Slashdot Mirror


iMac LCD Impostors

cannonball_D writes "CNet has an article about the first (?) inevitable PC imitation LCD iMac from Gateway. The design is a step in the right direction, but I still think it has all the tell-tale signs of a cheap knock-off. " It really looks like it lacks the elegance of the apple design, but I'm all for the LCD based terminal to be available on x86.

355 comments

  1. That design's been around for a while... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...long before the new iMac came around.

    Not to mention that it looks nothing like the new iMac - the whole system is contained in the same case as the display, which the iMac specifically avoided.

    1. Re:That design's been around for a while... by Aqua+OS+X · · Score: 1

      True, and it is not a very good design at that. Optical drives can not run at full speed, and it is not the greatest layout for heat concerns.

      All in all, I agree, It's been done before. Moreover, it been done -better- before. Heck remember this litle flop The 20th Anniversary Mac?

      --
      "Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
    2. Re:That design's been around for a while... by Archan · · Score: 1

      And I've seen more of the Sparticus Macs than the new iMac. How? Simple, watch Serial Experiments Lain.... :D Connecting Anime and Macs... I truly have no life... -Archan

      --
      Blah to the skins and Blah to the punks and Blah to the world and everybody sucks.
    3. Re:That design's been around for a while... by catbutt · · Score: 1
      If you read the article, it indicates that the picture is the exising design, not the new one:
      Gateway also plans to streamline the design, making the Profile 4 look more like a stand-alone flat-panel monitor than the current model does. Gateway's older design places the processor, CD-RW (CD-rewritable) drive and other components directly behind the monitor, giving the Profile 3 a bulky profile when viewed sideways
  2. It's an I-cow by techmuse · · Score: 5, Funny

    It has a remarkable resemblance to a cow. Black and white curvy patches over a white body. It fits in with Gateway's image, but lacks any of the beauty of the imac.

    1. Re:It's an I-cow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gateway has a long tradition of making horribly ugly cases.

      I wonder what marketing executive up there saw a computer case and thought "ooooohh...cows".

    2. Re:It's an I-cow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You call a desk lamp-base with a flat-panel-on-a-stick beauty???

    3. Re:It's an I-cow by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I'm quite busy fondling a dog's genitals at the moment, so I can only type with one hand, but I must say that this C/Net article is the biggest pile of dung presented as journalism that I've come across since I last accidentaly looked at Tom's Hardon Guide. F U C K !

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    4. Re:It's an I-cow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MOO!

    5. Re:It's an I-cow by neuroticia · · Score: 2

      Quoting from the article.... "The Poway, Calif.-based PC maker got into the all-in-one business with its original Profile computer in June 1999 on the coattails of the first iMac. Gateway, however, did beat Apple to the punch with the first all-in-one computer to feature a flat panel. While Gateway says its current flat panel, Profile 3, is profitable, the Profile line for the most part has experienced only limited success..."

      Ok. How is this copying Apple if, according to the article, Gateway beat them to the punch? Does Gateway have spies, now?

      -Sara

    6. Re:It's an I-cow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hey, don't you go talking bad about Poway! the Poweians might hear you and make it illegal for you go enter the town or something. lol. (i live here. i mean there. whereever.)

    7. Re:It's an I-cow by xonker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Apparently someone's editor decided they had to find a way to mention "iMac" in the story, and the writer had to fit the story around it. Or they decided that since Apple is supposed to be the innovator, someone had to be copying them, not the other way around.

      This story would have gotten a solid "F" in J-school, but apparently it's good enough for C|Net to run and for Slashdot to post. High school newspapers have higher quality standards than this.

    8. Re:It's an I-cow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's 'Industrial Design' (that's your cue to get all reverent and shit)

    9. Re:It's an I-cow by neuroticia · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, cannonball_D (the person who submitted the story to Slashdot) was mistaken. The entire take of the article is not focused on how Gateway ripped off the iMac, it's focused on the competing flat panel computers, and how the Gateway wasn't quite selling as many as the iMac (although the Gateway did come out first.)And now Gateway is coming out with the next of their line of flat screen computers and how it will be in the market to compete with the iMac. (Presumably better than the one currently on market.) It's actually a rather good article if you ignore the "lead-in" by cannonball_D.

      -Sara

    10. Re:It's an I-cow by Lars+T. · · Score: 5, Informative
      Bwahaha.

      Have you ever heard of the 20th Anniversary Mac (aka Spartacus)? Here's a nice picture and here's The 20th Anniversary Macintosh Web Site. That machine id from May 1997. Tell me about how Gateway beat them to the punch two years later.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    11. Re:It's an I-cow by SpryGuy · · Score: 1

      The original Gateway Profile (three years ago? More?) was the best design, imho. They've been getting worse with each generation.

      The main point being these things were around LONG before the new iMac. In fact, this particular generation was around before the new iMac. So saying that this is Gateway's "response" to the new iMac is completely ingorant.

      I bought my parents the first Gateway Profile PC. It was very inexpensive (three years ago, $799), is reasonably powered, easy to use, and looks great. It's perfect for them. I got one of the last ones before they started pushing the uglier Gateway Profile 2.

      --

      - Spryguy
      There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    12. Re:It's an I-cow by neuroticia · · Score: 1

      And how is a rip-off of the 20th anniversary macintosh a ripoff of the iMac? :p The entire point the poster was trying to make was that Apple comes out with a flat panel computer and everyone automatically copies them. Not so. Perhaps they're copying the 20th anniversary Mac, but... Then wouldn't every LCD "all in one" computer be doing that?

      Look! Apple made a computer. They're copying Simon

      In the world of personal computers it's not about who's copying who. It's about whose copy is better. Right now the iMac is definitely better than the Gateway.

      -Sara

    13. Re:It's an I-cow by Darby · · Score: 1

      hey, don't you go talking bad about Poway! the Poweians might hear you and make it illegal for you go enter the town or something. lol. (i live here. i mean there. whereever.)

      If you live in Poway, then you should know that you are referred to as "Powegians".
      It just sounds better. I live in PB. They call us lots of things, but it's just jealousy ;-)

    14. Re:It's an I-cow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The poster was responding to this line in the article in question:

      "Gateway, however, did beat Apple to the punch with the first all-in-one computer to feature a flat panel."

      It's factually incorrect. Apple released an all-in-one computer with a flat panel in 1997. The first all-in-one computer with a flat panel was the 20th Anniversary Mac. End of point.

      It's an understandable mistake for the writer of the article to make given that he's sitting there just making shit up ... "gee, I don't remember any other all-in-one flat panel computers, so I guess there weren't any ... no need to actually find out."

    15. Re:It's an I-cow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The main point is that Gateway is not blazing the trail here. Whether the Profile is a response to an iMac or to a previous Mac, such as the all-in-one flat panel 20th Anniversary Mac from 1997, it's wrong to say that Gateway released the first all-in-one flat panel computer when they didn't.

      Why this argument is even marginally important is that Apple is known for all-in-one computers. The first Mac was all-in-one, and since then, they've almost always had an all-in-one model, although sometimes only for education. It's like saying Cadillac never made big cars. You have to be fucking ignorant to say that, and of course that qualifies you to write tech articles for CNet.

      1984: original Mac, all-in-one
      1997: 20th Anniversary Mac, all-in-one with flat panel
      May 1998: iMac all-in-one
      June 1999: Gateway Profile all-in-one
      January 2002: iMac all-in-one with flat panel

      Where is Gateway's leadership either in all-in-ones or all-in-ones with flat panels? Facts are facts. Either you did it first in the industry or you didn't. Gateway didn't.

    16. Re:It's an I-cow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps he meant "The first all in one computer to feature a flat panel and be within the range of 'buyable' for the average consumer"? Weren't the 20th Anniversary Macs in the range of 9k to begin with, slowly dropping to $1900. (most likely after Apple stopped producing them and needed to get rid of the surplus. ie: Demand did not meet supply and the value was dropping as the machines were in storage.)

      There might have very well been LCD computers prior to the 20th Anniversary Mac, just never intended for public consumption due to the high cost of production. By 1997 consumers were generally already unwilling to spend that much money on a computer, particularly one where the monitor was only 12 inches and the CPU speed was slower than other computers available. Surprisingly, Apple seems to be selling the iMacs with some of the same issues. (smaller monitor, slower processor, higher price.) But hey- computers have gotten fast enough that people can hop to a computer that's 5 times the speed and not even notice. The iMac is perfect for a New York studio apartment where space is a premium and it will be an extra computer. It's just like a laptop without the portability.

      -Sara

    17. Re:It's an I-cow by SpryGuy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      By that reasoning, Apple's Mac line is ripping off the All-In-One TRS-80 Model III and Model 4, which predates the Mac by a few years at least.

      Gateway didn't do it first, but neither did Apple.

      --

      - Spryguy
      There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    18. Re:It's an I-cow by Lars+T. · · Score: 2

      Actually, the "old" Gateway reminds me quite a bit of the "old" iMac, with an LCD instead of the CRT and thinner (but still klutzy). Much too thick to be a clone of the TAM.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  3. What's the big deal? by TrebleJunkie · · Score: 3, Informative

    Didn't Monorail (or something like that) do this first, about 4-5 years ago, anyhoo?

    Not that their machine was any good, and wasn't very successful commercially, but it *was* an LCD-screen PC with all the guttiwuts behind the LCD.

    --

    Ed R.Zahurak

    You know, oblivion keeps looking better every day.

    1. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hateway already made one like this years ago - these pieces of crap are sitting on the desks of a few poor saps at my office. While imacs are for dirty hippie fags, the new one is at least well designed and looks good. That gateway is ugly as hell, and of course it is quite a chore to access it for upgrades and repair.

    2. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt if it's any harder to upgrade and repair than any laptop PC. Why would you want to upgrade such a machine in the first place? You're not one of the clowns who would try to do a processor upgrade are you?

    3. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong, I actualy think this new gateway looks like Apples old 20th Aniversery Mac more so than the new iMac.

    4. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, my buddy's got one of those Monorails -- Pentium 90 I think. It's pretty much the same profile as this new Goutway, but much more boxy. The floppy and CD ROM are accessed to from the side. It's about as stable as a loose cannon on a bull in a china shop. There's even a small pinhole button somewhere on it to poke it in the brain to 'reset' it when it goes all haywire.

    5. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They did although it may have been closer to 5 - 6 years ago. The only problem they seemed to have was cheapo parts and dollar store made in taiwan construction.

    6. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and Apple already did this 5 years ago, too. The 20th Anniversary Mac was an all-in-one with a flat panel.

      And, not to split hairs, but we're only talking about desktop computers here. There have been plenty of portables and "luggables" with flat panels in them and all-in-one form factors. In other words, creating an all-in-one LCD desktop machine is not equivalent to putting men on the moon.

  4. Maybe Jobs is onto something...... by idiotnot · · Score: 2, Funny

    With his emphasis on HID. I've seen the iMac in person, and I instantly wanted one. The Gateway, on the other hand, is ugly.

    iMac: Fits nicely into the corner of your contemporary flat.

    Profile: Fits nicely into the corner of your cell in the cube farm.

    1. Re:Maybe Jobs is onto something...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iMac: Doesn't run ANY of your current software. Better get out the VISA card, dude.

      Profile: Just get out the CD carrier and start installing apps and using the thing.

      And the Profile doesn't have the twit-magnet problem. The iMac will have every twit in the company coming in and cooing at it. While you're trying to get work done.

      Fucking 'Industrial Design' again. Does Apple have that term trademarked?

    2. Re:Maybe Jobs is onto something...... by broohaha · · Score: 0

      The new iMac runs all of my current software. *nix and OS X software.

      If I were to get a Profile, on the other hand....
      Well, I guess one can get Linux to run on that thing. Then I'll have some current software to run.

      (Shortly after I got my TiBook, last May, I took it with me on a transcontinental flight. Each way, I got pretty stewardesses striking up conversations with me, wanting to know what kind of computer I had. So, it's not just a twit-magnet.)

