Slashdot Mirror
Interview With iMac designer, Jonathan Ive
rleyton writes "The Independent has an interesting interview with Jonathan Ive, the designer of the new imac (and the iBook, the iPod and original iMac...)" It's actually a pretty interesting
even if you think the new iMac is repulsive. Personally I dig it.
Ive is a neat guy -- his work is pretty darned innovative -- more, I think, than people give Apple credit for. There are a lot of breakthrough aspects of most of their recent products.
Even if you don't like the stuff, it isn't the same derivative crap that has flooded the rest of the market.
There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
Max V.
NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
that's cool. i really like the design of the new iMac and think most folks complaining about it will be using a clone of it in 6 months. my question is why won't iMac treat audio with a little more repsect, and only service the visual (why didn't anyone ask the designer about that)? i'd like to see an iMac system that didn't require the user to buy external speakers just to hear anything remotely close to reaching the low end sounds we've come to love in our hip-hop, funk and satanic bible thumper rally music.
great comedy company.
I know that the lead times of a project like this preclude apple from actually using his design, but when you saw the article, what was your reaction?
Didja think it had been leaked?
This may have been the best trick of all. Forget the round motherboard or the pivoting head. This guy and his team kept the whole thing under pretty tight lip for almost two years!
Luck favors the prepared, darling.
Itroducing iLamp:
http://www.ridiculopathy.com/news_detail.php?di
Granted, the new iMac is beautiful on the surface. But that great design is not limited to the outer shell. Check out what the iMac looks like on the inside. This Apple draft service manual has great pictures of the guts of the iMac.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
This interview touches on a few concepts that I think today's geeks (and many of yesterday's geeks too) are no longer in touch with.
Quality. Art. The "soul" of a machine.
There is something to be said for the amount of sheer human effort put in to designing a product like this. A Quality product shines in it's attention to human-machine interaction, but is a result of "inner beauty". For those of you who haven't programmed using Cocoa or haven't messed around much with OS X or actually seen and used a recent iMac in person, there's no substitute for the tangible results of Apple's years of dedication.
When I use Mac OS X, I can *feel* that somewhere in Cupertino there's an English major who was losing sleep at nights trying to make the text in the dialog boxes as clear and understandable as possible. When was the last time you felt that way about the latest d/l off of sourceforge?
The subject/object duality is something that premeates the "geek world" - I beg of the programmers and techs out there try to move beyond it. Apple's certainly tried to.
(I'd post more, but I haven't had my coffee yet... )
------------
"...and Maddest of all, to see Life as it Is, and not as it Should Be."
As posted above even if you dont like his stuff, its different, there are some things I do and dont like, But he seems to be one of the few designers that takes any amount of function into account.
:()
Personally I dont like the new Imac, BUT that really dosent mean SQUAT since Im not a prospective customer. Ill stick with the UltraSparcs.
What matters is Mac people do, and they liked the original, and the I book, I have used both and I can say I came closer than EVER to buying a Apple for the Wife, Part of that was the integrated packaging, part of it "ease of use" etc.
If they almost had me hooked after my last Apple experience (I bought a Lisa when they were new
Im sure they wont have a problem hooking people in.
Does it remind anyone else of their home-ec project gone awary , a slunk of dough , then sticking a pencil in it with a sign, (insert team name here) RULE ! ??? No wonder I failed HomeEc....
Sig went tro...aahemmm.....fishing........
The article says the new iMac weighs 20 pounds. That seems rather heavy to me.
Has anyone picked one up yet? Does it actually weigh that much?
"The thing is, it's very easy to be different, but very difficult to be better. That's what we have tried to do with the new iMac."
Personally, I like the new iMac. Not enough to abandon my 6 month old PC and switch back to Macs, but I think it's a pretty cool computer. No matter what your opinion of Macintosh or their employees is, you have to like what the designer said. So many times in this industry (think about all Microsoft products) people forget that it's easy to make new and different things, the hard part is making reliable, efficient products that truly are "better." I say score one for Macintosh with this new computer, and even if it doesn't sell like hotcakes, they are in good shape if they all think like this guy does.
~ now you know
I doubt that Apple stole from this person as he released the drawings last summer, Apple has been working on the design of the new iMac for 2 years. Just two minds thinking a like. It happens from time to time.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
Say what you may about the new machine, but I've already purchased one for my parents. It's the logical next step, since my father's got an obscenely expensive AV center, and a nice Sony DV camcorder, all of which he set up himself, yet refuses to check his own e-mail because of some ingrained fear of computers being as hard to use as they were 10 years ago. I'm betting this machine will change that for him.
Michael C. Hollinger
...toward having computers that you don't notice anymore. I would love to have a computer that wasn't subject any manifestation of 'beige box syndrome'. Unforunately, what I think of as beige box syndrome includes connecting cables from mouse (keyboard, monitor, scanner, network hub, etc) to computer, not just visual astetics. One look behind my desk at home (or the office) shows just what I worry about. Sure, you can bundle the cables together, but even then they make an auful mess.
My dream computer is one that stands out while I activly interact with it, but when I'm not using it seamlessly blends right into the background. Kindof the way the computer works on Star Trek. While we're still years away from having this concept being actively sold to the consumer (though all the pieces seem to be falling into place), in the past few years I have considered Macs ever more seriously when thinking about new computers (and know that now, with WinXP, if&when I succumb to the lure of a laptop, it will be an iBook- unless Linux has become the dominant x86 OS in the interim).
Do you like Japanese imports?
Shouldn't it be spelt iVe?
When I use Mac OS X, I can *feel* that somewhere in Cupertino there's an English major who was losing sleep at nights trying to make the text in the dialog boxes as clear and understandable as possible. When was the last time you felt that way about the latest d/l off of sourceforge?
...or Slashdot for that matter.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon? :P)
(If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't.
Yes, but when the form comes at the expense of function, function takes precedence. At least, that's my own philosophy. I don't pretend to speak for everyone.
Admittedly it is a cool design, but I can't help feeling once again, that NO ONE is out there designing anything targeted at me and I'm left to hunt for obscure parts vendors and try to cobble together something that appeals to me.
Personally I'd just like some more variety in the choices available to me, especially if that means machines that fit in seamlessly with my existing home electronics.
OK, so I borrowed the 'Lump - Stick - Rectangle' from somewhere else. :-)
:-)
I don't understand how people can be so critical of this. It is truly innovative, with a 700-800MHz G4 packed into the small package (as well as 128MB of RAM and a GeForce2 card.) The only things I don't like are the price, and the screen size. Still, it's a marvelous piece of engineering and design. If you need something else to like about it, take a gander at all the ports in the back. Definitely impressive.
