeah...

$1800 iMac = $2200 Dell

[Anonymous Coward]

That's what the Time article reports.

Anti-Apple $ FUD is sooooooo 80s.

Not simple enough

[Anonymous Coward]

Beyond the usual fact that it is overpriced and the hardware is very 1999, I think Jobs have now made the ultimate mistake of making iMacs harder to understand. Keep in mind that the old iMac is successful because even a moron can use it. It was as easy as 1,2,3. plug in the power. plug in the phone line, power on. Anyone can do it. However, the new iMacs are more sophisticated... not to mention the new unix based OSX.

Apple should have stuck with simplicity, not feature richness.

Flame: OMFG what the hell is wrong with Steve Jobs

[EvilAlien]

Is Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple Computer, drinking the bong water again? Apple's new iMac boasts a flat panel display (which Jobs may be surprised to
hear have been an option for PC users - remember them, Steve? The ones with choices about their hardware? - have been using for some time). Yippity-do-dah.

The new iMac/desktop-lamp is "the best thing we have ever done" according to Jobs. What the hell is wrong with this guy? A 700 - 800 MHz G4 CPU, 32 MB GeForce2 MX card, and other options long available for PCs is the height of Apple's engineering prowess? Jobs further pontificates that "this is the official death of the CRT today". Wow.

More idiotic babbling: "Pretty much, us and Dell are the only ones in this industry making money. They make it by being Wal-Mart. We make it by
innovation,"... a desktop lamp-shaped underpowered OS-limited Mac box with a crappy video card is innovative?
</rant>

Sense of style...

[Anonymous Coward]

With white trash like you, anything without a goatee is "just plain stupid," hick.

Anti-Apple FUD. Amazing.

[Anonymous Coward]

What computer pays you to design computers that sell by the hundreds of thousands?

The 80s is soooooo over. Take a shower, stop being so cheap in the wallet, get a girlfriend and get a life.

The tech wreck is over, dot-con/ITT sucker. Go back to dual-booting your "I only use Windows for games" machine.

Not the only reason...

[cjhuitt]

just so it will take up more room in their briefcase/backback

That's not the only reason... some people will actually want their monitor to have that pixel depth, but cause less eyestrain trying to squint at the smaller display.

I hate to admit it, but as I get older, I'll probably want the same sort of things myself.

Re:Not the only reason...

[pivo]

...to have that pixel depth...

No such thing as pixel depth. There's color depth, but I think you're thinkin of plain 'ol resolution.

Anyway, higher resolution on a small LCD display is amazingly easy to read. I wouldn't have believed it myself until I saw a friend's Dell laptop with a 15", 1600 x 1200 display. It was beautiful and very legible.

No, the crappy PCs cost $400

[billstewart]

If you want a low-end PC, you're looking at more like $400-500, not $1000 - that's retail with a cheapo monitor. Spending $1000 should get you some significant upgrades. Typical retail prices for a motherboard and 900MHz AMD are about $99, 40-60GB disk is about $100. $50 for 512MB RAM. $20 for ether. If you're not a gamer, spend $29 on video card and use the built-in audio. If you *are* a gamer, spend an extra $150 for video and $50 for audio and upgrade the power supply and add joysticks, heavy speakers, chair-shaker... :-) CD-burners are commonly $79, as are DVD/CD players.

If you do want that gorgeous 22-inch Apple flat-panel monitor, now _that_ will set you back actual cash, and even 17-19" flat panels are in the $500 range.

"Ra, ra, ra..."

[Anonymous Coward]

Anti-Apple FUD is soooooo 80s.

The tech wreck is over, dot-con/ITTtech sucker. Go back to "dual-booting" your "I only use Windows for games" machine.

Mac fanatics

[Animats]

So typical. Say anything even mildly critical of Apple products, and get moderated down.

This is IT?

[SilentChris]

Forgive me for being brash, but this is it? A flat-panel machine that looks like a table lamp? Has the reality-distortion field set in so deeply? And what about the price?

Earth to Mac: you want to regain some of the lost marketshare? Stop creating products that belong in museums but have little inherent functionality. Build machines the people want: cheap internet terminals, inexpensive wireless networks for audio, true-to-TV video compression. You definitely have the budget. If half the money spent developing the new iMac over the last 2 years was spent on developing a low-cost internet appliance (say, around $300-500), Apple would be making a KILLING right now. Instead, I'm left with something that makes me glad I left the Apple world a long time ago.

why Apple is inspiring...

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple has always been the little guy.

They brought computing to the public, with a true personal computer.

They have a love (or possibly obsession) with innovation, and beauty in technology.

It's hard not to find that inspiring.

Mounts on a Ginger / Segway !

[billstewart]

That's the real secret of this device, is that it was designed with mounting brackets to attach on top of the Ginger aka Segway scooter. Just think about what you want to compute, and it'll go do that, as well as displaying the output of your digital video camera so you can see where you're going on the screen.

Re:Mounts on a Ginger / Segway !

[sconest]

You mean like this?

Re:Mounts on a Ginger / Segway !

[Anonymous Coward]

Aha. So that's what the iwalk was.

Mathematica at MWSF Keynote

[Anonymous Coward]

log (cabin)

'nuff said

AC

"Mac=glitz, Linux=power", very poor analogy IMHO

[AHumbleOpinion]

Linux and the Macintosh are very different things. I don't want to bore anyone with poor analogies, but when Macintosh has glitz, Linux has power

IMHO the above statement may have been true in the past but it is a poor analogy today given MacOS X. Much of what makes Linux powerful is open source software. Much open source software is not Linux specific and is fully accessible to MacOS X given MacOS X's FreeBSD core. The differences are more philosophical/political than technical.

Oooh! Apples are *trendy*! ...yawn.

[Paradoxish]

Alright, so this'll cost me a few karma points and everyone here's going to think I'm an asshole. Screw that, I'm sick of Macs.

First of all, I'm just going to give you my opinion: that "thing" on apple.com's main page is the gaudiest, ugliest, oddest piece of plastic I've ever seen in my life. That's right, it actually managed to pull that distinguished title away from the old iMac. Call me whatever you want, but I like good 'ol rectangular computers. I like my x86 cpu and all the big, clunky, ugly hardware that goes with it. I can decide tommorow that I want a new proc and motherboard - great. I'll go buy one and throw it in the case I have now. You see, my case isn't shaped like an igloo and will therefor fit any kind of real hardware I decide to throw in there.

Even better, if I get tired of the way my PC looks I can always buy a new case for it. Or put a window on this case. Or whatever. Yes, this is why PCs rule - and that's without even mentioning the power advantage they have over Macs... which is what really matters. But I will give you this -Apples (iMacs specifically) may very well be the trendiest computers out there. But, guess what? VW Bugs and Ford Focuses are trendy too, but I won't be buying one of them anytime soon.

But wait! Before you declare me instantly off-topic at least give me a chance to comment on why the new iMac set off this PC-patriotic (PCtriotic?) rant. My biggest complaint is probably what Apple would tout as its biggest strength - Apple designs a consumer appliance, but they don't design computers. Don't get me wrong, they're fine for plenty of things and I'm sure many professionals are completely happy with their Macs, but their focus is on making the damn things as user-friendly and prettied-up as possible. Well, great... let's drop the average person's IQ a couple of more points. But I guess that's just a matter of taste...

No, here's the real problem. Macs are expensive and serve a very limited purpose. Their hardware, and this new iMac is proof of that, is overpriced and underpowered. My latest computer (AMD 1800XP w/ a GeForce3, CD-RW, and 60gb HDD), 15" LCD screen included, cost me around the same price. And not only am I free to install any version of Windows I want, but any version of Linux. Hell, I could throw OS/2 on here if I wanted. And tommorow, if I'm sick of any piece of hardware I can just as easily go out, buy a new one, and throw it in. It can do everything the iMac can do, cost less, offers more options, and can play any game I'd want to boot.

And you know what the saddest part about this all is? I like Apple. If they'd realize that their hardware is never going to compete directly with the PC market and start developing an OS (preferably Linux based) for x86's they could probably take on M$.

But if they continue this foolish strategy then they're always going to remain a big company that fails to impress anyone

Re:Oooh! Apples are *trendy*! ...yawn.

[rob.eberhardt]

This wins the prize for most arrogant post I can remember reading on /. for ages. Get a clue - The fact that your needs are different from the needs of many other computer users does not mean their IQs will drop a couple of points - sheesh.

Re:Oooh! Apples are *trendy*! ...yawn.

[Anonymous Coward]

And I'll go one further: Just because a computer is made to be easy to use, that doesn't mean that its users are stupid. It just means they want to use the computer, not tinker with it. To use a car analogy, drivers aren't suddenly more stupid because they have cars with a crank to start them up, or an automatic transmission, or because they don't manually set the timing of their gears every time they go out for a drive. Some drivers just want to get from point A to point B, and don't care how the car works besides that. Just because many of us are interested in how computers work, that doesn't mean that everyone shares that interest. And if I just want to get something done on the computer, I don't want to deal with the inner workings.

Re:Oooh! Apples are *trendy*! ...yawn.

[GMFTatsujin]

Some people buy a toaster so they can pull it apart, supercharge the heating coils, chop the power cable and set up a microwave power relay, and polish the chrome until they can count their pores in it.

Other people just want toast.

disposible computer?

[brad3378]

Yeah, it looks cool and all, but...
I wouldn't buy one.

Although I'm a PC hardware guy,
I wouldn't buy one even if the pc makers start
similar styling with their cases.

It may not be a bad design, but come on.
Where am I gonna find an aftermarket
burner that fits in a spherical shaped case?

I might as well toss out my Soundblaster 5.1
with it's external drive bay controller.

And I'd have to buy the more expensive USB version zip drive.