    3. Re:Maybe Jobs is onto something...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh God. Now you mac freaks are saying that a Gateway can't run contemporary software? Let's see... Which OS didn't have Photoshop for a while? Oh, do you mean "run or emulate"? *GRR*

      The OS is going to get there, the boxes are *attractive* but good lord don't start saying it's the only computer that can run current software or I swear I'll hunt you down and force you to use Windows.

  5. a punch? by buzban · · Score: 1
    i dunno if that qualifies as a punch...the sex factor is not nearly as high, and they're not really competing on price. i normally like the thin clients that dell and gateway put out (even though, as my wife points out, the expandability is less)...but this is a poor knockoff of the iMac, IMO. =)

    of course, i won't be buying either...so WTF...

    1. Re:a punch? by tb3 · · Score: 2

      the sex factor is not nearly as high

      What sex factor?
      This thing has as much sex appeal as pantyhose. And anyone turned on by pantyhose is a pervert.

      --

      www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance

    2. Re:a punch? by buzban · · Score: 1
      sorry...sex factor is not nearly as high with the Gateway machine as with the iMac. that's what i meant.

    3. Re:a punch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The iMac has sex factor? Geez, you're reading 'Seventeen' magazine again, huh?

      It's a fucking makeup mirror.

      Do you know what a woman's face that's overdone with makeup tastes like? So much for sexy. Get out the fucking wet washcloth.

    4. Re:a punch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And anyone turned on by pantyhose is a pervert.

      It all depends who the pantyhose are on.

    5. Re:a punch? by miscellaneous · · Score: 1

      hey! i'm turned on by pantyhose, and a freak, not a pervert!

      also, to the guy that praised apple's HID-centric design: their empahasis is more consumer design, sort of a modern-day frog design; in terms of sex appeal, sort of a next cube or sparcstation 1 type o' thing. beautiful, but not necessarily centered around good design of the interaction between the box and the user. in terms of the actual physical box, this isn't much of an issue, and the tilty display *is* a particularly good thing, from an HID point of view. aqua isn't the HID or ergonomic disaster that some people predicted it would be, but it does have its faults on an interactive level, and it seems to me that their emphasis is more on "beauty in the eye of the consumer" rather than "ease in the the hand of the consumer".

      from a CHI professor's point of view, this is a bad thing; from the point of view of a company that needs to survive in today's marketplace, and do so by attracting a loyal band of customers who love its products as much for their beauty as their functionality (and i'm not implying that aqua isn't functional, just not theoretically optimally so), it's not necessarily a bad thing.

      --
      -k. ^-^ ^D
  6. hypocracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "That new iMac, it has no expansion slots, no room for my ghetto ISA cards, who cares about it!"
    "That new Gateway, while an obvious ripoff, is a step in the right direction"

    1. Re:hypocracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with the iMac is there's no place for the coke spoon, let alone the chrome buttplug.

      The Sales and Marketing guys will love it, except for those shortcomings.

    2. Re:hypocracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can something be an "obvious rip-off" when it came out WAY BEFORE the thing it allegedly is ripping off? Does that make ANY sense? Nope.

  7. Yeah by iamdrscience · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think when they talk about competing with the new Imac, they meant that it is aimed at a similar section of the market, not that it's competing through aesthetic design.

    1. Re:Yeah by Jobe_br · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe. I think many of the consumers of the new iMac will be ones that not only want a machine that is capable of getting work done on, but also one that looks good, so aesthetic design will play a large role for consumers of the new iMac.

      From what I can tell of the picture, the Gateway model is essentially a stationary LCD screen with a motherboard tacked on back. If you check out the various videos on Apple's site, you'll hear the designer of the new iMac talk about a design just like that being tossed out the window by Jobs. To me, that's an obvious sign that aesthetics will play a large part in the market targeted by the new iMac.

      Personally, having a screen that is adjustable in height, horizontal and vertical angle is actually quite useful (you can't change the landscape/portrait orientation, though). Depending on how I'm sitting at my desk any particular day (probably depending on how I slept the night before) I might want to adjust the angle of my screen. I find myself adjusting my Dell laptop's screen often, depending on how I'm sitting.

      Don't forget that this new iMac is more than just aesthetics, too. Because of all its connectivity (external video, firewire, usb, gigabit ethernet, 56k modem, etc.) its also meant to coexist peacefully and productively with all your external devices. Same goes for the software installed: iTunes, iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, and iTools (online). Gateway can't counter that and I think that's a very important distinguishing characteristic.

    2. Re:Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'd agree, although market economics means that PC designs based on the iMac will always be cheap quality knock-offs.

      Apple has the Apple hardware market all to itself (monopoly?) and if you want a Mac, it has to be an Apple. They can afford to bulk produce custom components - like the neck for instance - as they know they have a market to sell to. Could you really see Gateway having all these parts custom made for their box? No. The Gateway model is all about price and volume shipping, hence it's made from vacuform plastic; no chrome, no transparent panels round the LCD, no custom MoBo designs, for Gateway it doesn't warrant it and never will.

      Which generally is a bit of a bummer. For strange shaped PC's to come of age, you're looking at Intel releasing multiple odd sized MoBo configurations, someone getting their head around the PSU size issues and all of it being standardised.

      And as soon as you talk about standardising, that's when you've lost the Apple edge.

    3. Re:Yeah by Webmonger · · Score: 2

      Note that the picture in the article is the previous model.

    4. Re:Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I'd agree, although market economics means that PC designs based on the iMac will always be cheap quality knock-offs."

      Except the Gateway Profile is NOT BASED ON THE iMac! It came out WAY BEFORE the new iMac. In fact, it's in its third generation of single-box, compact, LCD-screend design. This is NOT a rip-off of the iMac in any way. You cannot rip-off something before the fact!

    5. Re:Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DUDES!
      You ALL are missing the point. The Gateway is a PC, while the eye-mac is not! The power of America is in the Microsoft Wintel platform.
      Truth Rides Again!

    6. Re:Yeah by Jobe_br · · Score: 2

      Let's see ... um, brainwashed? How 'bout picking a platform for what it can do and what you can do with it instead of just locking yourself into one option? How 'bout supporting a company that's doing Cool Shit(tm) instead of just the same 'ol thing? With an attitude like yours, how can Transmeta hope to ever succeed? And RedHat, TurboLinux, Mandrake, and SuSE? Linux isn't Intel only, Linux is definitely not 'Wintel' and neither is Apple's OS X. And what about design? Pixar made animated shorts for this little beaut - isn't that enough of a geek factor? C'mon, quit toutin' the company line and do something different for a change. If you can't get Apple's new iMac + OS X to do what you need to do, you aren't the geek you pretend to be, that's for sure.

      Let that be a challenge to all of /.'s geeks.

  8. Not as sexy. by aussersterne · · Score: 5, Funny

    The new G4 iMac looks like a supermodel, all curvy and slim and sleek and chic.

    The Gateway looks like a 60-year-old Janitor.

    I know who I'd rather "plug in".

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
    1. Re:Not as sexy. by b_pretender · · Score: 3, Informative

      http://www.gateway.com/work/prod/sb_profileb3se-d_ ProdDetail.shtml for a better product description than the article links.

    2. Re:Not as sexy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Now, I've never been great at deciphering sarcasm, but I'm going to say: the janitor.

      Was I right?

    3. Re:Not as sexy. by b_pretender · · Score: 3, Informative
      I hate to reply to my own comment, but this thing is *ugly*! Not to mention that the 360 degree rotation shows that it has about 5 degrees of available tilt for the LCD panel.

      I have to mention how harddrive platters and CD/DVD drives or more efficient and less noisy when mounted horizontally as opposed to slanted as they are in this monstrosity.

      The only thing that might save this monster was if it came with a wireless keyboard and mouse (which is doesn't).

      I forgot to mention that this runs WindowsXP rather than OS X (that's another thing the Gateway machine has going against it.

    4. Re:Not as sexy. by ElOttoGrande · · Score: 4, Interesting
      >The Gateway looks like a 60-year-old Janitor.

      I agree, and where's the cost savings that PC advocates go on about so much. This thing is retailing for about as much as the most expensive iMac.
      Gateway ($1699) best iMac $1,799
      and it has 128M less ram, 20G smaller HD, no Superdrive, no NVIDIA GeForce2 MX w/32MB DDR graphics...

      I'm just another PC user (ibook drooler;) but in comparison the new iMac looks like a much better deal that this.

    5. Re:Not as sexy. by xanadu-xtroot.com · · Score: 1

      Not as sexy. (Score:2, Redundant)

      Redundant? I thought that was funny as hell! D00d's got a good point, too.

      --
      I'm not a prophet or a stone-age man,
      I'm just a mortal with potential of a super man.
    6. Re:Not as sexy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry. I am not that interested in copulating with my computer.

      It's a tool.

      The iMac definitely has twit appeal.

    7. Re:Not as sexy. by quirk3k · · Score: 2

      I forgot to mention that this runs WindowsXP rather than OS X (that's another thing the Gateway machine has going against it.

      Look at the website. It doesn't come with WindowsXP, it comes with Windows 98 SE.

      Riding the bleeding edge of crap.

    8. Re:Not as sexy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. The Gateway machine runs Windows, or Linux, or Free/Net/OpenBSD. Or Solaris x86 or SCO I suppose.

      Those are all better solutions than MacOS 10. (dudes- the 'X' is already taken. Move along, now.)

    9. Re:Not as sexy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought 'Superdrive' was that crummy floppy drive that didn't have an eject button and reads Apple and 1.44 M 'IBM' diskettes.

      Oh, does Apple recycle their trademarks?

      What will 'Quicktime' mean in the year 2012? Since by that time Steve Jobs will be operating a cyber brothel, does that mean the six minute polywhack job for $18?

    10. Re:Not as sexy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well... could be because that link is not for the the new product they just announced. That's an old product.

    11. Re:Not as sexy. by angelo · · Score: 1

      No, the superdrive is that LS-120 disk. 120mb in an attempt to beat zip disks.

      I am so happy that both of them were taken out by CD-R and DVD-R formats.

    12. Re:Not as sexy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I know who I'd rather "plug in"."

      yes, but the truth is all you'll be able to get is the janitor, not the supermodel

      You've got to get rid of the bad mustache and get some muscle tone.

    13. Re:Not as sexy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey homeboy, way to ignore his point.

      Point being that Macs are simply cheaper when you factor in the form...factor.

      PC's are cheap because you get get cheap ugly boxes, which is s plus in most cases, but when you need elegence and style, you get....a Mac.

    14. Re:Not as sexy. by autechre · · Score: 2

      A few clicks from the front page of apple.com:

      http://www.apple.com/imac/superdrive.html

      It's a combination DVD-R/CD-RW drive, which is oh so many times better than the DVD-ROM that Gateway gives you.

      --
      WMBC freeform/independent online radio.
    15. Re:Not as sexy. by styopa · · Score: 2

      Frankly, I think both look ugly. When I first saw the new G4 iMac I could only think of the servo robots from Red Dwarf. It's a great TV show but I never thought the servo robots were sexy. This new thing, the Gateway model, looks like a glorified etch-a-sketch. Both look like toys.

      The G4 Cube, now that was sexy. Powerful, practical, with an interesting design that didn't give it the look of merely a toy. It is too bad they didn't sell well enough.

      I have never been a fan of combined monitor and machine. The attempt at effeciency while trying to make it artistic reminds me of the Constructivist movement, and you end up with something that does an okay job at both. If they allowed for the monitor to detach and connect onto other stablizing platforms so that you can A) get a better monitor without replacing the whole computer, and B) have more ability for personal arrangement of the equipment I might have been pleased.

      To each his/her own.

      --
      Disclamer - Opinion of Person
    16. Re:Not as sexy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SuperDrive (1987): Apple's 3.5 inch floppy drive that can read and write single and double density disks. Later adopted as the replacement for the 5.25 inch floppy by all other personal computer manufacturers.