Don't like it? don't buy it. But at least acknowledge the craftsmanship and vision.
(No, I am not affected by the reality distortion field... otherwise I would have put down the money and bought one, and not seen any shortcomings.
fair.org counterpunch.com truthout.com indymedia.org salon.com
eff.org guerrilla.net debian.org gentoo.org
Frankly, this is the dumbest design decision ever. If you're trying to make a "simple" computer, why use a dongle that consumers will most certainly forget or lose? What could be more simple than the same connector used on 99% of the world's personal computers?
This is extra stupid, since there is plenty of space to put a standard VGA-out connector on both systems. Additionally, making a custom port and dongle adds to the cost of an already expensive computer.
I'm all for design improvements, but there is no point being proprietary just for the sake of being different.
Re: the guy that had the sketches of a similar iMac last summer.
If he even remotely claims Apple 'stole' his ideas, he should be laughed off the face of the planet.
Consider the incredible number of conceptual drawings and sketches about possible new iMac designs that have made the rounds in the last two years. Combine that with the fact that every computer needs a spot for ports, a display, and something to contain the cpu/drives/ram/etc. Now, combine that with the industrial design directions Apple set by announcing the death of the CRT [last may @ WWDC, I believe] and the icebook/tibook look and feel.
All told, it is no surprise that *one* of the myriad concept sketches that appeared on the net look similar! As innovative as Apple is, they have yet to be able to entirely break the bonds of reality (i.e. say, a completely detached floating display).
As well, the guy *sent* his concept sketches to Apple-- including to Steve Jobs. Apple's policy on such matters is quite clear; anything submitted becomes the property of Apple and they can do whatever they bloody well please with it-- including giving it to a competitor, if they saw fit to do so.
Submitted for your approval, an Onion-like story on the subject:
Honey I Melted The iMac
The picture of the iMac with a lamp shade on it is worth the click.
I like Macs. I really do. I'm particularly partial to the all-in-one models. I've got an SE and an SE/30, and I bought the original Bondi Blue iMac the day they went on sale. So when I heard about this new iMac, I was excited. The pictures were tantalizing, but the thing that really thrilled me were the specs. There's an awful lot under the hood! Last Friday, I visited my local Apple Store to see this baby for myself. A small scheming portion of my mind was already wondering if Uncle Sam's Tax Return might defray the costs of a new computer. And then I saw it. I was deeply disappointed. It's ugly. It's clunky. The picture made it look light and airy, but in person it looked like a heavy white lump with an oversized nickel-plated pipe connecting a flat panel in a big lucite frame. (What is it with Apple and white plastic, anyway? Does Ives live in a house without dust and grubby-fingered kids?) There's no accounting for taste, and I may be an uncircumcised philistine with aesthetic sense, but I've never had such a negative reaction to a computer before. Maybe the next one... "Botticelli ain't a wine, you dolt! It's a cheese!"
You get what you pay for.
Somehow Jobs' remarks always seem to jumpstart my brain, if nothing else. Of the first iMac he said "It looks like it's from another planet". And oddly enough my first reaction to the new iMac after reading the article was "Hey, its a skutter holding an LCD!". That makes alot more sense if you've ever seen Red Dwarf.
Ever hear of a warranty? Apple has years of experience of selling and repairing LCD screens. They have the best in the market. Just take a gander at the Cinema Display.
Also by your argument regarding tv/dvd combos then no one would buy a notebook computer. Think of the new iMac as a non-mobile notebook computer.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
When I use Mac OS X, I can *feel* that somewhere in Cupertino there's an English major who was losing sleep at nights trying to make the text in the dialog boxes as clear and understandable as possible. When was the last time you felt that way about the latest d/l off of sourceforge?
While I agree about SourceForge, OSX is a step down from OS9 in dialog box text (and help in general).
For example, I just love the error "No file services are available at the URL . Try again later or try another URL (server returned error 1)" OSX returns this when it can't connect to an SMB share no matter what the actual reason. Wrong password? Invalid user? No such share? Everything gets the same error.
Worse, the MacOSX Help files are nicely written, but there are so few of them that help is very close to useless. It will tell you how to copy a file, but for anything more complex you're basically SOL.
Still, compared to the average Open Source app, they're amazing.
Eric
"Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
However, since the introduction of the PPC, mac hardware has generally been respected by the geek community. Now that macs run OS X, the geeks like it even more.
However, there's always going to be somebody who has to bash the mac for whatever reason. But lets face it, in the year 2002 you can't show how cool of a computer user you are by simply bashing Apple.
Now Microsoft on the other hand....
/bin/fortune | slashdotsig.sh
i think the point is that truly well designed functionality has intrinsic aesthetic appeal.
i mean, there are often many solutions to a problem - but the one that has the most thought and work applied to it is usually the most elegant.
A: None. The Universe spins the bulb, and the Zen master merely stays out of the way.
Mostly Mac geeks, since many of us are graphic designers. It's no coincidence ;)
"Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
This actually started me thinking about Compaq. Not today's company, but the company 5 or 10 years ago. They used to be a huge amount of thought into their computers, trying to make them the best they could be. You know what happened?
I freaking despised them.
Yes, they were well built. Yes, they managed to typically squeeze another 5-10% performance over their competitors. But to do all that, very often they used non-standard components. They had wacky partitions on the hard drives that for extra management functions. I believe they even had special "Compaq memory" (I could be misremembering the latter).
It was a total pain in the ass, and for many components there was only one place to go: Compaq, and the parts were very expensive.
I'm all in favor of better, but when it comes to computers, I think I would rather have better AND standard AND reasonably priced. The thing about Apple is that they don't make computers for "the rest of us", they make computers for the 3% of the population who like shopping at boutiques.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Vertical is an unstable position. Take a CD, and lay it flat on your desk. It will just sit there, and not move unless some outside force moves it. Now try to stand that CD up on its end. If you can get it to stand it will topple with the slightest movement. By using drives with spinning parts in a horizontal configuration, the amount of wobble caused by gravity and outside forces is minimized. In a vertical configuration this is not the case, and the precise reading electronics are more likely to fail. That is just my simple, mechanics based explanation.
The middle mind speaks!
the beautiful thing about PCs is everytime i built a new one, i used about half the hardware from the old one. PC replacement hardware is cheap and easy to install. I can't say the same for Macs
The thing is - most computer users NEVER open their cases. If they do, it's to add ram or a card (things they can still do on the new iMac), not to disassemble them and reuse parts.