Don't get me wrong, I actually like Mac Hardware,
but I like Sun and SGI stuff too. I just don't see the same bang for the buck. They have a market, but unfortunately it's not from much of the slashdot crowd.

The perfect machine, for some

[goodmanj]

My fiancee is looking for a new machine. We were looking at the old iMacs -- the power and price-point were right on, but she didn't like the lumpy shape, and wanted a flat-panel display.

And today, I read about this new Imac. Perfect!

Now we just need to find the best way to hook up a minidisk recorder to it, so she can burn CDs of her concert performances.

Re:The perfect machine, for some

[thedbp]

Griffin iMic

http://www.griffintechnology.com/audio/imic_main .h tml

You might need to chop the tracks up yourself unless you can find a way to use the digi out on the MiniDisc to the Mac directly ... perhaps a USB or Firewire solution?

an interpretation of the moderation of this post:

[Anonymous Coward]

that's a really fucking funny and insightful overrated offtopic troll.

Re:Not the only reason... [OT]

[xueexueg]

Oh, you're right. When I show people things in a gnome-terminal with the 10pt font that I prefer, they almost always laugh at me for expecting them to read those tiny letters, and I blow it up to 20pt for them. I used to have the PBG3 with the 14.1" 1024x768 display, and it *was* huge and majestic, and no one ever complained about the 10pt font. In many ways I think that Wallstreet was the best computer I've ever had, even though I love the compactness of my iBook. Nowadays, when I use my friend's Wallstreet (helping her tweak Debian on it), I am impressed by its size, and everything really is easier to see/read (even though the screen is a little yellower and darker). So I agree: there certainly are compelling reasons for wanting a bigger screen with the same resolution. But I bought the iBook because it was compact and subnotebookish. But it's so small I kind of have to hunch over it, so it's taking its toll on my posture.

I Just Don't Get It

[Anonymous Coward]

I just don't get how the rampant micro-chauvanism of the 80's and early 90's continues to survive to this day in the Apple community. I remember it well, as I used to own a Commodore 64 and used to think it was the damned best computer ever made (as it truly was, bitch). But then I grew up, and I realized that whether the computer was made by Commodore, Apple or Radio Shack (yes, I remember the old Trash-80s) it really didn't matter. A computer is pretty much a computer, whether it comes in a sexy casing with drool-worthy chips inside or not.

Really, to see how people bend over backwards to apologize for Apple really amazes me. It's a juvenile attitude that the people who buy Apple's marketing schtick have--and how righteous the indignation if you dare to point it out to them! And don't get me started on the whole "Think Different(tm)" ad campaign that they've used to sell iMacs (think different by buying a computer from us! you're part of the Apple(tm) generation!)...

For fuck's sake, it's just a computer! Get over yourselves!

Re:I Just Don't Get It

[Simon Garlick]

Buy a Mac... and use Microsoft Office, Microsoft Outlook Express, and Microsoft Internet Explorer!

Think Different!

the machine looks impressive

[AnimeFreak]

It combines both beauty and brawn (courtesy of Mac OS X and the PowerPC G4). The machine would mix well in a common household or in a business as it doesn't look like a cube or a box.

The only thing I hope is that there is a smokey look (like the iMac DV) because I don't like any other colour other than beige (I want a Power Macintosh G3 in a beige case, damnit!) or black.

If you honestly don't think it looks great and think it should not exist, tell Steve Jobs that by not buying his product. He'll get the message that way. Telling him via methods of communication such as e-mail (or via Slashdot) will generally not work if he is making good or decent sales on his products. :)

Slashdotters, please remember:

[thedbp]

That the iMac is intended for end users who want a computer without hassle that is also very powerful and customizeable.

It is NOT a computer for those looking to hack hardware or software aspects of it.

That's what cheap early model G3's and late model 604e's are for ;) snag one and install any flavor of *nix you want, even hack OS X onto it and see how much that GUI eats up processor cycles.

Of COURSE the iMac isn't made for the Slashdot crowd. At least not as a project machine ;) Perhaps as just a no-hassle, no-trouble, always reliable, personal life enhancer.

iPhoto

[digity]

Third: iPhoto is a decent cataloging program, and one designed to be used easily and generate more revenue streams for apple in the form of booklets and print costs. But it looks very polished and useful.

Go figure. It took Apple to make .NET work properly.

12 inch IBOOK better than 14 inch IBOOK

[KwamiMatrix]

Watch to see how many people purchase an 14 inch display IBOOK instead of a 12 inch display one. Since both displays run at SXGA, the 12 inch display has a slightly better resolution. What would be a good argument in purchasing the 14 inch IBOOK? More arm rest room? Seriously?

Re:12 inch IBOOK better than 14 inch IBOOK

[wessto]

I guess one advantage to the 14 inch (offset by weight of coarse) is the claimed extra hour of battery life. Just a thought...

You most certainly can....

[_avs_007]

Check out the cappuccino PC We have two of these in our group here. Very compact, yet can be had with a P-III processor, 1394, USB, 10/100 Ethernet, etc etc.

Is the power supply really in the base?

[GlenRaphael]

It's got a G4, a SuperDrive, a GeForce2 MX, and the power supply, all inside that base...

Apple has been known to fudge on this in the past. The Cube had an external power supply, a brick at the end of the power cord. I'll bet this thing does too.

Re:Is the power supply really in the base?

[jcr]

The Cube had an external power supply, a brick at the end of the power cord. I'll bet this thing does too.

I'll take that bet! How much? ;-)

-jcr

that imac reminds me of something

[Daspek]

does the product's pic at apple.com remind anyone else of the south park episode, 'cartman gets an anal probe?' in particular, the scene in which a satellite portrudes from cartman's ass.

"cartman, there's a 15-inch active matrix lcd screen sticking out of your ass!"
"sure, you guys, whatever."

Then get a good Logitech mouse

[MtViewGuy]

Gorimek,

If you think Microsoft's Intellimouse has problems, try using Logitech's excellent mouse pointers.

I'm using a Logitech Wheel Mouse Optical and it does work under MacOS X by connecting the mouse to one of the USB ports on the newer Macs. The nice thing about the Wheel Mouse Optical is that the mouse is smaller than the Intellimouse with a very nice shape that fits both left and right hands comfortably.

My next bump will be a(nother) iMac

[anfloga]

Ok, I've seen this over and over and over. In response to, "Why don't they throw in 2 Ghz G5's and a 22" LCD in the iMac, along with 4000 expansion ports?", the answer is, "because they aren't for geeks they are for consumers who know nothing".

I disagree. I am a programmer, professionally now, but have been doing it since the age of 8 on an Atari 800 as a hobby (don't worry I've changed machines a few times since then!). At one point I remember hand-assembling machine code and entering it into ATARI BASIC (using a construct something like "USR("[buncha obscure control characters]"). I fit nicely into the geek category I imagine.

And I love my main machine, an iMac 500 CD. It does everything I want it to do, except perhaps play DVD's. Of course, that's what my DVD player is for.

Running on BSD, and PowerPC, and everything just kind of works. What more could I ask for?

In fact the truth seems to be that programmers don't always need to run on the hottest, latest hardware. In fact, I could see a consumer wanting or needing that more than a programmer. If you spend all your time with your computer on games, and applications like DV authoring, you need beefy, expensive hardware. If you spend it instead on programming, I know from experience that an Atari 800 can be made to work. In any case I am very impressed with all the software that Apple includes in with the box (or, in the case of the new machines, "bump", plural, "bumpen"), especially the full-featured programming IDE, the best I've ever seen, which can be downloaded and used by anyone (with a Mac) for free. And this of course is why I don't complain about price either. Sure, I could have gotten a machine with better specs (arguably) on the Intel side. But I get a workable office suite, the equivalent of the pay version of Real Jukebox in iTunes (that goes for about $50 and crashes if you sneeze at it), better digital camera software than any camera comes with normally, and so on and so on... Total package? Even without the "Apple aura", the Apple comes out clearly ahead (as of Mac OS X 10.1) for me. Now I know I can fix just about anything that goes wrong with this thing. What about those times I just don't wanna? I just call Apple. Their support is awesome. They have a nice knowledge base on their support site as well. Anycase, enough ranting. I just don't buy the ubergeek=I bought a big machine, therefore I'm 'leet vs. consumer=bought a small or moderate machine because I don't know what I'm doing. Shouldn't it be, if anything, the other way around?

Erik

Re:My next bump will be a(nother) iMac

[Troed]

THANKYOU!

/me - professional software engineer today. was an asm hacker/phreaker/cracker as a teen. never in my life thought I would do anything but build my own PCs .. etc etc.

Now - when going home from work - I just want a computer that looks good, is silent, works, and does what I need [which is nothing really .. web, mail, icq, irc etc].

I'm all hooked on the new iMac. It _will_ replace the PC I currently have.

Re:My next bump will be a(nother) iMac

[EvlG]

You know, I agree with you 100% on the concept of coming home to a working PC. I go to school and work as a software engineer during my week days and early evenings - the last thing I want to do when I come home is to deal with a broken computer. That is a large part of the reason why I hate Windows so much. The damn thing just seems to need lots of maintenance compared to my iBook running OSX or my Linux box.

I am really considering purchasing a new Power Mac when I need more speed again. I'm really sick of all the hassles of building X86 boxes myself.

Re:My next bump will be a(nother) iMac

[BinxBolling]

Count me as another in this boat. I've been programming for half my life, spent loads of time in high school and college building/maintaining PCs, have played around with Linux and at times run it exclusively. And I now work as a programmer.

When I use a computer at home, I don't want to dick around with a lot of options and configuration -- I want to check email, surf the web, import and manage digital photos and MP3s, watch DVDs, and play games with minimal overhead. I want a computer that does these things with approximately the same ease with which my old CD player plays a disc. Except for the games thing (which I'm confident will change), my Mac running OS X is perfect for this. If I didn't already have a moderately up-to-date Mac, I would have already ordered one of the new iMacs.