      SuperDrive (1998): 120MB floppy disk drive that was backwards compatible with older floppies. Attempted to compete with IoMega's Zip disks.

      SuperDrive (2001): Apple's name for optical drives that can read and write both CD's and DVD's. They could have called them "combo drives" but "combo" already referred to CD-RW/DVD-ROM drives.

    17. Re:Not as sexy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason the iMac is the single best-selling computer model of all time is because it meets the needs of its users. Yes, the bump from 13.8 inch viewable to 15" viewable in early 2002 seems behind the curve to you, but the displays are that size for the same reason that subnotebooks have 10 inch screens: that's what the situation calls for.

      iMacs have always had handles so that they can be moved easily (the display's arm is the handle on the iMac G4) and they have always been as compact as possible. It's meant to be the most personal of desktop personal computers, not a big workstation that you have to get a special desk for. I think Apple knows what they're doing here, considering the number of orders they have for iMac G4. Two of my friends already bought them, both machines replacing x86 PC's. Both users are very, very, very happy with them. For one user, it is her first Mac, and she is overjoyed.

    18. Re:Not as sexy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SuperDrive (1987): Apple's 3.5 inch floppy drive that can read and write single and double density disks. Later adopted as the replacement for the 5.25 inch floppy by all other personal computer manufacturers.


      Not quite. Neither 3.5" PC floppy drives or the third-party 3.5" USB floppy drives for Macs are generally capable of dealing with 400KB, 800KB, and (unadvertised) 1.7MB Mac floppy formats. (A few PCs have 2.88MB floppy drives, but that format never really caught on.)


      With the right version of MacOS, the SuperDrive is perfectly capable of dealing with 360KB, 720KB, and 1.44MB PC floppy formats.


      The difference is in the IWM (Integrated Wozniak Machine) circuitry on the motherboards of most of the Macs that supported internal floppies.

    19. Re:Not as sexy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      >It's a tool.


      And so are--oh forget it, this is just too easy.

  9. Knock-off?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    This thing looks nothing like the iMac. Its design goals aren't even the same. Computers and monitors have been melded together for years now, why does the introduction of an LCD make it like the iMac?

    1. Re:Knock-off?? by neuroticia · · Score: 1

      Besides which, I was in Gateway last summer before the new iMac came out and I saw something amazingly similar to that. Either they were already moving in that direction when all Apple had on market was the crazy-colored ones, or the computer was hidden inside of a cabinet.

      -Sara

  10. It's not a rip-off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These "PC glued to the back of the TFT" machines have been available from various vendors long before the new iMac was presented and are therefore not rip-offs.

  11. Re:The article text... by quantaman · · Score: 2

    As much respect as I have for the /. effect I think that CNET might jusst be able to take it;)

    --
    I stole this Sig
  12. Apple was still first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    The 20th Anniversy mac came out in 96 and was an all in one lcd computer. So gateway was not first.

    1. Re:Apple was still first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's still a nice machine too, I have one with a g3 up grade and 512 megs of RAM, OSX runs great on the old dog.

    2. Re:Apple was still first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Nope. That's wrong.

      The TRS-80 Model 100 computer came out in the early 80's and was an all in one LCD computer.

      So yet again, Apple chased the tail lights.

    3. Re:Apple was still first by markj02 · · Score: 2

      There have been plenty of all-in-one desktop LCD computers prior to the 20th anniversary mac, not to mention zillions of laptops.

    4. Re:Apple was still first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Model 100 is a portable computer with a two-line LCD akin to the status display on a server. We are clearly talking about desktops with integrated flat panel displays replacing integrated CRT's.

      While I agree this is a stupid issue to even discuss, the writer of this article credits Gateway with the introduction of the first all-in-one flat panel desktop computer when they were clearly not the first. It isn't like IBM was the first ... the article talks about "Gateway" and "Apple" and says Gateway did it before Apple, when Apple was actually first. Facts are facts. If you can compare the iMac G4 (2002) to the Profile LCD (2000), you can compare the Profile to the 20th Anniversary Mac (1997).

      If you want to really split hairs, in 2000 Apple switched their standalone displays to a one-cable connection. You could make a case that a PowerMac with 15" flat panel is an all-in-one with the display hooked on by a single flexible cable for easy positioning and a snap-on connector for easy upgrading to 17" and 22" displays.

      This shit is goofy, but if the author wants to say someone's first, he/she ought to have done 5 minutes of Web research to see who really was first. These are tech companies ... it's all on the Web.

  13. Thats the profile 3, not the profile 4. by Milkyman · · Score: 4, Informative

    THe picture they show is of the profile 3, not the new profile 4.

    1. Re:Thats the profile 3, not the profile 4. by theancient2 · · Score: 1

      Also note that the Profile 3 (a current product) was out before the iLamp. In other words, Gateway isn't the one copying others on this one. In fact, the idea of an all-in-one computer with an LCD display is hardly new. Whoever submitted this article didn't do their homework.

    2. Re:Thats the profile 3, not the profile 4. by danwatt · · Score: 1

      Right, like Compaq did this what, 5 years ago with the 3000 series (Chamelion or something like that).. Apple just finally did it, and now everyone thinks that they came up with the whole idea of an integrated computer/LCD.

      Well, one slight correction, the LCD is still external from the computer. The Profile 3, as with all prior products, has everything in one big, bulky unit. The iLamp is uniqe in that the LCD is free from the bulk of the actual computer.

    3. Re:Thats the profile 3, not the profile 4. by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

      You make a good point, but for all the searching I can't seem to find any pictures of the new "Profile 4", just and article from zdnet and newseek (google search Gateway and "profile 4"). If anyone can lay their hands on some pictures of the "Profile 4" I think we would all be able to make better judgment on the look of the computer.

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    4. Re:Thats the profile 3, not the profile 4. by Digitalia · · Score: 1

      Apple released their anniversary computer which was an integrated PC and LCD. They did do it first, back in 1997. A great looking computer, even today, but it followed the typical Mac trend by having a price that would choke a Rockefeller. You can check out a good site on it at this site.

      --
      Pax Digitalia
    5. Re:Thats the profile 3, not the profile 4. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The TRS-80 Model 100 computer came out in the early 80's and was an all in one LCD computer.

      So yet again, Apple chased the tail lights.

    6. Re:Thats the profile 3, not the profile 4. by Noobie · · Score: 1

      They are all copycats. That 'iLamp'- design is allready used on some table lamps. I bought my lamp last year. And it looks very nice if I may add..

    7. Re:Thats the profile 3, not the profile 4. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmm.....I've seen it, but i think i would be breaking some clause in my employment contract to show the slashdotters. The Profile 4 is a 4th generation unit, no its not a imac clone. Anyhoo, I think that you be pleasantly surprised, by its formfactor

  14. A clone? by kiltedtaco · · Score: 1

    I don't see any resemblance. Am I looking at the right picture? Or is gateway cloneing the idea of a LCD and a computer in one box? That's been around since the iMac and cheap LCD's have existed. Overall, if anything, this is a CRT iMac clone.

  15. The picture is NOT gateways new model by plone · · Score: 1

    If anyone bothered to read the article (ie CmdrTaco), you would realise that the picture refers to the Profile 3, Gateways current LCD based computer. The model that Gateway is basing on the new Imac is the Profile 4, which the article does not show.

    1. Re:The picture is NOT gateways new model by ArnoldYabenson · · Score: 1
      It seems like even the submitter didn't read the article.


      "CNet has an article about the first (?) inevitable PC imitation LCD..."


      Ummm...no. The article is about the fourth iteration of Gateway's imac-inspired line.


      However, anyone who thinks this is not a Mac wannabe, consider that the current model is dubbed the "3cx." CX? Gee, where did I see those letters together before?

    2. Re:The picture is NOT gateways new model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It seems like even the submitter didn't read the article."

      "Ummm...no. The article is about the fourth iteration of Gateway's imac-inspired line."

      Ummmmmmmmm......no. It seems that the submitter of the above needs to read the caption and the *whole* article. The article is (mostly) about the fourth generation, the picture is of the third.

    3. Re:The picture is NOT gateways new model by ArnoldYabenson · · Score: 1
      Ummm....yet again, no. The article is about the foutrth iteration, as I said. I didn't mention the picture. I don't care about the picture. Web publishers like to have illustrations and, in the absence of a pic of the Profile 4 they used the Profile 3. BFD.

      My point is the submitter did not seem to have read the article.

  16. It does look like an iMac by yerricde · · Score: 1

    Not to mention that it looks nothing like the new iMac - the whole system is contained in the same case as the display, which the iMac specifically avoided.

    In other words, it looks a bit like an old iMac, except with an LCD panel. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

    One problem: where is the *D-ROM drive?

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
    1. Re:It does look like an iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in the new iMac? if you bothered to spend 10 seconds looking, its in the very front of the iMac's base.

    2. Re:It does look like an iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, sorry, but putting all the computer parts in one box instead of two does not an iMac ripoff make.

      Transparent plastic was an iMac innovation. Perhaps aspects of the friendly-looking design. And the lamp-like design of the new iMac is an Apple innovation. But saying any all-in-one design is a Mac ripoff is a bit stupid.

      The disk drive is on the side. Here's a picture of the old model, which has been around for ages, and looks just like the "new iMac ripoff" design...

    3. Re:It does look like an iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in the new iMac? if you bothered to spend 10 seconds looking, its in the very front of the iMac's base.

      He was probably asking about the pictured Gateway. I couldn't find it either.

    4. Re:It does look like an iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It popped in and out of the side of the computer on the origional profile. Not slot loaded, but still cool.

    5. Re:It does look like an iMac by LinuxInDallas · · Score: 1

      I remember reading an article in Time about the new imac. Steve apparently didn't want the side mounted CD drive because they aren't as fast as horzontal mount.

  17. Why does style have to be feminie? by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    The materials and the look of the iMac are far too feminine. The iMac is the VW of comuters and most guys I think would be embarrassed driving a VW (at least any straight guy).

    Why not use more "maculine" materials? There is a lot of cool design work you could do with red and blue anodized metals, surgical steel, carbon fiber or other industrial-type materials. Yes, Apple does use something respectable in the Tbook, but the rest of the line is for girls, period.

    1. Re:Why does style have to be feminie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're too hung up on this.

      Really.

    2. Re:Why does style have to be feminie? by szcx · · Score: 2

      Is that you, John Dvorak?

    3. Re:Why does style have to be feminie? by damn+dirty+ape · · Score: 1

      A real man wouldn't feel embarrassed using the iMac or driving a VW.

    4. Re:Why does style have to be feminie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So simply because it's bright white, it's feminine? So I suppose lab coats are feminine too then?

    5. Re:Why does style have to be feminie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You've got to be kidding me. New Volkswagons are pure, muted sex on wheels. There's a lot to be said for driving something truly refined and classy instead of a rolling, rattling circus, as is the case with so many others.

      Sadly, your laughable homophobia prevents you from experiencing the same joy. You know what they say about men who see femininity where there is none...

    6. Re:Why does style have to be feminie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You've got to be kidding me. New Volkswagons are pure, muted sex on wheels.

      Not outside the Castro it isn't. The above poster is correct. Do you still have the flowers in the vase of your Bug?

    7. Re:Why does style have to be feminie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VWs are feminine? News to me. Jettas kick ass.

    8. Re:Why does style have to be feminie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could haul three (count them!) Tektronix 500 series Oscilloscopes in the trunk of my '84 Jetta. Those are the huge tube models from the 60's. Now that was a serious trunk.

    9. Re:Why does style have to be feminie? by gmhowell · · Score: 2

      Judging by the responses, you seem to have touched quite a nerve amongst the androgenous (sp) set.

      FWIW, I've taken it that you are referring to the New Beetle's.

      And for that, I can't fault you. A wonderful, utilitarian auto, like the Golf, has been sacrificed on the alter of style, the New Beetle. Bleh.