Mac users, especially, have no reason to cannibalise their old machines since every Mac comes with all the components - Apple doesn't sell "bare bones" systems.
It's a whole different arena than the PC market. True, replacements ARE expensive, but I believe Apple does have a good warranty program.
OSX + iTunes Visuals + "Dark Side of the Moon" = Transcendence
The trouble with LCD iMacs is the education market. Schools don't buy iMacs just because they are cheaper than iBooks, they buy them because they are more durable.The abuse that a computer takes in a school setting is enough to make me cringe.
Still, I like the idea of having a LCD iMac. It would be cool for me, I'm just not sure that it will work in the education market. (Yeah, I know. Maine bought 38,600 iBooks recently. Still, most schools buy iMacs.)
Despite that,are we facing an Apple come back?
Think about what they've done in the past couple years:
- Nice hardware, growing in leaps and bounds as the market for those things matures (pc133, yes it was late, and yes, it's slower than DDR, but hey, better than pc100), nice processors, removing all relic hardware as necessary (USB instead of ADB, etc). Apple has always done this.
- Making the powerbook g4 was the next step, making a laptop just slightly less powerful than a desktop, *AND* has a battery life to speak of.
- Nice software: OS X. BSD core. No need for them to figure out how to reinvent the wheel with their crappy old OS's--Simply change a few widgets, and call it Darwin, then add a GUI, and Voila! instant OS. With a *LOT* of software available, not to mention the 20 billion BSD hackers, the people that'll keep the Darwin OS up to snuff.
- Totally reengineered interface--Finally a command line that doesn't suck! And for that matter, a GUI that doesn't suck! And multitasking! And all sorts of neat widgets that make techies and non-techies alike scream out "I WANT ONE!"
- Giving computers to schools, making great leaps in hardware, standardizing their video system. I see this as a incredibly brilliant move for Jobs.
All in all, more power to them... They may live, they may struggle, or they may die. They are pushing the user's into a whole new realm; DVD-
R's in affordable systems, laptops that don't suck, and keeping up with technology a lot better than they used to.
A good interview though
Moderation: Put your hand inside the puppet head!
Need to look that one up? Me too. The Anglepoise table lamp, modeled on the muscles and bones of human limbs, was invented by George Carwardine in 1933. You know your standard adjustable desk lamp? That's an Anglepoise-derived design.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Apple has posted the take-apart instructions for the new iMac; the story is on Macslash right now. It's no harder to replace than the LCD in a notebook, as long as you can find a compatible part (it's a standard, mass-manufactured LCD, and /.ers are supposed to be the masters of hardware hacking, I don't understand why they bitch about the Mac's architecture; there's nothing proprietary about anything except the motherboard)
"Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
Observing the public reaction, it is clear that like its predecessor it is destined to invade and fully occupy the public imagination for the next couple of years. Bully for Apple, and for Ive. And it will be perfect for my parents.
But what I've realized I'd personally like most is just the detached hub. I'll buy my own flat-screen thank you (maybe an Apple Cinema display). I don't need more than one viewing angle and I'd rather put the hub itself off towards the back of the desk. Just need the LCD, keyboard, mouse/trackball and speakers up front.
I hope they're planning on releasing this iHub on its own, some time soon. It would be a sweet machine - short on expandability, but as this NYT article points out, at a better price point (and a helluva lot more aesthetic) than the G4 towers.
-Renard
The new iMac is like Bang & Olufsen stereo components. It's a really artistic vision of technology yet, when compared to the competition, it is overpriced for the performance that it offers.
I see the new iMac as being a fashion accessory or a lifestyle statement rather than a serious computer. It will be seen in chic, modern, (pretentious) apartments, sharing space with the aforementioned Bang & Olufsen stereos, wall-hanging plasma display televisions, and expensive, but unused, Questar telescopes.
I'm a function over form kind of guy. I'd rather have a normal enclosure and a motherboard with lots of standard expansion slots so that I can expand my computer to meet my needs. I'd rather spend $300 for a 19" monitor than spend the same amount for a chic but small 15" LCD. I don't care if my PC is unattractive. It's a computer, not a girlfriend or wife.
I beg of the programmers and techs out there try to move beyond it.
First, let all the people who write apps swear an oath that they will forevermore document what they create to a high standard. If this is a start, then the cooler boxes may follow, perhaps in the next generation.
That new internet coputer based on Mozilla is a glimpse of what this "next generation" could look like.
No one is compelled to put up with "bland boxes" and "difficult" software like the notorius Mplayer, or any of the other "break it to find out how it works" stuff. There are other options. If you have the time/brains/cash.
Undocumented software, wires everywhere, bespoke systems. This is part of the culture. If one cant live with this, then one can to go to the places where everything is made beautifuly and beautifully easy.
I loved the part of the article about Gateway being on the ropes. The solution for them is clear; get a world class deigner in house to revamp and vitalize the product range, and then customize one of the advanced Linux distributions, brand it, and ship every product with it without exception.
They would then have something to offer the public, something to fire the imagination... and it might even be cheaper in the stores since they dont have to pay royalties for the OS.
ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
I think the insides of this iMac must look really cool, so it makes me wonder why the shell is opaque and white. Maybe they could make future models candy-colored and translucent? You probably wouldn't see too deep into the thing because it's so cramped, but it would be cool anyway. Well, just an idea...
I beleive the hard drive and optical drives are integrated in all computers; I've not yet seen one where the primary drives are all external. Perhaps you're implying that they are proprietary and can't be upgraded, in which case you are also wrong.
"Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
I mean, it is covered by a decent warranty. But more importantly, your argument shouldn't be specific to apple, but to the all-in-one PC in general (which includes laptops). How is it any different from dropping a pixel or blowing out a speaker in one of those?
Like always, your decision to purchase a computer should always factor in looks and function with reliability and upgradeability. It's purely a subjective opinion of which end of that scale you should lean towards. YMMV.
Personally, I see that swivel
What is the LCD drops a pixel or two? You're stuck with a proprietary solution that's loaded with all this great hardware, and you have to either hook up an external monitor, which would ruin the reason you got this thing in the first place, or get an authorized Mac replacement, which would probably be 3/4 of the original price.
... the monitor had to be put on some way, right? It can be taken off and replaced the same way. You'll just have to take it to someone who can do it, just like getting your TV fixed.
I can see your concerns, but
I know this means less control over our own systems, but the Mac crowd is used to getting their whole system in one package - this isn't new AT ALL. It's the PC-clone people that like that aspect, and in terms of Apple's target market, that's a small percentage.