Re:LINUX Has POWER and NetBSD, OpenBSD, etc. DO NO

[thedbp]

I am cringing.

Perhaps from the agnozing irony of that statement.

Perhaps because the author might actually think that's true.

*shudder*

CORRECTION - no iBook update

[Anonymous Coward]

The iBook is being advertised with a caption that notes its 14 inch SIZE, not 14 inch screen.

The iBook I see there now is the same thing as the iBook I saw yesterday. Sweet little laptop, yes, but unchanged.

Re:CORRECTION - no iBook update

[rob.eberhardt]

wrong - from Apple's web site:

Now there's even more to love about the iBook. Starting at just 4.9 lbs., with a choice of 12.1-inch or 14.1-inch displays, 500MHz or 600MHz PowerPC G3 processors, 15GB or 20GB hard drives, 128MB or 256MB of RAM expandable to 640MB -- plus AirPort wireless networking and FireWire, USB and Ethernet ports -- the iBook connects to hundreds of peripherals designed to fit your life.

Design - My thoughts

[akaDave]

I have seen a lot of the "It's Ugly" comments from various users here about the new iMac. I had mixed feelings about the design when I first saw the pictures, but now that I've gone to Apple's website, seen the quicktime VR and looked at the thing from all angles (not to mention various swivel points), I've gotta say that I like the design and this it is very functional. It only "looks like a Lamp" when the arm is completely up, but most users will have it tilted forward a bit, in which case it looks VERY nice... So, take a look at all the pics before you jump on the "It's ugly" bandwagon... ;) ...and I'm a PC guy. This new design along with OSX will probably get me to buy a Mac and use it as well...

Re:Design - My thoughts

[thedbp]

Yeah me too. They are making me want to abandon my upgrades plans for my B&W G3 tower and just get one of those instead.

I'm just waiting for my tax return so i can get this thing up to a dual G4.

Whoa, blown away

[jasonv118]

I have to say, I expected the computing industry to be revolutionized today... instead we gained a freaky-looking computer. Joy! Sarcasm aside, this is definitely a step forward for the physical design of a desktop computer.... _this_ is how it is supposed to be done. Oh, yeah, and the operating system is awesome. When can we have Quartz on Linux :( -j

Re:Whoa, blown away

[Toraz Chryx]

OS X users already have Quartz on FreeBSD :P

Make the iMac w/out the Montior!

[Anonymous Coward]

I think having an iMac model without the monior would be a good idea.

This and a KVM switch could do wonders.

Not ready to get rid of that PC just yet? Get a headless iHemisphere, a KVM switch and you're now running 2 computer platforms w/ minimal space intrusions. (FYI it is possible to use the Apple keyboard on a Windows box, and use a 2+ button mouse on a Mac, so the peripherals are perfectly interchangeable.)

The same would go w/ portablility. A headless iMac would be very easy to transport, as long as you can have a monitor at your destination.

Here's one even better: Make the Powerbook have a shortcut that changes it's VGA out port to a VGA input, and use that as a monitor!

what's wrong with having the choice ..

[Macka]

to run it at both resolutions? That way you don't leave anyone out.

It's not rocket science.

Re:Wow, a HEAVY laptop without batteries

[hartti]

A laptop which weighs 22 pounds.

Don't Click Above Link

[Anonymous Coward]

It will flood--and I really mean *flood*--your screen with goatsex images, probably locking up your machine.

Macintosh Glitz & Linux Power

[Anonymous Coward]

Power is being able to do what you want to do. You can measure power in different ways.

If you want to run a no-bullshit server, linux may be the way to go.

If you want to put a Digital camcorder or camera to real use, this silly iMac is going to spank any linux machine.

It all depends on what you want to do.

Your Digital Lifestyle Hub

[Dan Crash]

Apple seems consistently SO close to getting things perfect. Job's "digital lifestyle hub" idea makes sense, but the iMac is missing a few things that would've made it great for that purpose.

Things the iMac should've had but didn't:

1) Touchscreen: If this is really meant to be a digital hub, let's make it usable without a keyboard. You ought to be able to flip through pictures, play music, videos, and surf the web without connecting a keyboard. (In my opinion, the proper place for one of these things is on the kitchen countertop, bedroom nightstand, or livingroom endtable. Not a desktop.)

2) Wireless Everything: All right, not wireless digital video uploading, but wireless keyboard, wireless mouse that doubles as remote when you watch DVDs or show pictures to family, wireless connectors for other devices yet to be named that you'll want to place around your house but use with your digital hub.

3) Translucent "Bondi" Blue case: Hey, I liked the blue. As it is, it currently looks like something out of the harsh, blinding white future of THX-1138, and is out of place in most decors. Plus, they've essentially thrown away any sense of brand continuity or identity they spent 4 years building with the iMac.

Ideally, the base would be skinnable in the same way that cellphones are. There's no reason you should buy a computer in one color instead of a skin for every time you want to change colors. Seems like it would've been easy to do with the current design.

I'm not criticizing Apple, though. Thank god for them. They breathe sci-fi into the world. And while I wasn't sure what to make of the new iMac at first glance, I'm liking it more and more.

If they'd only port OS X to the PC! That's the real killer app they're sitting on.

Re:Your Digital Lifestyle Hub

[Anonymous Coward]

Well the OSX port is called Linux / unix and its available at redhead.......oh wait, unix was first.

Well i am glad the finaly gave up their buggy OS, I hope they ported / modified it right this time..

Good luck Apple!

That's it? The iLamp? That's all?

[Anonymous Coward]

You've got to be kidding me!

That's the best they could come up with? The frigging iLamp? It looks like nothing more than a glorified desk lamp

And as for the Mac nitwits tossing about terms like "premium brand", elegant, "industrial design" and the rest, wake the fuck up. It's just a damned machine.

Stop trying to justify the fact that Apple has been buttfucking you over price-wise by dressing it up with fancy words.

iMac can run *more* operating systems

[Anonymous Coward]

> Well, great... let's drop the average person's IQ a couple of more points.

That's actually not technically possible, as IQ stands for Intelligence Quotient (meaning divide by the average). So changing the average does not change the scale and thus has no effect ;-)

> And not only am I free to install any version of Windows I want,

May your freedom be your own.

Sadly, on a Mac one can not only install but actually run all versions of Windows SIMULTANEOUSLY, even networking them, all on one machine (using VPC). I do admit it won't be as fast ;-)

> but any version of Linux.

Not true; _not_ any. You would _not_ be able to run YellowDog Linux on your machine, or LinuxPPC, or mkLinux, or the PPC versions of Suse or Mandrake, and I probably forgot a couple... There are also PPC versions of NetBSD or OpenBSD. On the other hand, many intel versions of Linux *do* run within VPC on a Mac! (Though why bother with native Linux versions available to choose from?)

> Hell, I could throw OS/2 on here if I wanted

Yes; can do on VPC on a Mac as well.

Oh, and you forgot to mention you cannot run OS X. Did anyone say OS 9?

> And tommorow, if I'm sick of any piece of hardware I can just
> as easily go out, buy a new one, and throw it in.

iMacs aren't meant to be expandable internally, Apple has other machines that are.

> It can do everything the iMac can do, cost less, offers more options

As pointed out above, the iMac can actually run more different operating systems than any x86 hardware, so it can do more (maybe not faster).

LCD's don't work that way

[Anonymous Coward]

LCD's are not like CRTs. They have a single native resolution. If the native resolution is 1536x1152 and the selected resolution is 1024x768, then the number of displayed pixels is over twice the number of unique pixels. The extra pixels are created through interpolation. Essentially, for every 2 lines to be displayed (in both vertical & horizontal directions), an extra 3rd line is created. To most people, the result looks really ugly.

This is NOT the new iMac...

[BlackGriffen]

The iMac that Steve announced is not the successor to the iMac. Look at the pricing: $1300-$1800. This is the successor to the G4 cube! The iMac is still being sold at the Apple Store, and it's a good thing, too, because the education market really can't hanlde a computer with an LCD, let along an LCD on an armature. They need good old fashioned durable CRTs. Note also that they didn't upgrade the G4 line: this is to make sure the new iMac is a success until they can replace the old iMac in the lineup. Once they've cleared out the old iMacs, they'll probably upgrade the Pro lineup since the "new iMac" won't have to compete with the low end machines any more.

Also consider that the list of features for the "new iMac" reads like the wish list for the G4 cube: include a monitor, etc.

People, this is Stevie's ego baby not willing to die! They should call it the G4 hemisphere. For my $0.02, this is what Apple should have done:

DDR ram w/ improved bus speeds on pro models,
Keep the old iMacs about where they're at,
Introduce the "new iMac", but call it what it is with the same marketing strategy.

Here's hoping that Apple hasn't fouled this up too severely.

BlackGriffen

The new I-KEA desk-lamp Imac design

[Anonymous Coward]

My oh my,

What are looking at here? A new reading lamp from Ikea (makes you wonder if it used to be just "Kea") or a computer?

Ok ok, 'nuff said lets get a little more serious here.

One of the more important plusses of this Imac, as Apple says, is the creating of more desk-space. Ok true, but there is no sane company who will spend 1800+ dollars on a desktop computer with a cdr in it!

They will be looking for the simple standard: cpu, diskdrive, 17" screen (wich is the absolute minimum these days and in a lot of countries the legal minimum), network adapter.

Not fancy screens that will break, expensive design, modems and cdr (most companies won't install cdrom players for that matter).

For home users, just go to a computer shop and start calculating what you can buy for 1800 dollars.....

I must say, as a boring straight pc fan that Apple did a nice job on the G4 desktop versions (you know, that box with 4 handles) but this new design gave me the hiccups and laughs for allmost an hour.