      The turbo-Beetles are too-little, too-late to save the New Beetle from being 'a chick car'.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  18. Apple seeps by bluecalix · · Score: 1

    I like to see Apple's beautiful designs and ideas seep into the general PC marketplace, but once again, the copy is only skin deep. Unless I'm looking at the picture wrong, the Gateway pc won't have the most important function of the new Imac design, i.e. the amazing flexibility of the placement and angle of the monitor.

    --
    e x p e c t d e l a y . c o m
  19. Missing innovation in iMac/Profile by Pyrosophy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I keep asking myself why they have these one-unit computers, but still use keyboards and mouses with cords... These packages seem like exactly what wireless keyboards and mouses would be ideal for

    Lots of reasons people stash their computers somewhere inaccessible is because of their lack of aesthetic value. But now that Apple has something with aesthetic value, it seems they ruin it by putting cords everywhere. It wouldn't drive up the price too much to put a wireless receiver in the box, would it?

    1. Re:Missing innovation in iMac/Profile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think one of the mail reasons the new iMac still uses mice and keyboards with cords is because so many of them will be used in schools computer centers.

      There are only so many frequencies available for the wireless mice. Can you imagine the headaches when one kid moves his mouse and the other 24 arrows move by themselves?

      But it would be cool-looking, no doubt.

    2. Re:Missing innovation in iMac/Profile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so what if someone logs stupid shit like that. worry more about important things like passwords, PIN numbers, SSNs, account numbers, etc.

    3. Re:Missing innovation in iMac/Profile by discstickers · · Score: 1

      No, it probably wouldn't cost that much. But the keyboard and mouse need to be powered by something and plugging in your perpipherals every week to recharge them isn't the "Apple Way." Now, if it had wireless power....

      --
      I have a shitty sig!
    4. Re:Missing innovation in iMac/Profile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so many of them will be used in schools computer centers.

      I hope not! Time for another taxpayer's revolt!

    5. Re:Missing innovation in iMac/Profile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have been using the same set of batteries in my Logitech wireless keyboard for close to a year now.. I don't see why the mac one would have to be plugged in every week...

    6. Re:Missing innovation in iMac/Profile by markj02 · · Score: 2

      Jobs actually talked about that. He said the main reason they didn't have wireless keyboards was because they didn't have a good way of powering them yet. When a wireless keyboard runs out of power, it's definitely not very intuitive, and if you are out of batteries and it's your only keyboard, you have a real problem.

    7. Re:Missing innovation in iMac/Profile by Bombcar · · Score: 1

      Then why not have the movement of the mouse generate electrical current to regcharge batteries, and the keypresses of the mouse and keyboard do the same? If it were done right, it should be able to generate power enough for a little radio signal. Kinda like those funky watches.

    8. Re:Missing innovation in iMac/Profile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple's mouses have ALWAYS plugged into the keyboard, which is why PC reviewers have often complained that Apple's mouse cables are too short. They weren't thinking that it only has to go between your hand (where the mouse is) and the keyboard.

      Apple's mouse and keyboard and very attractive and use transparent cables. The fact that their non-wireless-ness is one of the biggest criticisms of the iMac G4 just says how good the machine is. It's an ironic complaint considering that all of Apple's machines have had integrated 802.11 wireless networking since 1999.

  20. erm... who is copying whom? by Sodakar · · Score: 0

    ...it's not about who's copying who. Heck, you're comparing apples to oranges, as there's a considerable design difference in having all the hardware (CPU, RAM, drive, etc...) in the *base* (Apple iMac) as opposed to the LCD (Gateway Profile)

    Besides, as you can see from Gateway's Support Page, they've had the Profile for over 2-3 years -- with the first model being a 400MHz machine.

    In all fairness, Apple isn't the only one that "Thinks Different" -- of course, I will concede that Gateway's Profile series wasn't too successful, and that Apple once again shows that it has a keen sense of timing -- thus allowing them to "Succeed Different". But to call Gateway's Profile a "knock-off" is not quite fair...

    Oh well.

  21. This isn't anything new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "On topic comment: Hasn't gateway done something like this before? Of am I confused with another OEM outlet?"

    Ok as an employee of the cow the Profile series has been around for at least three years and has had the same design as the Profile 3 that is pictured now unless Gateway is going to redesign the system so that it isn't an all in one unit I don't see how this can be considered news or competition with the iMac.

    1. Re:This isn't anything new by davedeep1 · · Score: 1

      For what I know, Gateway had this machine out before the new iMac was released at MacWorld. My school had an entire lab of the Gateway LCD/computers in the fall.

  22. Large LCD screens by perdida · · Score: 5, Funny

    are, unfortunately, untenable in a home with children and cats in it. at least my trusty glass screen will not leak goo all over the place when slashed by the claws of an angry monitor-sitting feline.

    Furthermore, where is there room for the cat on a flatscreen anyway? They have to sit in front of the screen, getting static-cling created furballs between you and what you're looking at, or behind the screen, which removes the motivation for the whole computer-cat experience in the first place, pissing off the computer user.

    1. Re:Large LCD screens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats what the over is for. I hate cats so much I have no idea why people seem to enjoy them so.

    2. Re:Large LCD screens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i make my dog sit in the corner to punish him :(

    3. Re:Large LCD screens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -1 Troll eh? It's nice to see that some dumbass moderator wasted points uselessly modding this down as opposed to modding good comments up. Was it the cat joke or the kid joke that got it modded down? Or was it the fact that I disagreed with someone because I've had a different experience than they have? Or was it that my joke just wasn't as cute or happy as the parent post? Just so I know how to phrase future commentary to steal the most mod points away from morons who don't know how to use them.

    4. Re:Large LCD screens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What kind of thin-skinned pussy modded this down as a -1 Troll?

      It's funny as hell

  23. Gateway is just.. by A_Non_Moose · · Score: 2

    Giving the customer what they want.

    And if Apple gets pissed and sends in the lawyers, fine.

    But know this: I think Gateway will not be cowed!

    {mmph..snort..ahahahaa}

    .

    --
    Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
  24. I don't see it by szcx · · Score: 4, Funny
    The Profile 3 shown in the article looks nothing like the new iMacs. Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel. And people complain about Slashdot editors.

    Hell, this makes me want to subscribe to Slashdot just to maintain the current level of editorial integrity. God forbid a shortage of funds leads them down the road of c|net banality.

    1. Re:I don't see it by dhovis · · Score: 2
      As some other people have pointed out, and I will point out here.

      The pictures are of the Profile3, and the article is talking about the upcoming Profile4. There are no pictures of the Pofile4 in the article, they just say it will be more iMac-like than the Profile3 (big surprise, a PC company following Apple's lead).

      --

      --
      The internet is the greatest source of biased information in the history of mankind.

  25. Picture wrong. by MindStalker · · Score: 5, Informative

    The picture on the article is of the profile 3 (which they have been selling for a long time now.) The new profile 4 is going to look like an iMac, but they havn't released any pictures of it yet. And the article has very little details.

    1. Re:Picture wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then why waste the time and bandwidth and put this on /. in the frist place. Wake us up when this vaporware condenses.

    2. Re:Picture wrong. by Laerien · · Score: 1

      I agree - the picture is of the Profile3. The heading "imac imposter" is quite ridiculous! The Profile has been around for years! If anything the imac is the imposter. In any case the Profile4 is an enhanced Profile3 and looks nothing like the new imac...

  26. Huh? Doubtful you could /. News.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This isn't Timmy's dorm computer you're hitting.

  27. Re:The article text... by CoolVibe · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I don't know, I've seen 'em crap out before. Better safe than sorry...

  28. Nothing New from Gateway! by suwalski · · Score: 4, Informative

    Gateway actually had a PC with a monitor with a built in PC about 4 years ago (I don't think it was LCD). Anyhow, same time the iMac was coming ou,t or even before.

    Take a look at Eurocom. They've had the LP260 All-in-one LCD PC for over a year now. They beat Apple to it, and I think it's a very cool design.

    Point is, everyone's 'ripping' everyone elses ideas off in today's industry, to the point that you can't really have an original product without hinting other products.

    1. Re:Nothing New from Gateway! by bstreiff · · Score: 0

      > Gateway actually had a PC with a monitor with a built in PC about 4 years ago (I don't think it was LCD).

      That would probably be the Gateway Astro, and, yes, it didn't use a LCD, but rather a CRT.

    2. Re:Nothing New from Gateway! by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Actually, Apple has had all-in-one Macs from the early 90's. These include the Mac TV (black case w/Quadra and TV tuner built in), performa 5xx series on up through the G3 AIO (giant tooth). These were mostly sold to schools so they may not be that well known.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    3. Re:Nothing New from Gateway! by LiENUS · · Score: 1

      i think i have one of those gateways
      for some reason it likes to lose its ip and not regain it via dhcp when you turn it off... tis a strange creature.

    4. Re:Nothing New from Gateway! by schwatoo · · Score: 1

      "Actually, Apple has had all-in-one Macs from the early 90's."

      Um, try the first Mac ever released in 1984. Or perhaps even the Apple Lisa the year before. All Macs up until the Mac II and several other models afterwood were all in one (the Mac SE, SE/30, Classic, Colour Classic and a few others)

      --
      I have trouble with passwords among other things.
    5. Re:Nothing New from Gateway! by hector66 · · Score: 1

      Sorry but Eurocom makes Gateway look well built. And IBM made their X series about 2 years ago or more, with their current models trimmer and some sporting 17" screens. separately: Yes the display on the iMac does wobble a bit after extreme use. Keep in mind those displays are getting tugged around more than a puppie leashed to a four year old. The demo iMacs are probably seeing more than 100 times as much movement for the screen than the end users' systems will.

      --
      -- I have an extremely witty sig, but you're not good enough to see it.
    6. Re:Nothing New from Gateway! by enrayged · · Score: 0

      if you mean the CRT model you are referring to the Astro

      http://www.gateway.com/support/product/astro/350 06 00/350060001.jpg

      made for one hell of a tech support call...

    7. Re:Nothing New from Gateway! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spartacus (20th century flat panel mac) came at least 6 years before your gateway crap. Also macs were way ahead in hacing a monitor built in to a pc (think 1984).

    8. Re:Nothing New from Gateway! by geekoid · · Score: 2

      Yes, because before then Apple never sold a computer with then screen built in. at least, not before 1982. sheesh.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  29. LCDs by ackthpt · · Score: 2
    I'm not ready to let go of the boxes yet. CRTs, yes, the NEC 1700+ looks like a winner to replace the bulky monitor which occupies 40% of the desk, but they can take my boxen when they pry them from my cold, dead arms.

    BTW: What's with the redirection of www.slashdot.org to freakydots? I thought there were going to be no pop-under or basically dirty trick ads.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  30. SUV's by digitalhermit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anyone remember when SUV's really started taking off? All the auto companies started ripping apart pickup trucks and bolting on a new chassis. The end result was a Frankensteined monstrosity that was easy to tip over, handled poorly, and had the worst traits of cars and trucks. I just took a loot at the new Gateway, and it looks like they took a laptop apart and attached it to a metal fan base. It too has the worst features of a laptop and a desktop PC (difficult/impossible to upgrade, relatively immobile, bad ergonomics, and comparatively high price tag).
    Where's the design? Half the people who buy these things are looking for something that goes well with the Art Deco interior of their social convergence area.

    1. Re:SUV's by n-baxley · · Score: 2

      Well, what you just saw was gateway's old model which has been around for awhile and is not a hurried-to-market iMac lookalike, but might be a poorly designed all-in-one flat panel PC. But it was a leader, not a follower and they at least deserve credit for that.