This is why I don't see this post as "interesting", because it's the same "PC's are better because we have more control" argument. Some people don't want control - they want a box (or dome) that sits beautifully on their desk and behaves nicely. This is the Mac market. This will always be the Mac market.
For crying out loud, PC users, GET USED TO IT.
</rant>
----- rL
This isn't flamebait, but isn't this the situation with all laptop vendors? LCDs drop pixels, and on an all-in-one computer (desktop or laptop) you are stuck with it. Did you post this about the netVista or Thinkpad? =)
"You know why you do not see me styling wit my homies? Because I have no homies!!" -Mojo Jojo
They kept the base original iMac, dropped the price to $799. Then they took the second original iMac, and dropped the price to $999. Difference is in cpu speed, memory, and hard drive.
So, they still have the durable iMac CRT for those that need it.
__nether
Apple's... (err who ever manufactures the LCD panels) ... LCD's are some of the best in the industry. I've owned 4 different PowerBooks and none of them have ever had a dead pixel. I've never actually seen a dead pixel on a quality Laptop from _any_ company.
Including the 4 PowerBooks, I've owned 7 different Macs (9600, B&W G3, original (rev A) iMac, PB 5300, PB 3400, "WallStreet" G3, "Pismo" G3). None of them have ever had any sort of hardware failure. None. My little sister has been using that Rev A iMac since it was introduced nearly 4 years ago.
I'd say that purchasing Apple equipment is a pretty safe bet.
Of course, there are some people who have problems, but given my experience with Apple hardware, I'd say it's some of the highest quality stuff on the market.
STEVE JOBS ON DESIGN
Fortune Magazine: What has always distinguished the products of the
companies you've led is the design aesthetic. Is your obsession with
design an inborn instinct or what?
Steve Jobs: We don't have good language to talk about this kind of thing.
In most people's vocabularies, design means veneer. It's interior
decorating. It's the fabric of the curtains and the sofa. But to me,
nothing could be further from the meaning of design. Design is the
fundamental soul of a man-made creation that ends up expressing itself in
successive outer layers of the product or service. The iMac is not just
the colour or translucence or the shape of the shell. The essence of the
iMac is to be the finest possible consumer computer in which each element
plays together.
On our latest iMac, I was adamant that we get rid of the fan, because it
is much more pleasant to work on a computer that doesn't drone all the
time. That was not just "Steve's decision" to pull out the fan; it
required an enormous engineering effort to figure out how to manage power
better and do a better job of thermal conduction through the machine. That
is the furthest thing from veneer. It was at the core of the product the
day we started.
This is what customers pay us for--to sweat all these details so it's easy
and pleasant for them to use our computers. We're supposed to be really
good at this. That doesn't mean we don't listen to customers, but it's
hard for them to tell you what they want when they've never seen anything
remotely like it.
http://www.fortune.com/fortune/2000/01/24/app6.
--
I'd also like to learn more about that $99 wireless option for Wintel PCs. Are Linux drivers available?
ScienceSeeker.org
Henry Ford said the same thing about the first car. Basically it was a Tractor high-bread that will allow people to drive the store in the same vehicle after plowing the fields.
I happen to appreciate the elegance of something like OSX. It's out of my face so I can get the work I need done, done quicker.
The rumors about it being slow or buggy are just plain fud. They have fixed almost all of the anoying problems after version 10.1 and it's just getting better.
I find that I am actually able to do the things using the tools I am used to (Unix/GNU tools that I am used to such as VIM, wget, Lynx, php/apache, etc.) I can also play games (Wolfenstein) that I love, and co-habitate with my co-workers that are a MS Office establishment.
I don't know how you can say that interface improvments are regressive. The UNIX/Linux world would still be using TWM if we all kept that mentality.
I thought a more squarish (dare I say cube-shaped) base would have allowed for built in stereo speakers. And I think it would have looked a lot cooler than the lump base.
The Independent interview with Ive finally explained it for me:
Well if lump is the most functional form for the base, then lump it is. As Ive mentions in the interview, you don't really appreciate all the subtle decisions that go into an industrial design until you start to understand all the constraints.
I like the G4 iMac more now.
I've ordered an iMac mainly because it's not much larger than the Pismo PowerBook I used to put on my desk, compared now with the Blue & White G3 I have (which takes up a lot more space). Then you have the G4 under the dome, with SuperDrive, and 60GB of space and it looks like a good computer.
I don't use my computer for gaming so much, anyway. That's what my PS2 is for. And, I'm more interested in using my computer for organizing media (pictures, mp3s, movies) and using it as my MP3 playback server using iHam on iRye. The iMac will serve this purpose very well.
Besides, it looks great.
Is that true? I suspect that when small children
read picture books, they don't just pick up the
basics of reading -- they learn how stories are
structured, along with a raft of other cultural
cruft.
Ben "You have your mind on computers, it seems."
An analogy could be made to the automotive market. That sporty little Boxter there can probably go twice as fast as my minivan, but it's constrained by the same speed limit as the rest of us, and is probably stuck in the same backup to the toll booth that I am.
I've bought the latest and greatest a couple times in my life. It's a wonderful feeling, tapping on the keys of the fastest and most powerful computer available. (Power. Power! Raw, brute, merciless POWER!!! Muahahahaha!)
Then two weeks later Intel or AMD releases an even faster and less expensive chip, and inside of a month you overhear some snot-nosed kid boasting about his new TurboUltraMegaBox which has twice the CPU, memory, and storage of yours.
That way lies madness. At least fashion fads stick around for a couple years. They even come back around in a couple decades. iMac Lisa, anyone?
The internal RAM is running at 133 MHz (see the service manual refered to in this thread).
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
That simply is not true. We are obsessed with quantification, as Ive points out. You trust doctors to explain and cure illnesses, and you don't know the science behind it. You probably believe that the colors of your dwelling can have an effect on your emotional disposition
.. sometimes you must carry them, or tilt them, or upgrade them, etc) of tools have an effect on their interaction with them is one of the best illustrations of the complete lack of faith that North Americans exhibit in the importance of design. You may not be able to count your 'happy points', but to suggest that the look of your computer has absolutely no effect on you is rediculous. Just because you can't point the 'HowMuchMoneyDidItMakeMe-o-meter' or the 'HowHappyAmI-o-meter' at the box doesn't mean that the asthetics of a tool do not effect your efficiency, levels of stress, or usage endurance. To listen to designers and architechs proudly explain how the design of a physical environment or tool affected the behaviour of the users and dewellers of their creations is to understand that the less you think about design, and simply place your faith in 'the experts', the more successful it tends to be.