Sorry for all the Apple fans but its an I-kea desk-lamp with a silly flat thing on top period.

Re:I wish that laptops had the cool screen arm thi

[effer]

Easier. Use a frame stand. I've used this with my PB for two years now. Standard KB and mouse with the display nicely placed.

iYaiYai!

[zazylawy]

What a collection of bad puns this subject has generated! iGet the iDea already! Sure, Apple machines may be nothing more than iCandy, but iDeally, iDly reading /. wouldn't offend my iSight so much! Good job, everyone. Anymore of these iSores and I might need iGlasses!)

How Apple should sell Power Macs

[Steve Cowan]

Today Apple announced really fast iMacs, so fast that they will be in direct competition with Apple's own Power Mac G4 series.

In order to really increase market share, and to increase the value of the current Power Mac G4 line, Apple should be selling their incredible Studio and Cinema displays at cost, or perhaps even at a slight loss.

By sacrificing the profit they make on these fantastic monitors, they immediately add value to the Power Mac line - after all, they don't work with any other computer anyway! (At least not without a very expensive adaptor). Apple's displays could be arguably less expensive to produce than competitors' much cheaper products, because they (Apple's displays) don't need power supplies, and they have no VGA connection (only DVI).

The effect would be twofold: the displays are arguably among the best LCD panels on the market, so peecee people who see them in action would say "you Mac users get all the best toys." Second, it would make purchasing an Apple display seem much less frivolous - right now (in Canada at least) an Apple Studio 15" display costs about twice what I would spend on the cheapest 15" LCD from LG or KDS. Yeah Apple's displays are a bit better, but I can't justify that!

Offering the displays at bargain-basement prices would also position the Power Mac G4 as a reasonable purchase instead of buying a new iMac. Case in point: an 800 MHz iMac (in Canada) is $2899 (with SuperDrive). A similarly equipped Power Mac G4/733 with a combo drive (no SuperDrive) is $3049, and a 15" Studio Display is $929 - for a grand total of $3978, and I still can't burn DVDs! (FWIW the Power Mac G4/867 with SuperDrive and 15" display is $4803).

Realistically the Power Mac G4/733 will probably be about as fast as the iMac G4/800, and my advantages would be PCI slots (so what) and gigabit ethernet (nice for servers but...)

This is a dark day as far as Apple's pricing grid is concerned, and this is the best possible solution I can think of for the sake of the Power Mac G4 at the moment.

"New" iMac Nothing New (just a repacked cube)

[issaco]

The great steve jobs has managed to re-sell us the cube

Look at the Specs - 100MHz bus, 2XAGP...

Great Machine and all just imagine that the cube had sold well , this is what it would have in it by now....

iPhoto...

[Wakko Warner]

So, um, how is iPhoto any different from ACDsee? There are plenty of tools available for Windows that do what it looks like iPhoto does.

Today, Apple showed us a little round wart of a computer with very little expandability that uses laptop parts in a somewhat creative way. There's really not much beyond that, from what I can tell. Am I supposed to be impressed?

- A.P.

Re:iPhoto...

[MoneyT]

You know, for all the complainign everyone does about how "unexpandable" apple computers are, you forget the average lifespan of a mac is 3+ years, the average lifespan of a PC is 1.5 (both numbers are assuming no upgrades have been installed) Thats a big difference. The difference between windows and mac software (espesialy that developed my Apple) is the mac software is almost always easier to use and has a much better interface. For every second of clock speed you save, I save the same ammount not having to hunt for a command that isn't where it should be.

Re:iPhoto...

[Anonymous Coward]

More bullshit from a Mac addict. I know people with 486's who still surf the internet with Windows 3.1. My sister uses a P133 that I built 5 years ago. We also have macs at work that are 5 years old and we have to wack them on the side to get the hard drive spinning sometimes. Otherwise we get that information mac with a question mark in the middle. Yeah that's real user friendly.

Re:iPhoto...

[schvenk]

OK, calm down. MoneyT was quoting averages. No one's contesting the fact that you can surf the Web on an old 486, or that there are dead Macs out there. The point was about the average lifespan of a Mac vs. a PC.

And if the 5-year-old Macs you have at work don't boot, why are you starting them up and whacking them? No amount of usability will save you from a dead hard drive.

Re:iPhoto...

[Anonymous Coward]

ACDSee (a fine software product, btw, so I'm not slighting it) does not have one-button camera import, multiple thumbnail views (it has ONE thumbnail view), view by roll, layout control for creating a picture book, hard copy ordering of pictures w/sizing direct form the app, and numerous other things mentioned in the speech.

You dorks don't seem to get it. Geeks are a meaningless minority to corporations selling product. Geeks don't spend the money that regular consumers do, and they enjoy tinkering and over-complicating the simplest of concepts. People want things to be EASY. They want the computer to update itself and to do what they tell it to do. You flakes want things to be more and more complicated, as is evidenced by your love of compilers. No respectable normal person should ever have to compile a goddamned thing or even know what a compiler is. In short, many of you want to be engineers but aren't, so you create ludicrous systems so you can prove your superior intelligence. Instead, you fool yourselves. Apple Computer makes computers for CONSUMERS, NOT GEEKS!!!

"I can do the same thing on my PC, wah wah wah ..."

Sure you can, in about ten extra steps, having to download multiple apps, etc. YOU MISS THE POINT! One click, one app, one service. Simple and effective. Too bad it's lost on you, flit.

Re:iPhoto...

[Anonymous Coward]

where did you get those figures ? Can you get a little more generalized in your statements please ?

Re:iPhoto...

[MoneyT]

I can try:

Ooga, MAC GOOD, SPIFFY COLORS, LONG LIFE

Booga, WINTEL BAD, CRAPPY OS, LOUSY LIFE SPAN

I don't get any more genral than that, it causes my brain to hurt.

Reminds me of noonoo (sp?) from telly tubbies

[Bitsy Boffin]

This thing reminds me of the vacuum cleaner from that Telly Tubbies pre-schooler show.

I can see it being really unstable, and extremely expensive to fix when you inevitably knock it over.

Mathematica on OS X

[Decimal Dave]

Was I the only one impressed with the Mathematica demo during the keynote? They showed a multi-dimensional graph on Win XP and OS X running side by side. The resolution and frame rates looked comparable, but the image quality on OS X was definately superior; there were no moire artifacts at all on the OS X visualization!

Re:Mathematica on OS X

[KwamiMatrix]

I was impressed also. Price?

iUnimpressed

[Anonymous Coward]

After seeing the movie clips that Apple ordered spymac.com to pull from their website I'm really NOT interested in another Mac.

I want another goddamn NEWTON.

Serious question about connectivity

[weave]

This is not a troll. I just don't know Macs. I am seriously thinking of buying one. I have several machines in my house, connected together via cat-5 networking to a cable modem and a w2k server for doc storage, user home dirs, authentication etc...(active directory). I'd like to put it into the living room. The fact it runs Unix is a big plus.

Can OS X work? Is smbclient an option? Does it have any apple OS native support for SMB shares? Does OS 9.2 (besides Dave)? Could I print to my wife's USB HP inkjet through a windows share?

Does it have an X-server? Do open source programs compile readily on it?

I have alterior motives too. I'd like to judge how well it might work inside our 99.5% windows shop at work. If it works well, maybe we'll lift our ban on Macs, support wise.... (I'm in charge of tech support. We currently have 1,400 PCs and they are a real PITA...)

Re:Serious question about connectivity

[jfruhlinger]

OS X works well for me. There is a built-in Samba client in OS X 10.1 and later that mounts Samba volumes as native volumes -- there's no built in browser (you have to use a clunky syntax like smb://user@computer;share) but once you mount it you can create a alias for it and not worry about it again.

There are both free and pay options for X-Servers that can run both as an Aqua (the standard OS X GUI) app and in full-screen mode. Several command-line compilers are included. Not sure about the printer share, but there is built-in networked printing so I imagine you can.

jf

Re:Serious question about connectivity

[ellem]

But there is a "browser"

choose GO-->CONNECT TO SERVER
Then find your Windows machine, or whatever...

You'll put in your Workgroup, Username, & Password.

Done.

(you can also use "Apple Thing Key" - K

Re:Serious question about connectivity

[dhartshorn]

Can OS X work?
Between Mac OSX and Classic mode, you should find just about every Mac app workable. Other than that, what to you want to do?

Is smbclient an option? Does it have any apple OS native support for SMB shares?
As a client. But you can turn on Services for Macintosh. On a related note, I like Netmax's flavor of RedHat Linux for simple web-enabled file and print services. Share to Mac, Windows, and Unix.

Use Sharity to export SMB from the Mac.

Does OS 9.2 (besides Dave)?
Nothing I'm aware of.

Could I print to my wife's USB HP inkjet through a windows share?
I don't think so. The OSX Print Center allows addition of Appletalk and TCP/IP printers. Netmax will export printer shares on Appletalk, though, and Win2K Server might.

Re:Serious question about connectivity

[nullard]

OS X works fine. I NEVER boot into OS 9 or open Classic. I've had two crashes since August 21st and my machine has been running almost constantly (I really need a UPS...). All in all, it is the most reliable computer I've ever used - including my SuSE Linux box.

Smbclient is built-in

I've never had a chance to try to use smb printer sharing. Sorry.

Smb sharing is done just like it is under Linux.

I run Oroboros-X on XDarwin. I run X apps from my Linux box for the fun of it.

I've compiled lots of Linux and BSD software w/out any major hassles. The GNU Mac OS X Public Archive has ports available as source and binaries. In most cases, I just download and compile apps as if I were on my Linux box.

I have a home network with three PCs (2 Win9x, 1 Linux), two Macs (one is ancient, one is a G4 w/OS X), and an AppleTalk laser printer.

Apple makes the best mouse...