    2. Re:SUV's by toast0 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      as far as i can tell, these days SUV's are just last years minivan, w/ four doors (no sliding door), a hatchback (they minivans allready had one), and a lift kit.

      at least the pickup inspired ones had character (i've got a '78 scout II, one of the better SUV's in my opinion, and if you disagree, mine has 'dual wall' steel construction, so my SUV can break your SUV :)

    3. Re:SUV's by gmhowell · · Score: 2

      It's highly unlikely that the original poster knows of the original SUV's (Rovers, FJ-40, scout II, Bronco I, CJ's, etc, etc.) and mistakenly equates the Ford Excursion with an SUV, a common mistake made by... 99% of the world:)

      He is probably also mistaken in believing that Acura MDX and other unibody vehicles are SUV's. Again, marketing works wonders.

      FWIW, I used to have a CJ-5. Undestructible little bastard (for reason best not shared, it ran at 40 mph with NO OIL for at least five minutes. Filled it up, and it ran for at least another 10000 miles before I sold it. Gotta love a 7 main bearing engine).

      Did International ever solve the 'rotting body' problem? One of the things that kept me from ever looking for one.

      (And yes, as long as the body was solid, you could bounce the suckers off as much stuff as the SUV's in the arcade games with just as many repercussions:)

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    4. Re:SUV's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hate to top your CJ-5 story but while missing an oil drain plug I drove a 91 Honda Accord with 180k miles for 5 minutes at 50mph (on the freeway) and then for a few more minutes at 30mph after I got off the freeway trying to find an auto supply store. Immediately after replacing the drain plug and oil I drove 2 hours climbing 7000 feet into the Sierra Nevadas. Just recently hit 190k.

    5. Re:SUV's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually very likely that the OP knows about the original SUVs, as he's actually driven (or ridden) in many of them in places where they are actually useful. To paraphrase a former politician, "I've driven the FJ-40, and the Ford Excessive is no Fj-40." The OP is also familiar with the Acura MDX and its origins. You're probably too young to remember the original SUVs outside of a google search, but I remember them fondly. Now if you really wanted to play the role of wise old man, try telling about the *many* problems with the cj-5 outside of the ones that have become such a part of the lore that anyone with a browser can locate, and claim to be knowledgeable. Geez, it's like some of these folks that claim to know about the early days of the PC/Web/ArpaNET/BBS based solely on their readings of the ASCII archives.

    6. Re:SUV's by toast0 · · Score: 2

      well... keeping the truck in southern california helps keep the rust at bay.

      that said, there is significant body rust on my truck, but most of it is on the roof of the vehicle, or in areas that aren't significant to structural integrety (theres a large spot on the passenger side fender, near the door, a lot of other scouts i've seen on the net have a large spot in the same place)

  31. It's a beautiful day in the Neighborhood.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can you say iOpener? Sure, I knew you could.

  32. What's the startup sound? by red_dragon · · Score: 1

    What sound does this Gateway computer make in place of the Mac "bong"? Moo? Hopefully it's a properly digitised "moo" they recorded, otherwise it might end up saying "moof" instead.

    --
    In Soviet Russia, Jesus asks: "What Would You Do?"
    1. Re:What's the startup sound? by analog_line · · Score: 1

      ...and then people would start mistaking it for Apple's Clarus, the dog-cow.

    2. Re:What's the startup sound? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When a PC undergoes hardware failure and can't pass BIOS boot, you hear a series of beeps.

      On the Mac, you hear a stereo recording of tires screeching and then a car violently smashing into something, with glass bouncing all over.

    3. Re:What's the startup sound? by dead_penguin · · Score: 4, Funny

      What sound does this Gateway computer make in place of the Mac "bong"?

      I've never seen a case mod that turned a Mac into something like *that*, but given the alternative image that Apple occasionally tries to follow I wouldn't be surprised if someone went and did this.

      Startup sound in that case? Definitely a gurgle!

      --

      It's only software!
    4. Re:What's the startup sound? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to see a new Mac with the "Moof" of Clarus the famouse dog cow for a start up sound that you very much.

    5. Re:What's the startup sound? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The series of beeps on the PC BIOS test has meaning. The combination of long and short beeps tells you what's wrong.

      I imagine the 'shit out of luck' sound effect on the Macintosh is impressive to the kind of people who buy a Mac, but it must piss off the tech support people who have to figure out what the hell is wrong with the machine, cuz it's sure as hell not a meaningful error code.

  33. You figure they'd be more original by qurob · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why doesn't someone like Dell or Compaq, with their billions of dollars, hire some designers to come in and create some nice looking systems?

    There's nothing uglier than a giant case full of empty space. Even their laptops are bigger, thicker, and have less features.

    And other than Apple and Sony, does anyone else have integrated FireWire on most/all of their systems? No!

    1. Re:You figure they'd be more original by linuxbert · · Score: 1

      Eurocom Does. Also one of their laptops has a built in memstick / sd card reader

    2. Re:You figure they'd be more original by zulux · · Score: 2

      Why doesn't someone like Dell or Compaq, with their billions of dollars, hire some designers to come in and create some nice looking systems?

      Dell tried this when the first Imac came out and lost a bunch of money - Dell's core competency is selling cheap boxes made with easily sourced parts. They are the Walmart/Microsoft of computers - high volume,disposible, and cheap, and anything that gets in the way of their message is a waste of time.

      Of course we all know that crappy hardwzare/software has a horrible return on investment - but your average consumer doesen't.

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    3. Re:You figure they'd be more original by WiggyWack · · Score: 1
      Why doesn't someone like Dell or Compaq, with their billions of dollars, hire some designers to come in and create some nice looking systems?

      Why doesn't Ponderosa make their restaurants look like Morton's Steak House? Or why doesn't Kia have sleek designs like Porsche?

      Cost. Dell is the Kmart of the computer industry. And Compaq... They're just trying to stay alive.

      --
      Macintosh humor! MacComedy.com
    4. Re:You figure they'd be more original by Namarrgon · · Score: 2
      does anyone else have integrated FireWire on most/all of their systems? No!

      Who cares? I can get a generic two-port FireWire card (or USB 2.0, or whatever) for $13 from Pricewatch, for my ugly but oh-so-expandable box. Hell, FireWire ports get thrown in as bonuses on video & sound cards these days.

      That's why I won't be buying an iMac (or Profile) anytime soon.

      --
      Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    5. Re:You figure they'd be more original by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      And how do you plan to install those cards into a laptop?

    6. Re:You figure they'd be more original by aliebrah · · Score: 2

      And other than Apple and Sony, does anyone else have integrated FireWire on most/all of their systems? No!

      Dell already has one. Check out the Inspiron 8200. I just placed an order for one of these earlier this week. I think it'd be a safe bet that all their new lines will have 1394 built in.

    7. Re:You figure they'd be more original by qurob · · Score: 1


      The 8200 is a brick...but back on topic:

      They still don't have it on most/all their systems, one or two doesn't count. Look at the feature sets on Apple's systems sometime.

    8. Re:You figure they'd be more original by qurob · · Score: 1

      The whole point is that you shouldn't have to add these in. They should come with it! Apple systems come with (for now, at least) great video and sound systems. In 2-3 years when the computer is obsolete beyond belief (but still very usable), I'll just plunk down $1500 for another machine.

      My car is pretty expandable. But it came with the 8 speaker, 400 watt cd player, GPS navigational system, leather seats, alarm, sportier wheels/tires......

      Could I have added those all myself? Sure. Would the aftermarket parts be better than the factory? Probably. Is it that big of a deal, and worth the hassle, to me?

      The point is, Apple has all the great technologies included. LCD's, CDRW/DVDRW, FireWire, Gig ethernet....

      Would your computer be okay if it came with no printer port, network card, or sound, since you can just throw more cards in your beige box?

    9. Re:You figure they'd be more original by asv108 · · Score: 2

      Well with the exception of DV editing and an ipod what would one use firewire for? I guess you need integrated firewire on macs since there is not enough room to add multiple hard drives. The "ugly" alluminum box I have has 4 drives spinning in it.

    10. Re:You figure they'd be more original by qurob · · Score: 1

      CDRW's for one

      They beat IDE drives, which hog the CPU

      They also beat complicated SCSI setups

    11. Re:You figure they'd be more original by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point is that the IMac *HAS* to come with these because there's no way to expand the damn thing. Whether you want them or not, if you buy an IMac, you payed for them.

      Installing a card in a PC is no where near as hard as installing GPS in your car. Depending on the case, you might not even need any tools at all.

      "Would your computer be okay if it came with no printer port, network card, or sound, since you can just throw more cards in your beige box?"

      Printer ports are always part of the mobo. Many mobos have onboard sound and nics as well. My point is, don't be rediculous. Your comparison is asinine. Most people don't need LCD's, DVDRW, FireWire, Gig ethernet. Don't confuse necessity with high-end/little used features. Unless you travel a lot to places your unfamiliar with, how often do you really need GPS?

  34. Why does style have to be masculine? by mibat · · Score: 1

    This is completely ridiculous. I'm not against more industrial-style designs in computers (something besides the beige box, please) but how is this masculine vs. feminine? So the iMac doesn't have to be covered in pink fluffy bunnies to be considered "too girly?" Please. It's a computer. It's asexual. (I've never understood people addressing their company's tech. project as "sexy" unless it's porn.)

    I guess this is coming from a woman who doesn't need any more testosterone in her life, as she gets more than her daily dose from fellow CS students alone. (but does not feel insecure in the face of either the iMac or this theoretical industrial-influenced computer design.) By the way, everyone I know who owns a VW is a guy.

    1. Re:Why does style have to be masculine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VW, feminine?

      The VW bus? Buncha guys hit the road for a weekend, camp out.

      The original Bug? Hell, great little car. Cheap and solid. I've seen more tricked out Bugs in my life...:-)

    2. Re:Why does style have to be masculine? by Spankophile · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I know a few guys who drive the "New Beetle" and get called "fag" quite often, in their fag-wagons.

      Now don't get me wrong, I LOVE the old beetle, it was a culture thing. The new beetle's curves seem to give it a feminine feel over the more angular designs of other "European-influenced" cars. For example, compare the Bug with the Jetta.

      Anyhow, if it's curvy and can be described as "cute", it's probably feminine.

      Your computer may be asexual, but if it's pink with sparkles - it looks feminine.

    3. Re:Why does style have to be masculine? by Pussy+Is+Money · · Score: 1
      Please. It's a computer. It's asexual.

      Everything is sexual. Maybe you're asexual. I mean with you not recognizing these things.

      --
      Pushin' 'n dealin', shovin' 'n stealin'
    4. Re:Why does style have to be masculine? by presearch · · Score: 1

      fag-wagon huh?
      Have you ever waxed a New Beetle, preferably a red one? A delightfully sensual experience if there ever was one.

    5. Re:Why does style have to be masculine? by jawtheshark · · Score: 1

      I personally know "real men" who drive the New Beatle. It's a cute little thing, and a lot of guys like stylish products.
      Personally I drive what people refer to as a Squashed New Beatle and I do own an iBook. I love both machines :-) I barely even touch my x86 workstation (tough it has an LCD panel, which I paid big bucks for 1.5years ago) Nobody ever called me a fag, because I like style over function.

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
  35. C|Net should check their facts by petard · · Score: 5, Informative
    As others have noted, first off, the only similarity here appears to be that they both are all-in-ones with an LCD. The gateway doesn't appear to have any of the "bringing content-creation to the masses" focus that apple does. Moreover, though, the article states that

    The Poway, Calif.-based PC maker got into the all-in-one business with its original Profile computer in June 1999 on the coattails of the first iMac. Gateway, however, did beat Apple to the punch with the first all-in-one computer to feature a flat panel.