That people do not believe that the asthetics (nevermind that the physical representation, ie, design of a computer does not exist in a vacuum
The speed at which you dismiss design vs. function suggests to me that you've never really given thought or faith to design, and thus never really experienced the benifits of proper industrial design. There is no clear line between function and asthetic, as you put it; a painting is a tool to stimulate parts of your brain that you want to stimulate, where as a tool is no good unless you can stand to look at it, use it, and spend time with it. Given the increase in stress of the average office worker, and the number of hours he or she spends with the tool known as the computer, it is a shame that people seem so quick to dismiss evironmental factors as having an effect on their emotional disposition.
To take it a step furthur, your bedroom is nothing but a tool to get some sleep in, so why not paint it completely black?
"Old man yells at systemd"
I generally agree with you about the paucity of on-disk help files for Mac OS X (there's lot more info in the Knowledge Base), Mac OS 9 wasn't any more of a paragon of informative error messages. Witness the super-helpful 'Sorry, the application "Internet Explorer'" unexpectedly quit because an error of type [1, 2, or 3] occurred.'
Now *I* know that was probably an out of memory error or an extension conflict, but that comes from a lot of reading and experience. The average user calls someone like me and says words to the effect of 'WTF?!'
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
The PC is no different. The personal computer is simply going through the same cycle automobiles went through. Cars started out as gadgets for the rick, then ford found a way to mass produce it and sell it at an affordable price. Later on, style became more important because everyone had figured out to build cars.
The PC industry is also reaching the same point and has to evolve. Now that processors speed is sufficient for 90% of the typical user's needs, raw power is not an important factor. Just as most people buy Honda's because of reliability and style, people will begin to change their buying habits to reflect the change. Now that most people have atleast 1 computer in their house, the difference will be which one blends in their their furniture, color scheme and life style.
The change is inevitable. There will always be people who buy trucks because it is the most functional, just as the tower is the most flexible. But for most people, a car is a status symbol just as the computer will be in 20 years.
Oh come on, I understand arguing performance-vs-costs issues regarding macs vs pcs, yes you can argue that you get more performance for less out of a PC.
But please, please... don't just say you can go and install Linux or *BSD on your Dell machine and boom there you go. That just oozes complete ignorance. Linux/*BSD is not a consumer desktop OS. You know why I like MacOSX? Because with it, I can boot my pc, run Internet Explorer while running Photoshop (the GIMP does not compare, and only geeks that never do any real production work would say it does,) edit my perl code, and then check out my work on my apache server, which includes photos imported from my camera and stills captured from my Digital Video camera. Oh, and then I can edit and save (sucessfully I might add) that word or excel document attachment sent to me by a friend in Office.
Now let's see Linux do that, and better yet... Do it OUT OF THE BOX.
Oh and I don't think Linux has a WM (or more likely X Server) that produces vector-based images for it's windowing architecture.
So NO... you CAN'T JUST install Linux on your dell (which costs pretty much the same, if not only about $100-$200 less)
512M memory?: IMacs come with 256M, upgradable to 1G ... and memory is cheap.
Radeon AIW card?: NVIDIA GeoForce2, combined with Velocity Engine in the CPU.
CD-RW, DVD?: The high-end iMac has this built in, including DVD-write ability.
RAID array of 4 hard drives?: That's the kind of thing IEEE 1394 ports are for.
Beside's which, it's a consumer computer. The functionality it's already got is bordering on overkill.
Again, here we are talking about 2 different design philosophies. Apple builds stuff that generally lasts for a long time. It builds machines that come with everything you are likely to ever need over the life of the machine and pushes external additions via USB and Firewire. Most Apple users never have a need to open their computers for anything other than to add memory.
Aside from a few manufacturing defects which were noticeable out of the box or shortly thereafter, it has been very rare that I've seen a Macintosh have any problems in under 5 years. By that time it is generally better to replace the entire computer rather than upgrade, due to advances in all aspects of computer technology. Sure I could add a new hard drive or processor, but what good is it when the bus and memory of new computers have doubled in speed.
Of course most of this doesn't apply to those of us who prefer to upgrade our computers constantly, to the point where we essentially have a new computer every 2 years through incremental upgrades. The bulk of Apple's users do not do this, however, and Apple knows this. They are very successful at providing what their users want and making those users happy to buy their products.
As far as the LCD goes, I wouldn't worry about it having problems. Apple has a very good repair service and you can get an extended warranty if you need it. Apple also has very good quality LCDs and over the years have had very few problems with their laptop displays, which certainly will get a lot more abuse than an LCD on a desktop.
Sapere aude!
link to text online: http://www.aoe.vt.edu/~ciochett/lit/zen.html
Everytime I read this it means something different. Now I think it's about programming, but that's probably because I'm a programmer :) It's not the best Philosophy book I've read, but it is the best book I've read.
DO NOT DISTURB THE SE
Gelernter's "Machine Beauty" is another great book about combining beauty and function.
When did science and art separate? Socrates and Divinci would not be happy with the PC beige box.
Oliver's army is here to stay Oliver's army are on their way And I would rather be anywhere else But here today
Either that or it becomes the most inscrutably byzantine contraption you can imagine. Rube Goldberg devices may have a great deal of thought and work applied, but they are ultimately useless.
I'm sorry, you misunderstood my point - and maybe i could have been clearer... good effort seems result in concise, clean design. bad effort... seems to have the opposite effect.
A: None. The Universe spins the bulb, and the Zen master merely stays out of the way.
It is unfair to compare the perceived quality of projects on Sourceforge by people that had an itch to scratch... with paid professionals at some computer manufacturer.
The comment regarding Sourceforge projects wasn't intended as a slight against those authors per se... I just wanted to bring an example of something that is within our power to change and improve upon. (As opposed to lamenting the poor wording in any number of MS products...)
The better ones usually have an active community of developers AND users that provide feedback and improvements.
What... and Apple doesn't?
------------
"...and Maddest of all, to see Life as it Is, and not as it Should Be."
All the user upgradable components (memory, airport) are easily accessed and don't require thermal paste. It's only if you want to get into the serious guts of the machine. This is because of the internal power supply, which was a high demand item from cube users.
ScienceSeeker.org
I think the Mac dongle also takes power for the monitor, giving you one monitor cable instead of two.
Why, that's a brilliant idea! It would allow people to haul around 19" CRTs, and run them off the iBook's battery, reducing the battery life to less than an hour.