[Brownian Motion]

Apple already makes the best mouse...one button mouse that is. No other one button mouse comes close, and no other mouse comes close either for the "one button" features (tracking, click, etc).

Problem is that most people these days want 2+ buttons and a scroll wheel.

Still, I know people who use and like two button mice and still use the Apple mouse since it's much easier on your hand. If you are a mac user you're already trained to use modifier keys anyway, so you can live w/o the extra buttons. And yes, there _are_ mac users who know what to do with extra mouse buttons!

Re:PCs still cost much less (50%) if you ignore st

[jedidiah]

Does the basic iTit?

A new CD/DVD drive is a fairly simple swap out.

Your favorite PC vendor will likely even do it for you should you feel not up to the task.

133

[MoneyT]

133, so there :P

yeah I know, macs lag a bit in sheer power, but they more than make up for it in usablility. I can actualy stand to sit on my mac for longer than nessesary rather than on my PC. (And the curvy design of the mac makes it a much more comfortable seat). In all seriousness though, I pay more, but I like my mac better than my PC. Give them a try, you might be surprised

Re:133

[mojo-raisin]

I used Macs from '88(SE) through '98(ditch my PPC-601). Maybe Apple will release a reasonably priced highend machine that competes with Intel/AMD someday... I'd love it (Oh, I'd be running Debian on it of course, I just would rather support PPC).

Insta solution

[MoneyT]

Sell the PC, then combine that with your current budget to get a tower. Sides, I prefer laptops anyways, but that's just me. And yes, OS X is everything it's cracked up to be and then some.

Click and hold...

[MoneyT]

...and you get a contextual menu. No control button nessesary. On the otherhand, this is where I stand. I own a logitech 2 button optical mouse. I use it on my PC, I also have one for my desktop mac (a Power Mac 5400/180 with G3 upgrade from 1997). However, on my mac laptop, one button is actualy very nice, I never mis-click, and the control button is so close, it's like having a second button anyways.

Re:Click and hold...

[Anonymous Coward]

You actually think you would mis-click with two buttons. I think I've using computers for 20 years now (ok not all of the with mice obviously) and I never remember clicking the wrong button. I mean these aren't tiny little buttons and I do use more than one finger. Shit my mouse has 5 buttons (including a scroll button that clicks and scrolls) and I never have any problem figuring out what each does. And when I sit back to read something in my nice comfy chair the ctrl button is no longer close.

Re:Click and hold...

[MoneyT]

On laptops, I've found it is fairly easy to misclick. Mice however are another matter, but geeze, 5 buttons?! That's overkill, even for gaming.

Gaming

[Weasel Boy]

'I'm sure you'll say, "but I'm not a gamer, games suck anyway."'

Quite the contrary; I love gaming. I spend way too many hours each week playing games. In over 10 years of playing games on the Mac, and I have never had trouble finding high-quality, fun games. My problem is more a matter of too many great games and too little time.

My all-time favorite computer game runs only on the Mac. I know dedicated PC users who bought Macs just to play it. I won't bother naming it, because it doesn't require a GHz processor or a GeForce3 Ti-500 and therefore couldn't possibly be fun.

I do have a PC which primarily boots into Linux, but that also has a Windows partition solely for games. I have yet to play a single game on it, although my roommate has played one. He plays his PC games using Virtual PC whenever possible because, although it's slower, it's more stable.

'Geforce2 MX isn't exactly cutting edge any more'

I guess that's why nVidia put it into their brand new new nForce chipset. It's more than adequate for a low-end machine, which is what the iMac is.

'Another activity that can't be performed, would be using a mouse with more than one button.'

I threw away the mouse that came with my PC, and I did the same with my Mac. Multi-button mice have only been available on the Mac since about 1986.

Re:Gaming

[Anonymous Coward]

Please do tell me what game it is. I'm curious!

Yup, interpolation looks ugly

[Anonymous Coward]

I was at fry's once, and I happened upon the monitor department. They had one computer showing output on three different models of LCD displays. One of them looked really nice, with crisp clear graphics, but the more expensive models looked horrible. All blurry and washed out looking...

I wondered what kind of idiot would pay more for a display that looked 10 times worse, but then it all made sense. The cheap one had a native resolution of 1024x768, and that's what the sales drones set the computer to. The more expensive models were 1280x1024 natively.

The dumbasses probably lost thousands of dollars in sales because they made the superior displays look like shit.

Joe iMAC user...

[Anonymous Coward]

Where's the handle?

Looks cool. Would love to have one.

[acceleriter]

But I can't forget about:

the Sorenson Codec

o threats against skin authors

o crippled DVD authoring software

o licensing the one-click patent

among Apple's other crimes,

Re:Looks cool. Would love to have one.

[Anonymous Coward]

Skins skins skins! god, what a lame anti-mac argument. I've never ever used a theme or skin or anything in any of my applications or in any OS. Who needs 'em? There's all this talk about how Apple is only making pretty computers and not doing anything serious and then people make gripes about apple and themes! Geez! What a waste of brain power. Skins, themes, what-have-you are merely ways of making things prettier to look at and have no inherent productive benefit to users.

Don't get me wrong, Apple can be litigious bastards like any of the big boys, but I'm not going to boycott them for such petty reasons. Apple Computer and Adobe have pretty much guaranteed me a paycheck for the last decade. Sorenson, One-click and themes...what a load of tripe. Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, BBEdit and Flash are all I really need.

And what is this garbage about crippled DVD authoring software?

Re:Looks cool. Would love to have one.

[Anonymous Coward]

So if skins are no big deal, why was it important for Apple to throw its corporate weight against a few hobbyists? After all, in your own words the have "no inherent productive benefit to users." So why be just another scumbag corporate bully?

Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, BBEdit and Flash are all I really need

And all except for BBEdit are available and run great on non-Apple hardware.

And what is this garbage about crippled DVD authoring software?

see 'iDVD deliberately crippled?"

Apple could could release a 1THz G9 with 512GB of RAM, a 256TB SCSI drive, and a flat screen monitor 40" wide, and I wouldn't buy it.