    Apple introduced the Twentieth Anniversary Macintosh, which was an all-in-one with an LCD, in May 1997. Oh well... I certainly don't read C|Net for the intelligent reporting. Actually, I'm not sure why I ever click an article that's linked there :-)
    --
    .sig: file not found
    1. Re:C|Net should check their facts by morcheeba · · Score: 2

      And I don't possibly see how C|Net could have known about the Monorail 7000 computer that came out at the end of 1997 (at $999 vs. the mac at $7,499)

    2. Re:C|Net should check their facts by sootman · · Score: 1
      Also, don't forget the Compaq Presario 3020 and 3060, released in mid-1996. 166-200 MHz MMX Pentium, 24 MB RAM (128 Max), 2-3.8 GB HD, 6x 4-disc CD changer, 12.1" 800x600 TFT screen, 2 MB VRAM, logitech cordless mouse. Very close, performance-wise, to what the iMac would be when it was released in late 1998 (G3/233, 32 MB RAM, 4 GB HD.) Who's trailing whom? Of course, the 3020/3060 was basically a high-end (at the time) desktop with a notebook screen and a price ($3000-$3500) to match, so they sold like crap and were quickly discontinued. I've got one and I love it. As a bonus, it's unnaturally stable-- with the early version of win95 that it came with, it goes 3-5 weeks without needing to be rebooted. I've never seen a 9x machine so stable.


      I can understand why C|Net was inaccurate-- if you do a google search for 'compaq presario 3020' or 3060, you'll get a link to a ZDNet page and then discover that it has been pulled.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    3. Re:C|Net should check their facts by demonbug · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure there were many hundreds of other all-in-one computers with LCD screens well before this twentieth-anniversary-mac. They used to be called Notebook or Laptop computers. The difference is that the newer, all-in-one computers have been carefuly designed to be more difficult to move around.

      Once again, mac-users claim a step forward when in actuality they have only taken a prettily-packaged step backwards (of course, all those PC makers like Gateway and Compaq seem intent on following them).

    4. Re:C|Net should check their facts by sparcv9 · · Score: 2

      Or how about Sun's SPARCstation Voyager that came out in 1994?

      --

      This is not a Fugazi .sig
    5. Re:C|Net should check their facts by asv108 · · Score: 2

      I really wouldn't classify Apple as beating Gateway to the punch with the 20th anniversary mac. With a $7,500 price tag and a limited release, the anniversary mac is more of a concept machine than a mass market box.

    6. Re:C|Net should check their facts by heim913 · · Score: 1

      In a response from the writer of the article, He said that he didnt include the TAM because its a $10,000 computer not intended for mass-market consumption.

      Either way, aimed for mass-market or not, Apple produced a AIO LCD computer before Gateway.

      Then, he proceeds with this:
      For the record, Dual Technology released an all-in-one LCD PC on April
      3, 1996, more than a year before Apple actually started selling the
      Twentieth Anniversary iMac. It was an attractive configuration, too, for
      its day: 75MHz Pentium processor upgradeable to 200MHz, 12.1-in SVGA TFT
      LCD screen, 8MB of RAM upgradeable to 128Mb, 1 GB hard drive, 6X CD-ROM
      drive, 16-bit audio card and Sound Blaster 16 Pro sound card.

      Nice, he even got the name incorrect; let that one slide.

      If this does exits, sure another company made an all-in-one with a lcd before Apple; but again his claim was that Gateway did it first.

  36. Integrated LCD and computer....hmmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many have integrated LCD and PC in one unit, Gateway has had the profile series for some time and Micros has been doing it for many many years. Lets not forget .... Laptops :)

  37. The original impostor by Daniel+Rutter · · Score: 2

    As far as PCs-that-look-like-CRT-iMacs go, there are lots of machines being sold under different labels that're all based on the bare-bones Palladine LCDpc, which I review here. It's a pretty nifty piece of gear, actually, provided you can get a bare-bones one for a decent price and don't mind lacerating yourself when you install hardware in it.

    1. Re:The original impostor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It's a pretty nifty piece of gear, actually, provided you can get a bare-bones one for a decent price and don't mind lacerating yourself when you install hardware in it.

      Duh...Didn't you know Mac-heads were masochistic?

  38. Hard to see the iMac inspiration in this one... by pinkpineapple · · Score: 1

    Kinda like MS XP vx. OS X comparison. Apple is way better on the design side, but it's more expensive and will run less apps. Same deal for hw and sw.

    Talking about the new iMac: has anyone noticed that the screen module tends to become lose from the arm attachment after some use. All the display models I've been playing with exhibit the problem. Could it be a flaw?

    PPA, the girl next door.

    --
    -- I feel better now. Thanks for asking.
    1. Re:Hard to see the iMac inspiration in this one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are tons of OS X apps, plus Classic all ones classic programs (which i never use anymore). Please stop spreading FUD.

    2. Re:Hard to see the iMac inspiration in this one... by fryke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How can you say Mac OS X is more expensive and running less apps? Count again:

      - Mac OS 9 software
      - Mac OS X software
      - X Window System software
      - Command line applications

      And about the price... What is Mac OS X? It's of course provided with all new macs, but if you buy it standalone, you pay 129$. What does Windows XP Professional Edition set you back? And I'm not talking OEM versions... *sigh*.

    3. Re:Hard to see the iMac inspiration in this one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, read her bio. Sounds like she's spreading more than fud. :)

    4. Re:Hard to see the iMac inspiration in this one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not "FUD" (Shit, do people even know what that means? Seems everyone likes to use it because it's the flavour of the week...) There are probably close to 1000 times as many programs available for the x86 platform than there is for all the Mac platforms put together.

    5. Re:Hard to see the iMac inspiration in this one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is only one Mac platform.

      I'm sure there are more x86 programs out there. 1000 times more seems like hyperbole.

      I will say this: the (sizeable amount) of software available for a Macintosh running MacOS X (classic, carbon, command line, etc) provides just as much functionality to most Mac users as the software available for x86 provides PC users.

      This, of course, doesn't include isoteric, custom-made buisness software and the like. Nor does it include the myriad virii and their ilk which themselve prolly make up half of the total available "software" for x86 systems (had to get my own tall-tale in there too).

    6. Re:Hard to see the iMac inspiration in this one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is only one Mac platform.

      Bullshit. There are more orphans in the Macintosh line than the average war zone.

  39. Get a notebook instead! by forgoil · · Score: 1

    They are smaller, portable, and more powerful than the slow iMacs. Is there even a question of what is the smartest thing to do?

    *bah* Now mod me -#inf all you Mac lovers

    (A Mac with dual G5@1.8Ghz would have been competetive though)

    1. Re:Get a notebook instead! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It isn't all about the MHz, you know. I bet you're one of those people who actually would consider buying an Intel Pentium 4.

    2. Re:Get a notebook instead! by forgoil · · Score: 2

      "Not about the MHz",

      then how about making it about processing power? Because the G4 lags behind, bad. I'm fully aware of what makes a CPU fast or not, and I know that a dual Pentium 4 Xeon 2.2GHz is enormously much fastar than a dual G4 1Ghz, not because of Mhz but because it's simply a faster CPU. To belive Apples rants about the Photoshop filters is naive at best.

      I would never buy something that is slower && more expensive, that simply doesn't make sense. I remember when I thougt the Amiga was all that there was, I grew up and vowed to never be that stupid again. I would only use what is best for me, whomever it might be that makes it. Today AMD makes the best CPUs for the buck, tomorrow it might be iNTEL again. Motorola/IBM will be hard pressed to get in the front.

  40. Straight outta 1997 by zealot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This thing has nothing to do with the IMac. Gateway isn't, and wasn't, the first to use the "profile pc" design.

    When I entered college in the fall of '97, my roommate has a machine like this from Compaq... it featured a Pentium 166 MMX processor, and a fairly crappy LCD.

    I'm not sure that Compaq was the first to develop and sell one of these, but they've been around for a while.

    I hate getting told that x has been made to copy y because y is popular, when x was really around for a long, long time before y gained any popularity. It reminds me of fashion trends in junior high...

    --
    He said, "You'll be able to tell your grandchildren that you helped assemble the first NT supercomputer," and I cringed.
    1. Re:Straight outta 1997 by k_187 · · Score: 1

      Apple made an all in one with an LCD for their 20th anneversary ('95 I think?). the 20th Anneversary Mac looks more like the Profile 3 than the new iMac. Granted the things cost like 10K when they came out, weren't that fast, and broke easily. I don't really know of any combos like this before that tho.

      --
      11 was a racehorse
      12 was 12
      1111 Race
      12112
    2. Re:Straight outta 1997 by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      Nope, the 20th anniversary Mac was just another in a series of all-in-one LCD systems made at about that time. It made its debut in '97, and was beat off the line by the aforementioned Compaq, the Monorail, and other PCs. It's just that '96-97 was when LCDs were giving the first hints of becoming reasonably affordable, so everyone wanted to put out a system with one of them in it.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

  41. You people are missing Japanese products by kazzuya · · Score: 4, Informative

    Forget this stuff. Check out the Vaio PCV-W101. It has TV tuner, DVD, 1280x768 LCD, 2 PCMCIA ports, i.Link, USB and what else.
    Japan is filled with those products.

    1. Re:You people are missing Japanese products by AndyChrist · · Score: 1

      IIRC, Hitachi and NEC had products in this general form (looking like the Rapeway model, not the IMac), 18 months ago.

      So are americans discovering the joys of having empty space to move around in?

  42. LCD Desktop Computers by Crash+McBang · · Score: 1

    If you're into neat designs, look at the Sony: Sony

    --
    To put a witty saying into 120 characters, jst rmv ll th vwls.
  43. Its Not a Nockoff by linuxbert · · Score: 1

    Many PC Manufactures had LCD all in one units prior to the iMac. Eurocom, IBM, even the Gateway
    exixted prior to the iMac.

    What makes the imac special is the arm, and how you can ajust the lcd in any direction you please
    plus its ultra cool styleing.

    it could be imitated, but imposible to reporduce.

    1. Re:Its Not a Nockoff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True ....the IBM Netvista X series was there way before the Mac was.

  44. Knock off????? by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 4, Informative
    How the heck is this a knock off of the LCD iMac? The Profile 3 is an all-in-one LCD machine. The profile 4 is an all-in-one LCD machine with a slimer design. The Profile 3 was out long before the LCD iMac. If the Profile 4 is keeping the Profile 3's physical layout of having all the components housed in the same housing as the LCD, unlike the iMac's housing of everything in a separate base.

    Calling this a knock off is just stupid.

    1. Re:Knock off????? by c0rtez · · Score: 1

      Yeah, seriously. No WAY is it a knock-off of the LCD Imac! Any diehard MacAddict will tell you: this thing is a knock-off of the 5-year-old Twentieth Anniversary Mac.

      Duh.

    2. Re:Knock off????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many 'Twentieth Anniversary Macs' were sold? Wasn't it mainly a novelty item for the suits and marketing people?

    3. Re:Knock off????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They must've been using a Pentium chip to calculate that 1997-1984 = 20.

    4. Re:Knock off????? by trcooper · · Score: 2

      Yeah, but Apple does every thing first. And as any Apple zealot will tell you, if it isn't an apple it just isn't good enough...

      Of course I'd do the same if I was constantly ripped off by a company charging a premium for sub-standard harware, that looks soooo pretty...

    5. Re:Knock off????? by geekoid · · Score: 2

      NJOt that you'll bother to look, but for apples 20th anniversery, they had an all in one LCD computer. Not that an LCD screen is much of a jump past any all in one computer....*coughMACcough*
      no I don't own a mac.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    6. Re:Knock off????? by c0rtez · · Score: 1

      20th anniversary of APPLE. not macintosh.

      peace

  45. Point - Counterpoint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I have to have my hands on something all day long, I'd much rather have them be on something feminine than masculine, as I think any straight guy would.

    1. Re:Point - Counterpoint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So do you go to work wearing a dress?

    2. Re:Point - Counterpoint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only on the weekends.

  46. What is the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is the point of a machine that cannot be upgraded? (and no, mac philes, the ability to put an extra DIMM into a system does NOT class it as 'upgradable')

    The mac has always promoted form over function; (no wonder it's favoured by designers) when your iMac is getting long in the tooth your options are either throw it away and buy a new one, or turn it into a fish tank.

    What's next - go faster stripes?