The dongle I have simply provides a standard vga port.
The teachers in my school district use video projectors all the time. In other respects they are "low end consumer" users but the inclusion of this feature means we don't have to buy higher scale Macs. One of Apple's strongest markets is education and they do listen to their needs. I agree that the dongle is questionable but the inclusion of the feature IS wise.
You are quoting a Microsoft software designer on software design. Wow, that has to redefine either "guts" or "insanity".
Every machine is the creation of a human. Some of those creations have a beauty and functionality surpassing that of others. Part of that can be unquanitifiable, and it is that that is a machine's "soul" - the very essence of what makes it different that cannot be summed up in numbers. Not every human has a mystical bent, but the vast majority do, even in this cynical time. This is why most people buy tables, instead of putting plywood on a bunch of cinderblocks.
Obviously, because you've never used either, and from this and your other comments have no idea what constitutes worth.
Cocoa, meaning the frameworks and objective C language in this case, is the best object oriented programming environment I've ever seen. Perhaps the problem is that it is not difficult enough for you to use? Perhaps you couldn't get enough "cool points" by accomplishing something easily, when there is a harder way to do it?
And "not where the money is"??? OK, it's true you can make more money if you use VB than if you program in Cocoa. I'm not aware of any decent programs written in VB, or any decent programmers who use VB, but whatever floats your boat, I guess.
-- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
You do realize that you're an idiot, don't you? Cocoa is not Java for anything. Cocoa is an API for Mac OS. You can program for the API in two languages: Objective-C and Java.
I have a website. It's about Macs.
EVERYTHING in the computer community (Mac or store-bought PC) is proprietary. Most people assume that "proprietary" in terms of Macintosh means "closed box" or "non-PC," and this isn't the case.
PCs, in their ultimate basic designs, are supposed to work identically--to be a clone. A hand-built PC (like the Athlon box I just built to play what few good games which come out that aren't available for Macs, such as Age of Sail 2 [rocks] or Half Life) is great, but unless EVERYONE used the exact same motherboard and parts from the same manufacturers, they aren't strictly clones. Technically, your home-built is unique and closed to others--proprietary, because only YOU know what's inside it.
And look at store-bought PCs, which are supposed to be clones, but each manufacturer adds a widget or two here and there to add market appeal over other competitors PCs, which also do the same. If you haven't tried to install Windows on a Compaq without using Compaq's own CDs, you have never experienced the true meaning and heartbreak of "proprietary."
And Macs aren't even "closed box" anymore. As far as the iMac goes, Apple doesn't expect you to crack open your iMac anymore than Toastmaster expects you to crack open their toasters. It's for a logical reason (the same reason why you pay a bit more for a Macintosh): Everything you need is already there, from the laptops to the desktops (extra RAM and maybe drive space included). Thinking a Mac is proprietary is like thinking that your Porsche needs a V8 and one of those Calvin-pissing-on-a-BMW logos.
With the exception of the logic board (motherboard), open a Power Mac desktop and you'll find the same Matrox IDE drives, the same nVidia video, the same SDRAM, and similar expandability. The only difference (OS aside) is that the computer is integrated with finer quality than that $50 ATX motherboard we grabbed from "Chips-R-Us." That's what we pay for.
If you use Linux (and I know most of us do), we experience the sheer hell of PC propriety every time we try to install an OS on a store-bought system that's been modified to work with Microsoft Windows and not for any other OS, period.
Remember the old days where every computer maker made a PC and their own OS? Only Apple does that now for mere mortals (Sun, SGI, and other unique non-Windows PCs excluded but acknowledged). Makes me still wish someone would make a PC designed only for the ultimate Geek--the Unix family user, to end this argument.
/.
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
Man, i wish people woudl stop using "function over form"! The *POINT* of Apple's designs are simple: The FUNCTION of the computer (you know, people actually using it) requires a certain FORM to make it easier to use.
/. crowd are among them. However, most people who say the iMac/Apple products are "form over function" are actually completely missing the point: USING a computer is the function, and if you make it easier to use, you are increasing its function, not destroying it.
Form Follows Function.
That is the Louis Sullivan mantra, and I believe in it (and you should too). What this idea means is that the beige boxes we have setting under our desks are actually LESS functional than, say, an iMac (new or old) because it is harder to use; you have to fiddle with openin the case a lot, you have a lot of cables, the calbes are hiden behind your desk so you have to get underneath to do anything...
Yes, there are some people for whom "function" means "fiddling," and i assume that many of the
So yeah, nerds SHOULD stress function over form... they should demand better designs like teh iMac, but expandable. They should demand the ugly beige box be replaced by something more elegant, more beautiful, easier to use, and just generally better.
Get it right, people.
This seems very much a chicken/egg sort of argument - is it that Apple doesn't care about making the hardware hackable because Mac people don't hack hardware, or is it that all the hardware hackers stick to PCs because it's so hard and unrewarding to hack Mac hardware?
Ok, I've never used a Mac (besides playing on it at Fry's), and probably won't be interested by it in the near future. But I heard this, on the radio, a few days ago, while sitting in my friend's car (sorry, can't remember the name of the guy, nor the radio station):
This thing is more like for teenage girls. Look at the design, it's like the plastic mirror for kids. If you have teenage girls in your house, you know what I mean. For the wrong market, that is, geeks like us, this reminds me of a plastic mirror on a scoop of cow shit!
Give me a break. Can you please stop lumping the non-inuits living in the Arctic with the Canadian Inuits? I'm not excoriating North Americans (I am one .. actually, I'm Canadian); however, I was referring to a set of values that apply most appropriately within the context of North Americans. I can feel free to lump us together when I'm discussing certain values that are by and large unique to North America. And if you don't like generalizations, get used to them. You cannot talk without generalizing.
BTW, do you know what constitutes a valid generalization? It's a point or example or whathave you that holds true more often for the generalization than the exception(s). I maintain that my generalization is valid, discounting cultures within North America that do not participate in mainstream consumerism. Just don't lose sight of the fact that using a generalization prooves exactly what you're so eager to point out: that exceptions exist, and that the generalization doesn't always apply.
OF COURSE IT DOESN'T ALWAYS APPLY, DUMMY, THATS WHAT MAKES IT A GENERALIZATION.
I'll be sure to troll your posts and make sure you're not generalizing about Apple Users being lumped in with the rest of those very different Computer Users. And I'll make sure you never say "people", cause there are "women" in a group of "people", and "men", and "men arn't the same as women"!
Get it? For the context of my point, it was suitable to group North Americans together. For the most part, the behaviour I was describing is not particularly unique to any given subculture of North Americans.