DEATH TO APPLE. DEATH TO THE MAC.

~~~

Re:Looks cool. Would love to have one.

[Anonymous Coward]

You pompous mac-rimming asshole. It is intentionally crippled, go read the article before squishing your valueless venom next time, eh?

iView might be a better choice

[Anonymous Coward]

iPhoto is for your Mom. iView (check the OS X section on the Apple site), is for pros who want to relate to F stop, etc.

iPhoto will get the job done, and let you buy prints and books, but iView is the tool.

Geeks can have style too

[putaro]

I have a room full of built-it-myself machines with cables running all over the place. I also have a living room with nice furniture, a nice A/V system, some pictures on the wall. What kind of computer do I put in the living room? The cheapest p-o-s I can find, or something that I spent a little more money on that looks nice? I'm not sure if I'd put one of those new iMacs in my living room, but it's got a better shot than a cheap-o beige box with a Shamrock monitor.

Re:Geeks can have style too

[bryan1945]

According to some geeks here, they would be plenty happy to install a rack system in their living room. I think they are either sick, full of shit, or have zero chance of getting laid**.

Personally, I'd love to surprise my guests with "no, that's not the lamp, that my Mac!"

[**for you style-inhibited, don't bother flaming me about the getting laid part, I'm already married :) ]

nForce

[CaptainSuperBoy]

yah ask any power user if they're using the onboard video of nForce.. you'll get a resounding 'no'. It's underpowered.

My point

[CaptainSuperBoy]

My point was, none of them are released yet for Mac while they are all available for PC, Max and Civ for months now.

Re:My point

[Weasel Boy]

Actually, CivIII is shipping now. But that's not the point. The point is, you're barking up the wrong tree. Just because the Mac doesn't have all the SAME games as the PC is nowhere near the same thing as having NO games.

If you look back over the years, you will find that most of the best PC games eventually find their way over to the Mac -- and vice versa. You might even be surprised to learn that some of the bestselling PC games (SimCity, for example) appeared first on the Mac.

But that's not the point at all. The point is that each platform, independently of any ported titles, has a complete set of quality games. Just because they aren't the same titles you play doesn't make them any less good.

What will the DVD burner get you?

[waterbug]

How 'bout backup? I can't use CDR for regular backup, because I have one 20 GB drive and one 30 GB drive. And those are puny by today's standards.

My last full system backup took _hours_ and something like 15 CDR's (at 4x. Bleah). I'd love to burn a few DVDs and be done with it.

I haven't done a full backup in months, primarily because I don't have a good solution.

Re:What will the DVD burner get you?

[scott1853]

Be gone non-geek. Some people realize that they don't need to backup their OS or applications, because it's easier to just re-install if something catastrophic enough happened. You only need your data, and unless you're doing important physics/bio research on your computer you probably don't have too much data that needs to be saved.

The arm is quite strong

[waterbug]

To quote:

http://www.apple.com/imac/faq.html

Is the display extension strong? Will it ever break or need adjustment? The iMac extension connects the base to the display. It is crafted from stainless steel and is extraordinarily strong. In fact, it's so strong that if you need to move your computer, Apple recommends that you pick it up by holding the extension. The extension is also designed with extremely high precision, so that while the display can be moved easily with just a light touch, it never needs tightening or mechanical adjustment.

Ibrator?

[Anonymous Coward]

so will they have to change the look of the ibrator? http://www.mecha.net/iBrator/ibrator.htm

Sorta OT question (maybe redundant by now)

[bryan1945]

After reading through a bunch of comments, some people are really trashing the new iMac and Apple. I can understand trashing the iMac due to its new form. But a lot of comments border on outright hatred of the hardware, the OS, and Apple itself. No, the iMac is not positioned as top teir hardware, the OS issue I'll leave alone, and yes Apple does market its stuff differently.

With the above said, can some of you (likers, moderates, and dislikers) elaborate on why Apple gets this severe negative reaction from some?

When will Macs get DDR SDRAM??

[mooboy]

...When the CPU speeds finally hit 1GHz, I guess. The 133Mhz SDRAM probably won't start to cripple the FSB/CPU until the chips are pushing the same speeds as Intel's and AMD's.

Re:I wish that laptops had the cool screen arm thi

[John Harrison]

Yes, but I want it for on the plane when the person in front of me reclines and nearly shuts the screen onto my fingers.

yippeee!!! iLamp is here!

[N3P1u5U17r4]

I can't wait to spend a few grand on my very own iLamp!

New iLamp software

[N3P1u5U17r4]

I hear they are already creating iLamp software for the new iMacs... this software will cause the entire screen to glow in colors of yellow, sky blue or soft white to simulate a desk lamp.
A special module will be available for treatment of seasonal affect disorder.

Superdrive for $300?

[nitehorse]

What???

The cheapest DVD burners I've seen are ~$500. That Superdrive != Combodrive.

-clee

Re:Superdrive for $300?

[Fjord]

Since he added margin and retail margin afterwards, I think the $300 was supposed to be apple's OEM cost. But the other prices seemed kind of high for an OEM cost so I think it was just a bunch of numbers pulled out of an uncomfortable place (no, not the backseat of a volkswagon).

Re:Superdrive for $300?

[King Babar]

Since he added margin and retail margin afterwards, I think the $300 was supposed to be apple's OEM cost. But the other prices seemed kind of high for an OEM cost so I think it was just a bunch of numbers pulled out of an uncomfortable place (no, not the backseat of a volkswagon).

No, these numbers weren't completely of rectal origin. Just the incorrect ones.:-)

Seriously, the *point* is that the margin on the new $1800 iMac need not be very slim. To make that point, you only need to use comfortably padded cost numbers and show that there's still room for margin. The only tricky things are new technology, how fast R&D is amortized, and making sure you include all costs.

Now, apparently you agree with me that most of these are as cushy as a plump backside (and I don't mean cache :-)). Apple knows they're going to make a couple million of these at least, and I budgeted something like 200 man-years for development costs, so I *think* I'm safe there. The only really tricky number is the superdrive. Retail costs for these are not low ($500 is the number somebody used), but most people don't order 500,000 of them at a crack. And, indeed, one reason why retail single unit costs are high is probably that one or more very large companies have diverted a large proportion of the total manufacturing capacity for these things to themselves...

no slot loading...

[Anonymous Coward]

because they don't have a slot loading superdrive. the only superdrives so far are all tray-loading. that's why the powermacs still have tray load. and it doesn't make financial sense to have slot loading for two machines and tray loading for one of them.

I'm disappointed, but not with the keynote

[jchristopher]

I can't describe how incredibly disappointed I am with Apple Computer. The source of my frustration is their continual need to seperate their customers into "consumers" and "professional".

Apple's lowend computers are nice enough, if a little pricey. If you want some slots, however, so you can add future neat stuff, Apple calls you a "pro".

The cheapest Apple "pro" computer is the PowerMac G4. I can buy a PC clone that meets those standards for 1/2 the cost of the Mac, and that basically sums up my opinion of Apple.

Things did not used to be like this - I bought a PowerMac 7200 for roughly $999. I had 3 PCI slots, which I used to add a second monitor and later, USB and an IDE card. Into it's drive bays I added both SCSI and IDE disks. I never ran into a problem I couldn't solve by adding or changing a component. That computer is still in use in a local elementary school, thanks to it's ability to adapt and change.

Now compare that to a computer like the iMac. It will never support dual display with spanning. You're tied to a 15" display for the life of the computer. You'll never add a future tech. like USB 2.0 or faster wireless, since there is no place to put expansion cards. It's intentionally built NOT to be upgradeable.

Sadly, it doesn't need to be this way! There's no reason that an easy to understand computer could not also have expansion options for power users. But Apple would prefer that you buy their $2000 computer for that... sadly, most people will look at the HP for $1000 and realize that is has BETTER expansion.

The days of Apple producing affordable, expandable computers are gone... and so am I.

Re:oops ... just wait a bit longer

[Ffakr]

Apparently, verndors are being told that the current G4 desktop line will be available for another month.

Coincidently, the current G4/monitor deal runs until January 31st.

I expect that the new desktop will be released in about a month.

I think there are 3 possible reasons for this...
1) the intended design just didn't come together and Apple would have moved no current stock if they pre-announced a new model (or maybe they have too much current stock)

2) The new model... perhaps an Apollo G4... would be soon eclipsed by another, more powerful model like the G5. If this were the case, Apple would be foolish to release the Apollo G4s. They would loose money on the current G4 inventory, they would also take costs to retool the line and they would have additional parts/support costs. If the G5 is close behind, Apple would have to go through the same problem all over again... this wouldn't allow the Apollo line to adequately cover it's roll out costs.

3) The lamest reason possible... the new hardware was ready but the desktop is selling well enough and they didn't want to eclipse the iMac roll out.

I think each explanation has merit.

...ffakr

What's with the VGA-out port?

[jchristopher]

Why does Apple insist on using some stupid micro-connector VGA-out port that needs a dongle just to connect a regular monitor?

They do this on the iBook, and now I see it's on the new iMac too. A regular, "PC-standard" VGA would fit fine in the same space!

Now you've got a dongle to remember to take with you and possibly lose. Is there ANY benefit to this approach? WHY WHY WHY?

Re:What's with the VGA-out port?

[KwamiMatrix]

not sure. I have the exact same question. Is it proprietry by Apple, because if this is Apple's proprietry vga, then I still don't get it. Why Apple?

iBook will not have bigger screen than Titanium.

[TheMCP]

The titanium doesn't have a 1280x1024 screen. They're not going to make an iBook with a screen with more real estate than the titanium. It would create a bad perception of their premier business portable.

apple products look like rectal thermometers

[Anonymous Coward]

what's with jobs and his obsession with how his computers look? the g4's towers have look liked yeserday's models for a couple of years now and the i macs look like they gather alot of dust under that clear case. the cube under your desk or on top? where was it supposed to go?. the milk white tropical lifesaver note books? the titanium g4 - that's class. this new i-mac, am i supposed to say be-polite, remember looks aren't every thing?. seems like jobs is still looking for that rush from the praise of the old days when he was boy genius. hey it's the twenty first century and this imac will just be one is a new line. (bet u it will over heat!!,) apple design people are as cool as those commericial makers who use old rock songs to push products. wow the future. bust out your drywall set your harware inside, and recesse the monitor if your concerned about space. the little ten inch foot print will work well in high density cities like
bombay tokyo new york or hong kong, there must be alot of people impressed

get writers who know what they are talking about

[realkiwi]

"It's not particularly a good deal, I mean, you can pick up 200$ 15" tft displays at Fry's"