    1. Re:What is the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What sorta upgrades you talkin' about? A new pentium spaceheater? Ten feet of tubing and a high-powered pump to circulate liquid helium through the case to keep the shit cool? A new graphix card every year so you can get that extra 1fps playing quake?

      Other than shite like that, I can't really think of much that isn't in the imac already or is easy to add (airport card, more ram, hard-drive).

    2. Re:What is the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try motherboard, CPU, RAM, GFX, audio, HDD, DVD, CDR, TV cap and anything else that might take my fancy.

    3. Re:What is the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      motherboard and cpu - got me there, but if you really must upgrade those, then in my book you need a new computer anyway.

      ram - no problem. you can upgrade mac ram. the original poster doesn't count that as an upgrade tho.

      gfx - the gfx cards in the new imacs are pretty sweet. sure, there'll be bigger and better soon enough, but the people who buy imacs don't care so much.

      audio - built in. not much of an issue.

      hdd - firewire baby.

      dvd - built in. cdr/dvd-r.

      tv cap - haven't looked into it, but there must be firewire solutions for this. you don't need an internal PCI card for everything you know.

    4. Re:What is the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what about better audio? Buy a new mac.

      Better graphics? Buy a new mac.

      Better CPU? Buy a new mac.

      Blue laser DVD? Buy a new mac.

      And of course what you get ripped for an iMac you could have a very high end PC.

    5. Re:What is the point? by phillymjs · · Score: 2

      motherboard, CPU, RAM, GFX, audio, HDD, DVD, CDR, TV cap and anything else that might take my fancy.

      Time and time again, it has been explained to you thickheads that the iMac's target market DOES NOT DO THESE KIND OF UPGRADES. I'll say it again, to see if it can penetrate your concrete skull: The iMac's target market DOES NOT DO THESE KIND OF UPGRADES. They want to do word processing, e-mail, and web surfing, play some MP3s, and hook up their digital still and video cameras. Grandma does not spend her evenings installing a new video card in an attempt to to coax a few more FPS out of her lame-o, cookie-cutter FPS-of-the-month. The iMac she gets today, as taken out of the box, will do what she wants it to do until she keels over.

      If you want upgradability, however, there are plenty of upgradable Macs available. The Power Mac 7600 I'm typing this on, I bought new in 1996. It's 5.5 years old, and still works great. I've added USB, IDE, put in faster drives, and upgraded the processor twice in that time. Macs cost more at purchase time because they remain viable for significantly longer than PCs do, and their resale value shows it. If you don't believe me, look on eBay.

      ~Philly

  47. 20th Anniversary Mac, 5 years later by maggard · · Score: 5, Informative
    Actually this looks a lot more like Apple's 20th Anniversary Mac; essentially a laptop opened up with lots of built-in goodies.

    Integrated custom Bose sound system with woofer/power suppply, integrated TV & FM radio system, S-Video input, and of course the little leather pads on the keyboard. Oh, and the high tech metal bracket holding it up that reportedly cost over a hundred bucks each to manufacture. Originially sold for around $10,000 then as low as $2,000. Of course for 10k it arrived a limo and was set up for you by a tech in a tux (kid you not!) A review from when it first came out is on MacWorld

    Bet Gateway doesn't offer a tech in a cow suit to set theirs up...

    --
    I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
    1. Re:20th Anniversary Mac, 5 years later by phillymjs · · Score: 2

      Bet Gateway doesn't offer a tech in a cow suit to set theirs up...

      I'd settle for Ted Waitt, so I could pin him on the floor face-down and cut off that stupid, ponytail of his. Nothing more pathetic, IMHO, than a severely balding man with a ponytail.

    2. Re:20th Anniversary Mac, 5 years later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 20th Century Mac was a tricked out novelty computer. For fucking suits and marketing scum.

      Nobody else in their right mind would buy something like that.

    3. Re:20th Anniversary Mac, 5 years later by Anixamander · · Score: 2

      Don't forget that it also had a remote control for the TV tuner (with a leather slip case), and (my favorite) a pen and pencil set.

      People who see mine still ooh and ahh over it. I'm wondering at what point do I stop using it and pack it up as a collector's item. It would be a shame to put it away though.

      --
      Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball(TM)
  48. Oh! Someone's hit a nerve! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gee, look at how defensive everyone gets when someone mentions that iMacs or VWs may be feminine? I remember this type of reaction...once I was talking with his guy who was so gung ho on his new VW Bug. I mentioned in passing, "dude, isn't that kind of a chick car??"...and I watched his face and heart sink as he realized in a split second that until I shook him out of it, his entire sense of style had been shaped by feminine values.

  49. Apple was not the first. by InjuredLabMonkey · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you're talking about LCD terminals, IBM was really the first with their NetVista series. While it may have been lacking in power, it's simply ignorant to call Apple pioneers in that area.

    --
    ----------What the Chiquita banana?
    1. Re:Apple was not the first. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember: always read before posting.

      2*0*t*h A*n*n*i*v*e*r*s*a*r*y M*a*c*i*n*t*o*s*h

  50. A friend of mine had one of these... by singularity · · Score: 3, Informative

    A friend I lived with for a while had an older Gateway Profile 2 or 3 (where he got it from was unknown).

    A few comments, having used it a bit:

    1) The LCD quality was not very good. Colors were completely off. Off-axis views were not good at all (worse than most LCDs I have seen)
    2) The vertically mounted CD-ROM was a frequent problem. I am not sure if the new Profile 4 is going to have the same problem.
    3) Celeron-based. Enough said.
    4) The LCD eventually crapped out on it for no reason. It was more expensive to replace than the computer was worth at the time.

    I have played with the new iMac in a local Apple store and it seemed like a much better machine.

    --
    - (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
  51. Stealing? by Kalidor · · Score: 1

    Uhm, yeah .. looks just like the commercial model I saw in a store about .. say .. 6 months ago. It was being used as a Cashier's station. It was Gateway.

    --

    Code softly but carry a big magnet.

  52. nothing new - netvista by elliotj · · Score: 2

    IBM has had an all-in-one for ages: Netvista

    1. Re:nothing new - netvista by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jeez,

      they still put in a 16MB ATI Rage 128 video card!!!!! and in all models!!!!!!!!!

      *PUKE*

  53. OSX by archen · · Score: 2, Funny

    A quote from Apple's website:

    Mac OS X is a super-modern operating system...

    See, now the Gateway might be trying to improve it's looks, but does it have a SUPER-MODERN operating system?

  54. Re:Large LCD screens (and cats) by CoolVibe · · Score: 4, Funny
    Another thing is that cats just looove to sleep on top of CRT's because usually it's nice and warm. Also, they also like hanging their tail in front of your screen. This is their way of getting your attention other than sprawling over your keyboard and taking a nap on it.

    A large LCD screen will spoil their fun. My cats would be miffed with me if I took away this source of entertainment from them.

    Oh, I am digressing... Better post without +1 :)

  55. not the first gateway imac ripoff by DaoAcid · · Score: 1

    gateway also had a knockoff of the original imac, built-in monitor and all. i think it may have been called the solo or something. the thing to remember here, however, is that this is not aimed at the mac user, it's aimed at grandpa who sees that the imac is $1,799, but shucks ma', good old fashioned american company gateway has the "same thing" for a scant $1,699. in a market where total cost is the only thing that matters to ignorant users, can anyone blame gateway?

  56. Nice looking computers by Spit_Fire1 · · Score: 1

    If I have to sacrifice funtionallity, for aestics, thats where i draw the line, it's only availble with a 15inch flat screen, it's probably hard to upgrade, it uses usb for everything(which isn't a very bad thing, but usb has it's place, and it's not for hard drives, or cdrw drives) Why didn't they included firewire as an extra feture. Oh and for people who want pretty colours, there should be snap on covers for it, to match the carpet and drapes. :)

    --

    "The secret of success is to know something nobody else knows." -Aristotle Onassis
    1. Re:Nice looking computers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From what you say you must have seen the new iMac only on TV and did not even try spending 5 minutes reading the specs from apple.com

      It has 2 Firewire ports, five USB ports, it has SuperDrive which burns DCs and DVDs, and NVidia Geforce2.

      Could you spell TROLL?

      T*R*O*L*L

  57. Yawn... by Davoid · · Score: 1

    All-in-one PCs with LCDs have been around for a while. NEC and Sharp have had em on and off for years. Never got on the cover of Time magazine tho' The NEC one I saw a few years back went a few better than than the new iMac IMO. Other than the cords going out the back (Ethernet, Power) there was no extra clutter on the desktop.... wireless keyboard and mouse. With a wireless ethernet PC card one could get down to a single cable.

    The new iMac is all very elegant and all... but suffers the same problems as the old iMacs... once you start hooking up devices to this sleek "digital hub" pretty soon you have a snarling mass of cables all over your desk and a few power strips encrusted with wall-warts. For this reason I prefer a system that goes under the desk with all cables going through a "cable valve" at the back of the desk.

    -DU-...etc...

    --
    "Don't sweat the technique."
  58. Whoever submitted and posted... by Luminair · · Score: 1

    ...is a fool who has never entered a computer store.

    They were probably too worried about breathing the same air as those dreaded captital Windows users.

  59. I've Used One of The Profile 3s by ec_hack · · Score: 1

    I recently used one of these for a week on a temporary assignment at work. The unit I used had a Celeron III @ 1.33 GHz, 256 Mb, 30 gig HD, CD-RW, Floppy, PCMCIA slot, USB and Firewire ports, & ethernet connection. It's basically a laptop design on a stand. It worked well enough, although the color scheme of Windows XP was a little hard to distinguish in bad lighting and took some tweaks. One annoyance is that the fan runs only if the chassis gets hot and starts and stops - which was disconcerting in a bullpen with 25 or so of them. I'd not buy one for the house, but for business, they are handy - pull it out of the box, plug in the mouse/keyboard/net connection, boot, clone a standard load off the server, and you are good to go.

  60. Why it's not an iMac by maggard · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The coolest thing about the new iMac isn't that it's an LCD, its how it's mounted. Not on a big box but a smallish base, at eye height, with an infinitely flexible yet stable arm, surrounded by a nice frame.

    Let Jonathan Ive (its designer) go on about how "we wanted the user to violate the sacred plane of the monitor": Better put is it works. Around that high quality (though only 1024x768) perfectly poised LCD display is a frame that lets you casually reach out, grab it, adjust it, swing it about to share with someone else, nudge when you change position.

    Just plain flat out unconsciously interact with the Display without needing to fight it or worry about smudging or getting any thing wrong.

    That's AWESOME. You don't know how incredible until you've use it; afterwards everything else just sux. A display that fits folks, not the other way around, something Apple gets and the rest of the industry hasn't (nor likely will Gateway if their past is any guide.)

    Sure it may look like a "Sunflower", or more like a desk lamp or a face mirror. On the other hand those two are great examples of good design - they're popular because they work and just like they the new iMac screen is adept at putting light right where you want it, in your eyes, from whatever angle you're comfortable with. And if that kinda brilliant design isn't nerdly or butch enough for ya then go back to chipping with rocks 'cause once again Apple has raised the bar for PC design and once folks get a taste they're not going to accept the 2nd rate layouts, hear that Gateway?

    --
    I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
    1. Re:Why it's not an iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From what I have heard, the arm on the iMac is hardly stable. Store disply models are getting shopworn quite early on.

      Oh, and it's something Apple gets that the rest of industry doesn't.

      We've heard that one before. heh.

    2. Re:Why it's not an iMac by seanadams.com · · Score: 2

      Not on a big box but a smallish base, at eye height, with an infinitely flexible yet stable arm, surrounded by a nice frame.

      "Infinitely flexible" is probably going a bit too far, don't you think? It goes up and down, left and right, and it tilts. Big whoop. Have you seen the fully articulated, counter-weighted arms that are used in medical lasers and other equipment? Now I'm not saying Apple's display needs that kind of flexibility, but they stopped just one tiny step short of what I believe would have been a perfect monitor mount. It needs to PIVOT.