"Old man yells at systemd"
It's a buzzword for computing methods that you don't notice. While it isn't really valid for computers that you are supposed to interact with as a computer (but it may be for an Internet terminal or word processing machine that is based on a computer), Apple is definitely not going this direction. In fact, the standard ugly beige box PC is closer. It is something that you can hide under your desk. If the keyboard and mouse are out it is an extension of your desktop workspace, and if they aren't, it's a plain black box. Of course it could be better. At the low level, it could be a lot better; parts aren't interchangeable enough. And the monitor is still an ugly sore when not in use. It should hide itself, or at least blend into the background when not in use.
That's the fault of the new imac. It's a display piece. Guess what; I don't want to show that in my house. It fits into an Ikea display, but nowhere else. It's just a slightly less ugly, almost-beige near-box on my desk, with a monitor obviously protruding. Frankly, it's a step backward. At least my PC fits under my desk and out of sight.
Perhaps Apple wants to maintain a constant and intrusive presence in your house; it builds the brand to have it sticking out all the time. For consumers, the opposite direction is better, and the Windows PC fits that a lot better.
Even Slashdot wants to hide some things
Worse, the MacOSX Help files are nicely written, but there are so few of them that help is very close to useless. It will tell you how to copy a file, but for anything more complex you're basically SOL.
Yeah, no kidding. I refuse to give up my little iMac keyboard, the original laptop-style one that came with a Bondi. It's just comfortable for my hands. Well, my new Quicksilver at work requires the use of the Pro Keyboard to open the goddamned CD burner and get at the tray.
Try using Mac Help to find a solution for _that_. As best I can tell, I have three options:
1) Use the Pro Keyboard
2) Run Classic mode _solely_ for the Disk Eject app that comes on the install disk.
3) Use the eject feature of iTunes when I need to open the drive.
I'm using number three at the moment, but it's still not exactly optimal. Generally, Apple is able to make their case designs attractive and interesting without sacrificing utility. The whole "remove the eject button" idea is ludicrous, though.
(Yeah, I know, pointless rant triggered by nothing in particular. But it's a sore point.)
--saint
See. They're not more expensive because of propietary parts of pretty cases. They're more expensive because they get chicks. Geesh. You guys need to look deeper into the computer. Pretty cases and ghz only do so much, but female magnetism?! I'd glady pay twice as much as they're selling for.
You want function over form, thereby making the assumption that you prefer form to be marginalized to the benefit of function. At least the iMac, while not perfect, has a higher attention to function than the average PC.
There is no VGA connector and no power cable for the video. Two cables gone, functionality has been improved by reducing clutter, form has been improved by removing clutter.
There is no bulky three prong power cable, but a slender laptop style power cable. Form and function.
The possibility of using an Airport card, increasing functionality and form. No wiring for networking necessary.
Problems: USB and headphone access is in the rear. Keyboard, as you mentioned, is in front. The saving grace is that the mouse is designed and intended to be attached to the keyboard, meaning only one USB cable needs to snake to the back, minimally.
Functionality: Out of the box, all you need to do is plug in the speakers in the back, the power in the back, and the keyboard in the back, for use. For maximum utility, you have Airport installed. For slightly less utility, you can plug in an ethernet cable.
Compare to the average PC: On PC power cable, one VGA power cable, one keyboard cable, one mouse cable, one speaker-sound cable, one ethernet cable, one VGA cable. That's 7 cables to the Mac's 4, maybe six vs three, for the same functionality.
GPL Deconstructed
any mirrors?
Note to poster... If you're going to post restricted Apple documents, you may want to host them on a web server other than Apple's.
This was well written, but also not a universal truth.
I, for one, would rather have something beautifully made and sleekly engineered than the latest thing that has nought but raw speed to offer.
After all, a year from now the raw speed product will be replaced by another one, but my Macintosh will still be capable of great things.
Another example: I just bought a digital camera. I had a choice: A Canon D30 3.1 megapixel single lens reflex, an outstandingly elegant design, for $3400 (including lens and compact flash card). Or I could have gotten a 5.1 megapixel Sony for $999. I bought the Canon, and look, feel, overall design intelligence and quality are the reasons.
Amazingly enough, there are customers for plenty of different products. Don't try to sell consumers short; you can find pretty much any buying pattern you'd ever want to see if you encounter enough of us.
D
Why this lavish devotion to "upgradability"? The average computer user really doesn't need that much beyond what the iMac has. Memory plus all the ports you need pretty much takes care of it.
I've got a Dell Inspiron that I've used for three years without upgrading and I'm a good deal more geeky than the average computer user. I simply haven't needed to upgrade, not even memory. Laptops are probably a better base of comparison for the new iMac. I don't see anyone complaining about not being able to "upgrade" laptops, really, and they're arguably more integrated than Apple computers.
If you're at all concerned about being able to "upgrade" your computer, the iMac simply isn't for you. The average computer user doesn't need, nor wants to do, to upgrade their computer any more than they would want/need to upgrade their car. Does anyone here *get* that?
I might get the new iMac. It's the first Apple product I've seriously considered buying. Get the high end model, max out the memory... I'll probably be set for another 3-4 years.
Interviewer: So, we've all seen the new I-Mac by now, and I'm sure everyone has the same question -- What the hell were you thinking?
JI: I, er, um...that is-- it seemed like a good idea at the time.
No way, OS X looks much, much better than XP!
As far as looks go, XP is nothing special. OS X, on the other hand....
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
True, indeed. The other day I had to subtly use a PC in a Gateway Country (I was out of town and lost) while pretending to be interested in the crappy thing to the guy who kept trying to sell it to me.
The browser kept breaking, Google didn't load properly, and every time I tried to do something quickly, a new, annoying window popped up. The the media player started and took over the screen. Finally, I found the directions that I needed, got the guy's business card and swore to myself that I'd never use XP again.
There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
Max V.
NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
While not done on a Mac, a buddy of mine loves playing around with the Microsoft Agent stuff and writing little VB applications to control things. After muddling around with X10 and his love of music he's got a nice new trick.
Walks into the bedroom and says "Lets get it on..." lights dim down to 5% and starts playing some smooth music.
The new iMac design isn't just about a new case or the next wierd look from Apple. It's all part of apple's new strategy. Apple lost the "big market-share and superfast speeds" race long ago, way back in 1996. That isn't where Apple is focused anymore.