Sure and they are really like high quality compared to the $500 ones too. Great backlighting. Long lasting LCD. No dead pixels... sure...

"and lets get real, the G4 (Excepting the velocity engine stuff) isn't that fast of a chip at any available speed compared to the x86 world."

What are Macs used for??? "excepting the velocity engine"... Jeez what a genius. In imaging Macs beat any PC. Seen Maya running on a G4??? Who gives a damn about M$ office bloatware suite.

We are talking about a consumer PC that lets you do home videos with software and hardware that I would have killed for 4 years ago in a professional environement.

"I do worry about it overheating, as I did flash back to the cube's cracking problems a bit."

Notice how there are lots of sharp right angles in a hemisphere... And it is a G4, not a P4. It doesn't get as hot as my 600 Mhz Athlon for crying out loud.

It would be nice if Steve would bring out a "professional" version with a Sony 16" 1240 x 1024 LCD. I think that would make a nice $2200 high end machine.

Never benchmark with Adobe products.

[Otis_INF]

..because they don't port their programs to x86 but instead use an emulayer. So what you're testing is not the raw speed of a dual 1ghz system but the speed of the emulayer. Which is pretty bad.

Do you really think a dual 1ghz p3 system is 50% slower than a 733mhz G4? LOL :)

Re:Never benchmark with Adobe products.

[melatonin]

..because they don't port their programs to x86 but instead use an emulayer. So what you're testing is not the raw speed of a dual 1ghz system but the speed of the emulayer. Which is pretty bad.

Not, it's not the emulayer (if there is one). People test filters, which exist outside of the Adobe app. They execute their own code, duh! In Photoshop's case, Intel's engineers MMX'd the filter code so they would get trounced so badly.

Do you really think a dual 1ghz p3 system is 50% slower than a 733mhz G4?

Having one sitting on my desk, yeah... I have used dual P3s at work for various data crunching (and compiling, which I do a lot of everywhere), and damn this baby shines :) Only a dumb-ass would say it's faster across the board. Steve Jobs demonstrated the first 733 MHz machines 'matching' a 2 GHz Pentium 4 at a single Photoshop task way back when the 2 GHz didn't exist. You don't really see any other vendors brave enough to step up to the plate and provide any convincing counter-arguments...

When AltiVec kicks in the performance boost is truly mind boggling. Several parts of OS 9 are written in AltiVec... I think OS X is still a work in progress in that area.

A little OT now, but one of the reasons why OS 9 is so damn fast (when it's not doing heavy multitasking) is that Apple learned a lot about the speed of their OS when they had so many components running in 68k emulation. Take those bottlenecks and apply altivec to them...

AltiVec isn't just for graphics. strlen can get quite a nice boost.

Re:Never benchmark with Adobe products.

[rob.eberhardt]

Do you really think a dual 1ghz p3 system is 50% slower than a 733mhz G4? LOL :)

I don't think it is, I know it is - when using After Effects, which is what I use the computer for. So what's your point? Emulayer Shmemulayer. Real world performance is what matters to me.

the iLamp is a GIRL's computer...

[Anonymous Coward]

Steve seems to have noticed that there are now more females on the net than males. Maybe that's why he wanted it to look like a "sunflower".

I bought up a bunch of Audreys from TigerDirect and was amazed at how many women were drawn to its simplicity and its similarity to a flower pot in shape. The iMac is also simple and has a subtle flowery kind of shape. I wouldn't be surprised to see that Apple has become the first major computer manufacturer to directly appeal to the fastest growing segment of the market - females.

Instead of dividing the Apple line into consumer and professional models, maybe we should be looking at the line as being female (iMac and iBook) and male (towers and Powerbook). Look at which line gets the cute soft colors and which line gets the powerful hard colors; and which line are basically sealed boxes and which line begs to be opened and tinkered with.

I hate to be the one to bring it up, but...

[metrognome]

A beowolf cluster of these would at least look interesting. Kind of like a mountain range or something...

Re:I hate to be the one to bring it up, but...

[davidhan]

A beowolf cluster of these would at least look interesting. Kind of like a mountain range or something...

Or a topless beach.

G5 and Photoshop

[yunfat]

Steve cannot introduce new towers until photoshop is up and running on g5's natively in OSX. Otherwise, he has no speed test against wintel based hardware... and he certainly ain't booting into OS9 to show off what the g5 can do.

what?

[Anonymous Coward]

and around 1.3ghz P4 (which a G4 will smoke)

I think somebody has been smoking something other than a processor around here...

Re: photoshop shoot outs are lame...coz...

[cb0y]

It would be quite cheap for adobe to make/design a PCI card with custom asics or some shit that does blue/resize all the 100 filters in hardware and 50x faster than any CPU out there, hell 3dfx did a bunch in the beta chips before they died, so we will soon see photoshop filters in Geforce4 or something. THEN the issue of g4 vs p4 will be lame as a geforce4 will do it in 1/30th the time most likely, and for 1/10th the price.

Re:iPhoto: Personal experience

[anderesa]

I fully agree with the statements about the longer average lifespan and higher usability of Apple software. I'd like to share with you my personal experience.

Yesterday evening, after I read about the new iMac and in particular iPhoto, I showed the new stuff to my wife, carefully guiding here to agree that we might buy one of these slim new machines. We already own a PBG4, an older PPC 96000 apart from Wintel machines running W98 or Suse Linux. So far, my wife hesitated to touch the Macs since she feels technologically challenged (like many people) and is happy working with M$ Word and Internet Explorer on the PC.

I tried to argue how easily she could herself create digital albums of our 5-month old son, or create video clips using iMovie together with a digital videocamera (to be bought too). So far, I've been afraid to ask her to handle the publishing process starting with importing the JPEGS from our memory card, using Photoshop to edit the image (e.g., eliminate red eye effect), crop or resize the images, and finally print or publish the images.

Without boring you, the bottom line of my message is: attracted by the excellent hardware and software design of the new iMac, my wife got really enthusiastic about learning how to manage digital content with iPhoto and perhaps iMovie. I am very glad about that fact because this frees me from publishing and printing every single photo on my own, a spend more time on building up the homepage of Jannik and learing Zope or OpenACS.

iSegway?

[Falshrmjgr]

Since the iLamp is all skinny and such, maybe the next one will have the Segway gyroscope balancers....AND the force from the spinning can be used to cool the little cantaloupe. ;o) Then it could go know what you want to type by the way you lean in your chair.....

But seriously folks....Cool design (I guess) but wouldn't you really just rather have Aqua/Carbon available for Darwin x86?

bigger screens

[Anonymous Coward]

i think it's a pity that one can't attach a 17" (or cinema) flat panel to the arm, as an optional extra. i don't see why the restriction is necessary, apart from that it devalues the powermac. it would make this new iMac more useful to developers.

i'll probably buy one anyway, but 15" is really too small for looking at code and having lots of windows open.

Re:bigger screens

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple doesn't want to make the Imac too attractive to power users, and giving it alot much upgradeability would do that. They need the power users to spend $4000 on a Power Mac.

14 WHAT display?

[The Pi-Guy]

What I'd give for a 14' display on my iBook... --pi

Unix clone...

[Anonymous Coward]

Inode
nuff said
:]

That may have been true in 1996...

[Sleepy]

>>because they don't port their programs to x86 but instead use an emulayer

Where do you get your facts?
Adobe has worked *considerably* with Intel to speed up the x86 processing for things like image filters.

In fact, the PowerPC code for image filters is compiled from a C++ codebase. The Intel code for image filters is compiled from HAND-TUNED X86 ASSEMBLY. Considerably more effort has gone into the Intel side of things, not just from Adobe but also Intel and Microsoft.

You have your "unfair advantage" assertion backwards ;-)

And yes, I think it's possible for a G4 to be faster than a x86 at the same MHz. You ever ride in a Buick Grand National?? The thing barely gets over "5000 rpm", but with enough traction it easily would toast Mustangs of the day...

Or, I have an EASIER analogy for the PC Bigots...
Which is faster:
a 1.7 GHz Intel Pentium 4
.........or
a 1.6 GHz AMD XP processor?

If you say "Intel" is faster because of the MHz, you are either foolish, or dumb, and in either case if you back up your belief with a monetary bet you will SOON be parted with your money...

Disclaimer: I no longer own a Mac, but I come from a video editing background. I can tell you from personal experience running BeOS & Linux on PPC, that the biggest performance killer on a Mac was the pre-OS X operating system (and it wasn't so much a "speed" issue as it was latency on task-switching... VERY different issue).

Re:100mhz fsb not 133 (A consumer speaks)

[Anonymous Coward]

It may be aimed at the consumer crowd, but I ain't buying one while my children are under 5 years old. I can just see my two toddlers (3 and 1 1/2) at either end of that screen yelling "mine!" and bending it off that base in one of their daily tug of wars.
It was cute to see the pictures of small children in the keynote, but anyone with small children may have reservations about buying one. The current iMac model seems much more impervious to the pokings and proddings of small children. (Although I sure wish there was a way to lock the slot loading drive -- my son stuck 3 discs in there at once, and no, it would not let him play 3 games at once as he had hoped)

When the new model is at full height, does anyone know if it could be tipped over accidentally?

And: How do you pick the new iMac up??? Can you pick it up by the arm?

Introducing iLamp

[tenzig_112]

SAN FRANSISCO, CALIFORNIA- It's the same old story: rumors abound of Apple
releasing a ground-breaking product; Apple threatens to sue/kill/maim various web
sites for publishing pictures in advance of Jobs' keynote address; Long-neglected
Mac users hold hands and watch the webcast with saucer-wide eyes; the whole
thing turns out to be another color/shape of iMac. Hurray.

Just like the rum-soaked father figure who says "this time it's going to be
different" every time he blows the family savings and crashes the car, Apple has
issued a statement that this is, indeed, going to be different. Instead of stuffing
the relatively slow iMac guts in a new candy-colored shell, Apple has stuffed their
relatively slow iMac guts into a candy-SHAPED shell, specifically a Hershey's Kiss.

full story: Honey I Melted The iMac

linux power

[cutterjohn]

care to clarify what sort of power that linux has that OS X doesn't? (can't be the applications/servers as OSX runs all of the important ones: GIMP, mySQL, postgreSQL, PHP, Perl, Python, kerberos, ad nauseum There's probably a good market for Aqua front ends for these that OS X Server doesn't cover... A good chance for counter M$ point-and-click crap argument, i.e. sysadmining for clueless morons.)

iMac: yawn, but I'm sure that some of the commentators that I heard were correct in that average buyers with little tolerance for playing around with their machines would be more interested in the iMac due to design and bundled apps: iMovie, iDVD, iTunes, and iPhoto.

I wish that the flat panel was 1280x1024, and that 1G+ G4/G5s were introduced. I was at least expecting a TiPB upgrade as those were also missing from displays at Compuseless for the last several weeks, whereas the old iMacs were still present.

Also, at least on notebooks, I've noticed that LCD refreshes seem a tad slow for FPS games, e.g. Quake III, Unreal Tournament. Are the "desktop" LCDs any better? (i.e. there seems to be an amount of ghosting when playing these games...)