0 6. shtml
Instead, Apple has come up with this concept of the "Digital Hub". Admittedly, the concept is not new, but Apple is marketing it, and sucesfully I might add. No longer is Apple selling a computer, they're selling a lifestyle. Think about what they provide. A series of softwares which touch on almost every aspect of life.
1) OS X- For the computer geek in the house, a *NIX underpinning, with plenty of built in power and a ton of open source aspects, and a fast and worthy GUI on top of it. Combinned with the support of comercial software backers, Apple is bringing *NIX to consumers.
2) iMovie- For the parents, finaly those really dull home movies can be livened up, even if they still won't ever be watched.
3) iPhoto- Steve was right, every family has a photo buff, and this product makes things unbelievably easy.
4) iTunes+iPod- Say what you will about it's price, the iPod is still one of the best MP3 players arround, and I can boot my comp with it. iTunes has a lot of power behind it, and while there may be other more feature packed products out there, almost none of them have such seamless support with so many MP3 players. Plus, it burns CDs for you. Yes ladies and gentlemen, Apple believes in being able to use music you own (and if you ask Steve off the books, probobly even some you don't) in any way you like.
5) iDVD- a new concept, burning your own DVDs. And while DVD burners aren't anything new, I don't see anyone else promoting the idea.Not only that, but someone mentioned to me, that even though Apple doesn't support it, the drives in the high end products are apperently not only DVD-R, but actualy RWs. (Unconfirmed, I guess you would have to find out what drive exactly is being used and find a market version somewhere
6) New iMac design- The look is more than just shock value. The concept behind the digital hub is that it is the center of your technological needs. The new design is something you could put in the center of your house. Where most computers have traditionaly enjoyed a spot against the wall, under a desk, or in a back room, this computer could sit comfortably in your living room, and it wouldn't look all that out of place.
7) Expandable- Not in terms of conventional PCI slots or drive bays, but in terms of versitility. The power of UNIX, combined with the imagination and wierdness of Apple developers and the OpenSource compuntiy you suddenly have a computer capable of being more than just a worprocessor and graphics station. This thing could actualy be the brain of a computerized home. It has the look and feel of being part of the future and has the potential to be part of it.
This is not to say the PC's don't have the ability to do this, but if you ask me, the only real innovation I see is from Sony, and Sony costs about as much as Apple.
Apple lost the power race years ago, as well as the OS race. Now Apple is running a new race, one of style, class and usefulness, and so far, the contenders are way behind.
For a superior explination of what I'm saying here go to:
http://www.macslash.com/articles/02/01/10/22492
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
and to cite some examples (from slashdot) consider this:
Person A loves the shiny new imacs with the transparent skins and mac os x bubbles. Sure, he pays more for fewer cycles.
Person B like the design of the hardware and the bsd command prompt, but chooses not to buy it because he's turned off by the mac "community"'s perceived lack of technical savvy.
Person C likes all the features of linux but decides to run a bsd os because he hates Stallman or linux zealotry.
All of these are in some sense irrational decisions, but they really aren't. The point is to enjoy yourself, and "extraneous" factors come into the picture all the time. The point of the cycles or features is, in the end, just another factor which adds to your pleasure in using a system.
When in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand.
The point is form *is* function... for many people. The iMac does offer exceptional "performance", but along a different axis than raw CPU performance. I don't see it in the same category as B&O stereo equipment.
Parallel arguments can be made for B&O stereo equipment:
"It's for people that don't demand that a stereo crank out x-many watts and want a stereo for home use, designed with the consumer in mind."
"With B&O, you are paying for form, functionality, and quality that is hard to come by."
"Yes, B&O have less watts than some mass-market stereos that cost hundreds less, but for many, B&O will be well worth the cost for the way it performs in the home."
The problem with claims like those are that they are so subjective. What works well for you and has an elegant interface, may be frustrating to me and have an interface that I hate. For instance, many of us with more than one finger like two or three-button mice/trackballs with scroll wheels.
Let's examine functionality further. Many people feel that the dearth of software for the iMac is a major hindrance. Many don't feel that revolutionary desklamp technology screen mounting does not make up for a screen that is only 15" in size.
What it really comes down to is that the iMac is a $1300-$1800 disposable computer. When it becomes too underpowered for then-current software, the owner will have no choice but to replace it in total. He'll have to scrap the DVD/cutter drive, the LCD screen, the case, power supply, motherboard, etc. That's wasteful and absurd. I've got a top-notch, modern PC and I'm still using the same floppy drive, monitor, case, internal Zip drive, SCSI controller (for my external DAT tape drive), etc. that I was three years ago. When a component becomes a bit long in the tooth, I can upgrade it without scrapping the entire system.
I asked an Apple guy at Macworld whether or not the screen was the same unit as their 15" desktop lcd -- as far as he knew it is. My question was leading to a possible 17" iMac model (mark my words, it will come -- there's a reason that base is so heavy...). However, this also means that the screen is high-volume, and probably wouldn't be hugely expensive to replace should it fail.
just my blog and pix
The developers would get far too lazy.
Apple was afraid that developers would just put out source and tell the users to compile it themselves. Not only is that EXTREMELY un-Maclike, it leaves Apple open to an obscene amount of tech support questions, such as how to use GCC and using the Command line, which the novice user may never bump into.
Bad example, the G4 actually does really really well on RC4....but point taken anyway.
As long as "a card" is always 802.11, and "memory" is never more then one stick.
External drives (FireWire) can also be added, which will quite fast, but more costly then adding a 2nd drive to a PC, and look kinda ugly out on the desk rather then in the case.
You can take the old disk and put it in a new tower (as a second disk), not much else though.
One nice thing about all the FireWire Macs is you can make them act like a FW drive, so you can mount your old desktop or laptop on your new one and pull out all the files you want. That makes the upgrade process way way simpler and faster then setting up file sharing and moving the files over the ethernet, and maybe safer depending on what the network is hooked up to. Not a killer feature I admit, but nice.
Well, laptops with a separate screen would be basically unmanageable and useless. A LCD iMac would not be significantly less useful if the screen were detachable.
Of corse this doesn't matter a whole lot since the screen on the iMac can come off without oo much trouble, and AppleCare (3 hear hardware and software support) costs half as much on the iMac as it does on the laptops.
They were more common in the past. About five years ago I had a DEC VERSA with a bad pixel in the lower left. I also have a SGI with a bad pixel closer to the center, I mostly don't notice it except when the screen saver kicks in.
I agree.
Probably not, the towers are modestly hackable, and the old clones were very hackable. Plus, in fact, the hardware hackers were very happy with the unexpandable 128K Mac. They made money upgrading them for people to 256K...