While it does raise the bar on design & included hardware again, I just don't like all-in-ones with no bus card(of some type) expansion slots.

14" iBook screen?! why the screen res is still only 1024x768, and it utterly ruins the form factor for no increase in screen res. Now if it had a G4 as well... The iBooks are nice machines, with the best battery life I've ever experienced in notebooks: Dell, Toshiba, Fujitsu, IBM, HP, and Apple.

I was also pining for an updated Newton, or other PDA from Apple.

Yellow Dog

[HiThere]

I wonder how long until Yellow Dog has an edition out that works with this and can use the DVD writer. Does it have one already? Somehow I doubt it, but that might make this a decent choice.
.

Not crappy at all: You're looking at it wrong

[maggard]

Looks like Apple will be lucky to retain market share until they start thinking about THE SPECS of their machines (and not how cute they look).

C O N S U M E R PC. Repeat after me: consumer PC.

The iMacs aren't sold to the techie crowd (like fancies itself here on /.) It's market is folks who want to buy a good PC at a good price, aren't ever planning to crack it open to mess with the insides (like 90% of home PCs are never opened) and don't want something in their living space that looks like a 1950's Singer Sewing Machine in it's case. Oh yeah, and the integration & ease of use Apple's been honing for years are also big pluses.

Do these folks care about specs? No. They care does-it-browse-the-web, can-I-get-online-easily, can-I-read-my-email, does-it-have-MS-Office, will-it-connect-to-my-shiny-new-digital-camera, etc. The closest they'll ever come to caring about a spec is "is it fast enough"; this meaning to feel snappy and keep up with their typing.

Besides which this is some pretty darn kewl hardware on it's own. Silent. Small. Great image. Fast enough. Giga networking. Lotsa ports. The Superdrive is a good deal, particularly when you note the integration into the system. MacOS X which is now the bestselling unix and darn kewl on it's own. No, the iMac isn't an open-the-case-plug-in-parts box, but for what it is it is a pretty kewl box.

Re:Not crappy at all: You're looking at it wrong

[mojo-raisin]

OK. You're right. I just desparately want to switch away from x86 to PowerPC, but so far I can't justify do that with any of Apple's current machines - I was hoping for more. Maybe they'll introduce something to please us "non-consumers" someday...

Re:Not crappy at all: You're looking at it wrong

[maggard]

You're right. I just desparately [sic] want to switch away from x86 to PowerPC, but so far I can't justify do that with any of Apple's current machines - I was hoping for more.

Have you looked over Apple's entire lineup? They've got some very nice hardware in there.

No, none of it is aimed at the assemble-it-yourself crowd that frequents /. but the tower boxes have a decent processor(s) which though admittedly overdue for a refresh are still plenty fast, the cases open sweeter then anything else I've ever seen, and you can plug in almost any standard hardware and expect it to work (not just Mac-labeled stuff.) Apple now uses both ATI & Nvidia, includes Giga-Ethernet in it's boxes, slots for 802.11b networking with built-in antennas, Firewire/iLink/1394, etc.

Is it stuff you couldn't assemble yourself on an x86 - no. Is it cutting-edge by x86 hardware terms? No. Does it work damn fast, reliably, and get full support from it's Unix OS (MacOS X) - yes. Frankly as a user and administrator of both platforms I've never seen a performance gap - a good Mac has for the past few years been plenty fast enough compared to a good PC in the same range and to me that's the metric that matters, not some paper bragging spec.

However I gotta ask: Why do you care about the PPC? Is there some intrinsic fascination it holds for you or are you just trying to be post-x86. Unless you get off on porting or writing low-level stuff I can't see that as criteria for going to a Mac. Heck, you can run all of the low-level MacOS X (Darwin) code on x86 as it is for free right now. MacOS X proper does offer some neat stuff like Cocoa & Quartz and parity for Java but none of those are particularly processor-relevant.

Re:Not crappy at all: You're looking at it wrong

[mojo-raisin]

However I gotta ask: Why do you care about the PPC? Is there some intrinsic fascination it holds for you or are you just trying to be post-x86. Unless you get off on porting or writing low-level stuff I can't see that as criteria for going to a Mac. Heck, you can run all of the low-level MacOS X (Darwin) code on x86 as it is for free right now. MacOS X proper does offer some neat stuff like Cocoa & Quartz and parity for Java but none of those are particularly processor-relevant.

A little bit of both. Part of me is annoyed that I still have an ancient Bios, serial port, PS/2 port and parallel port with a 25 year old instruction set architecture, when I could have more modern firmware, peripheral connectors and ISA. But mostly because I'm currently learning MIPS assembly and the transfer to PPC (or possibly IA64), shouldn't be too tough. I'm moving toward scientific computing (I'm currently a molecular biologist), and using AltiVec (or it's IA64 equivalent) looks very useful. So what I'm looking for is a cheap (I don't have much cash) dual processor workstation with an ISA with a future... and dual processor Macs are way out of my league. It'll be about a year before I move away from my PII-400, and I hope Apple (or any company that might be selling PPC boxes...maybe PPCLinux will create the opportunity - I can dream;) will have something that competes with IA64.

It's not the consumer market, but it doesn't seem to be in Apple's radar to offer cheap high performance boxes... but hey, whatever makes them money is great.

Ordering prints from iPhoto

[wessto]

On the demo quicktime video, 3 4x6 prints cost over $20 bucks!!! Who will do that when most times you can get free 4x6 prints from ofoto, snapfish, shutterfly, or another online printhouse. Is conveinence worth this exhorbitant price?

Re:Ordering prints from iPhoto

[wessto]

Nevermind...I wasn't paying attention. They're not that expensive. $0.49 for a 4x6, $0.99 for a 5x7 and $3.99 for an 8x10. Sorry :)

Moderators home?

[ablair]

How is the parent post not a Troll?

MMORPG

[Weasel Boy]

I play a MMORPG on the Mac. It's not exactly like any of the ones you mention, but it's very addictive.

FOTU

[Anonymous Coward]

Fear Of The Unknown.

From my experience with Mac bashers (and I see it nearly every week), most of it comes from either ignorance, or seeing an older machine to base judgement on.

Geeks are VERY judgmental of people wo don't think the way they do. It's almost amazing that something like Open Source can work in an environment like that. But then I guess most people stick to their focus of interest and never have to interact with others. It's a shame. Acceptance of diversity is a wonderful thing. Too bad the geeks who grew up getting a raw deal from being "different" have found their own little online worlds and now treat others who are "different" as the lepers.

Re:FOTU

[bryan1945]

Damn good point! At this point, I'm the Solaris guru because: 1) everyone else left (I'm still the newb) and 2) Solaris (and networking in general) scares the piss out of them.

Never thought about that, since I'm asked to work on Win95-2000, Mandrake, Solaris, and recently, DOS(!). Shit, I thought I was losing my touch 'cause I didn't remember all the DOS commands, but I guess your point hits it smack on the head!

Bummer though, I thought everyone liked a good challenge once in a while...

That's a great idea

[GPS Pilot]

What are people doing more than anything with their computers? Web browsing. And web pages are designed with a vertically-oriented aspect ratio. And it you don't hide your Dock (which is the default), another stretch of precious vertical space is wasted.

Vertical for web browsing (and word processing), horizontal for watching DVDs. Pivoting is a sorely needed feature.

Re:LINUX Has POWER and NetBSD, OpenBSD, etc. DO NO

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux gained popularity over x86 *BSD, because of the story behind its creation, not because of its technical superiority. *BSD is far more efficient. That's why Yahoo uses it. But Linux gained popularity because writing about Linus Torvalds and a bunch of hackers makes for better copy than writing about a bunch of old Berkeley researchers. Currently, I use Solaris because it is also free, is fairly mature (been around for almost 20 years), and because its still dominates the corporate world (so I tend to have to use it at work).

Product Placement

[carrier lost]

I can't wait to see which is going to be the first movie in which all the high-tech, power-crazy computer geeks are controlling the world with their new iMacs.

MjM

rw_rw_rw - the new sign of the Beast

Re:oops Think Developers conference

[Anonymous Coward]

Seybold is the Graphics Professionals trade show in mid February. I should think Apple will update the PowerMac line at that point.

Think about it...

January: Check out our consumer line, we'll get them all shipping by March.

February: Whoa! All you graphics pro's in the audience, check out our new PowerMac line! Well start shipping them in March!

By the time the Consumer machines SHIP, I think they will have announced the new pro-models.

my $0.02

Re:LINUX Has POWER and NetBSD, OpenBSD, etc. DO NO

[Anonymous Coward]

Solaris is nowhere near free software. The Solaris 8 Foundation Source is only available under a revocable license that forbids redistribution and commercial use.

iFellOver

[underpaidISPtech]

see the .sig

imac

[USAharrypotter]

i think the new imac is a very big step up and is a good idea. the new mac will be a progessive step forward.

iMac & iBook too good?

[Delita]

Apple has never done a revision to all of it's product lines at the same time, ever. If Apple were to do that, they wouldn't have anything to sustain themselves for, like, the next year in product releases. Apple will update the pro machines, just not at the same time as the consumer Macs. Keep your eyes and ears open for MW Tokyo, or MW New York.

Computer Engineering too

[javaaddikt]

I'm studying Computer Engineering. Sure, I don't need the simplicity of Macs, per se, but why should being highly computer literate and wanting a simple computer be mutually exclusive? I'm dying to get my hands on an iBook with OS X. It is absolutly beautiful and great for doing all my daily work. Just because I'm a Vi wizard and grepmaster doesn't mean I don't like using a glossy word processor. Just because I know how to compile the drivers and hack up a linux system to support my particular camera through a series of scripts doesn't mean that method is better. It's not. Simplicity is good. It took some pretty damn good software engineers to put together this entire system and make it easy. So why isn't that desireable on Linux? Oh it is? They why hasn't it been done yet?

Not a good deal?

[Lazaru5]

This is a fine deal. All you (Chris) as an argument for it not being a deal was that you can get a $200 15" flatpanel. The G4 vs x86 comparison is debatable (not by myself, but by many others). An 800MHz G4 w/Altivec is nothing to sneeze at.

The high end iMac is the real deal maker. A comparable machine (DVDR/CDRW and all) w/ flat panel would run about the same price. Add the coolness facter and it's perfect.

It's not the ripoff that the Cube was, but it's in no way a bad deal at all.

Is There Any Reason To Buy A G4 Now?

[SPeW]

You can get all the same options minus the dual processsors on the new iMac for less $$$ and almost as fast. It really doesn't make any sense. Go ahead go to apples's store and check it out for yourself.

High-End iMac Summary
768MB SDRAM - 2 DIMMs
AirPort Card
Keyboard/Mac OS X - U.S. English
60GB Ultra ATA drive
SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce2 MX w/32MB DDR graphics
Mac OS X & Mac OS 9 installed
Apple Keyboard
Apple Pro Mouse
Apple Pro Speakers

Subtotal $2,198.00

Similar Configured G4 Summary
867MHz PowerPC G4
768MB SDRAM - 2 DIMMs
60GB Ultra ATA drive
Apple Studio Display (15" flat panel)
Apple SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce2 MX - 32MB SDRAM
56K internal modem
Apple Pro Speakers
AirPort Card
Apple Pro Keyboard - U.S. English
Mac OS - U.S. English
Gigabit Ethernet
Two USB ports
Two FireWire ports
Apple Pro Mouse

Subtotal $3,506.00

Hmmm ... tough choice there