      Back around 1987-1989 Radius made a pivoting monochrome CRT for the Macintosh. It was absolutely brilliant. Wanna work on a full page Word document, turn it to portrait. Switch over to Dark Castle and turn it landscape. IIRC, you didn't even have to restart or change any settings, it would just resize the display automatically when you turned it.

      I'm sure this idea must have come up when they were designing the iMac. Why on earth did they leave it out??

    3. Re:Why it's not an iMac by maggard · · Score: 2
      Infinitely flexible" is probably going a bit too far, don't you think?
      OK, infinitely flexible within the bounds of reason for a consumer LCD.
      It needs to PIVOT
      AGREED. Its a pity that this wasn't included though I imagine with all of the other nifty engineering that went on this was just one step too far. The additionial range of motion would have likely complicated the cabling as well as required lots of fine-tuning (to prevent folks from regularly spinning their displays when they only wanted to shify them x/y.)

      Vertical-orientation monitors are a boon for anyone who reads and writes long stretches of material. Between the ever-increasing number of toolbars and the dead-space most web-pages leave (reasonably and rightly) vertical orientation is much more efficient. Indeed at one time Apple shipped a line of vertical orientation b/w displays; I used to manage in a university computer lab.

      Back around 1987-1989 Radius made a pivoting monochrome CRT for the Macintosh
      Yep, got one in storage. Can't recall if it needs a custom card or if was custom drivers. In either case they were top-end products that while popular in their time ended up without a market; Portrait Displays got their heritage.

      On the PC side I believe Cornerstone Monitors also once shipped pivoting displays though they're only doing oversize monitors now. Indeed I'm not sure if theirs ever shipped as a co-worker was testing a beta of theirs.

      But yeah; it would have been great if Apple had reintroduced to the public this feature. Perhaps it will appear in the next rev of the hardware along with a higher resolution display. Nonetheless I'm deeply impressed with the current "floating" display and feel it has really shown what Apple does best: Good engineering melded to great design.

      Imagine a MacOS X desktop as the display pivots, elements drifting to appropriate relative locations, no 45 degree sudden jump but an orderly progression. Very Jobs, possible under Aqua.

      --
      I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
    4. Re:Why it's not an iMac by geekoid · · Score: 2

      I agree, but I own't buy one until the arm has a proven track record.
      Its a great design, but it could easily be fowled up by poor manufacturing.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:Why it's not an iMac by maggard · · Score: 2
      I agree, but I own't [sic] buy one until the arm has a proven track record. Its [sic] a great design, but it could easily be fowled [sic] up by poor manufacturing.
      Certainly some mechanical engineer would have noticed any basic flaw and publicly pointed it out by now. So far none of the reviewers have noted any problems (they've had them longest) nor have the ones in stores begun to show any problems for all of their rough and heavy wear. If the arms were to begin to droop that would be an obvious design defect and Apple has an excellent record of remediation for those.

      Personally I'm waiting for the first revision on general principal (as noted in another thread pivoting would be great) but so far there seems no cause for concern.

      --
      I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
  61. Even Apple did this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not only has Gateway been pushing all-in-one-with-lcd computers for a while now but Apple did this with their older (603e based I think) 20th anniversary computer. That was also one sexy machine.

  62. Sheesh by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Absolute proof positive that no matter how different product X is from a Mac, Mac people will claim that product X was "ripped off" from the Mac. The proof used to be that Mac people constantly claimed that Windows was a "rip off" of the Mac even though the user interfaces are different in almost every possible way (with the exception of mouse and pixels).

    --
    Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    1. Re:Sheesh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoa! The claim that this is an imac knockoff is made by C/Net and the idiot /. editors who put this story up. I'm a "Mac person" and (a) I don't consider this a knockoff and (b) even if it was somehow demonstrated to be one, I wouldn't give a flyin' fuck.

    2. Re:Sheesh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, explain "application", "folder", "window", a disposal bin on the desktop, "zoom boxes", the "File" menu, the "Edit" menu, the little reminders that appear when you keep your cursor on a button (balloon help), and the "close box".

    3. Re:Sheesh by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1

      OK, you've covered the minor superficial elements. Now explain context sensitive menus, Alt-TAB (which is a stack, rather than IDIOTIC mac method of making it the same list everytime, preventing alt-tabbing between two apps when you have more than one open), Task bars, per-window and per-app menu bars (rather than the inferior Mac single-system-bar), text descriptions rather than icon-only (icons-only SUCK as a user interface element, because they are simply not descriptive enough), universal keyboard traversal (tab/arrows), mouse wheels, anti-aliased fonts (finally in OS X, Windows had it for SEVEN FREAKING YEARS), virtual memory that works right (ditto), memory protection (ditto), on and on and on.

      But you know what I hate most about the Mac user interface? Gray outs. For some INSANE reason, the Mac style guide says that controls should be grayed out when they are "not available" by context. That is the most frustrating thing about the Mac, because it gives you no feedback on WHY it's grayed out. Typically in Windows applications, selecting a bad option gives you a popup of why it doesn't work.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    4. Re:Sheesh by jawtheshark · · Score: 1
      anti-aliased fonts (finally in OS X, Windows had it for SEVEN FREAKING YEARS)

      Sure...Windows had antialiased fonts in 95....provided you bought the Plus pack or downloaded a patch (still have it somewhere on an archive disk). The problem is just that it was a really really bad implementation.
      You do not have to take my opinion on it because I have turned it on all the time.
      However I install PC's for friends and relatives and you won't believe how many people came back asking me why their fonts now looked "blurry", and if I -please, please- could revert it back to the non-blurry fonts.
      Besides, the Antialiasing was only on larger fonts (notably in titlebars or in Word). On smaller fonts it wasn't applied at all. I'm now typing this on my iBook and the small fonts have antialiasing and it does not look blurry at all.
      The antialiasing on windows was clearly the way "how not to do it".

      Further on your critisisms of the Mac OSX interface:

      • Alt-Tab: Never use that on a Mac, so I won't comment
      • per-window and per-app menu bars: What is wrong with that? You always find your possible choices on the same place. Not somewhere attached to some window that perhaps even is nearly off screen. I come from a WinTel world (I have a Mac since 4 months) and I don't have problems with the Mac system
      • text descriptions rather than icon-only: Where that? I wanna see! I agree it is bad to only use icons...but our friend windows has this nice toolbar thingy that only uses...icons! Here on my mac all applications currently open have icons with text beneath it.
      • grayed out: Did you use the flagship of the application Microsoft line recently? They do exactly the same! Open Excel, and close all documents (or add the /E parameter to your shortcut). Want to print, sorry: that is grayed out for no apparent reason. Okay, the reason is that there is no open document. But it is grayed out without indication why.
      Just remember that GUI's shouldn't work all the same on every platform. Each choice has its advantages and disadvantages. On Linux I use WindowMaker, now how is that compared to Mac OS X and Windows 9x/ME/NT/W2K/XP? Completely different! Learn to appreciate the diversity of systems and you won't feel too disoriented on other systems.
      But that is how I see it....
      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
  63. IBM has been doing these for a while by perky · · Score: 2
    IBM's X-series NetVista machines have integrated LCD screen on a nice arm thing that attaches to the back of a desk. They look pretty sexy too, in black. Also one of my housemates has a machine (possibly a Gateway) with a flatscreen with the computer integrated into the back of the screen. This sounds to me like Apple's markedroids are pestering the tech press to run "now they're all copying us" stories in the hope that they will flog a few of theirs by appearing to be "the original"

    --
    "The new wave is not value-added; it's garbage-subtracted" - Esther Dyson, Dec 1994
    1. Re:IBM has been doing these for a while by Tjp($)pjT · · Score: 1

      As others have noted. Apple did this with the TAM in 1997. A bit pricy at the time but a nice machine.

      --
      - Tjp

      I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!

  64. journalistic accuracy by markj02 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    The article talks about how Gateway will want to compete with the iMac. There is no indication that Gateway will clone the design. In fact, it rather looks like Gateway will simply come out with a cleaner-looking, thinner version of the Gateway 3: no floating screen, but a screen with the CPU integrated into it. If they make it look nice and sell it at a reasonable price, that could be a great machine. And, unlike Apple, Gateway seems like they are smart enough to offer a 17" screen on a $2000 machine.

    Apple isn't the first company to come up with a computer with a floating screen and the CPU in the base--IBM (and perhaps others) did that a few years ago (IBM's earlier designs actually were nicer looking than the current X series).

    Personally, I find this kind of design gimmicky anyway. With the Graphite iMac, Apple hit a design sweet spot, but the new iMacs don't do it for me--they atttract too much attention. To me, something like a high-end Sony LCD with a computer the size of an Espresso PC (about the footprint of a CD case) looks much nicer. Sorry, Apple.

  65. pricing difference outside U.S. by super-flex-o-matic · · Score: 0

    i dont get this iMac hype.

    if i buy myself a standard pc, chance is that i have to afford as much money as in U.S. whereas if i purchase an iMac i am charged an exclusive price difference of 868 Euro's or 768 USD _more_ than its worth in america. even if i substract my countries sales tax, there remains a difference which i cant base on transporting costs. - to be honest shipping of a container of iMacs to Europe doesnt cost 300 USD per piece.

    another cause why i dont like those expensive pieces of hardware thats old as soon as its delivered to you...

  66. shut the fuck up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    your anti-Apple, anti-Mac, anti-OS X nerdisms are fucking BORING.

    1. Re:shut the fuck up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple fanatics are not really welcomed here. Didn't you know this is a website where people aren't afraid of those scary wires and stuff?

    2. Re:shut the fuck up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who says I'm anti-apple? If someone was posting fanatic "WOW, it's good just because it's Linux" or "because it's Windows it will take over the world" I'll respond in much the same fashion. Claiming perfection where there is no perfection is foolish and only raises expectations and creates disappointment with the reality. (Which, in turn drives people away from the respective platforms.)

      Besides which, the post you're responding to is not an anti-apple post. I merely said that Gateway did not rip Apple off. I didn't say Apple ripped Gateway off, the designs are obviously from two different directions with Apple's design being far more appealing and Gateway's design being more practical.

      -Sara

  67. IBM Rip-Off by clinko · · Score: 2

    IBM has had a ripoff like this for a while now. Atleast 2 years ago our school got a lab full of IBMs that look exactly the same as the Gateway version.

    Check it out

  68. FireWire is there by default by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Considering that FireWire is a *huge* part of the digital hub vision, it would be suicidal on Apple's part to leave it off the new iMac.

    Check it out:

    http://www.apple.com/imac/specs.html

    1. Re:FireWire is there by default by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you say 'digital hub vision (tm)' you need to include the trademark notice. It's Mac hype, you've gotta give them credit when mentioning it.

    2. Re:FireWire is there by default by Spit_Fire1 · · Score: 1

      the system the article was talking about was not an imac it was a gateway fashioned in the imac style *not an imac*, and firewire has been a part of apple's computers for some time now, but it's just now chatching on with the pcs thats why i posted

      --

      "The secret of success is to know something nobody else knows." -Aristotle Onassis
  69. Almost news by BarefootClown · · Score: 2

    Well, this is almost news...I've only been using a Gateway Profile at work for the past two years, and it was there before I was. Yes, they've upgraded it a couple of times, and now they're upgrading it again, but it's the same concept, and it was out long before the current iMac. Actually, they're not bad little systems, at least not for our purposes (public web terminal).

    --

    "Make it ten--I am only a poor corrupt official."
    --Captain Louis Renault (Claude Rains), Casablanca

  70. This thing is just *ugly* ! by zottl · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why does only Apple manage to produce really good-lookin, stylish PC cases? It shouldn't be very hard to do, should it?
    But somehow no Windows-PC maker offers a computer that looks as good as an apple.
    Well, time to case-mod that ugly beige box myself, I guess...

    --
    an electric guitar is a great stress redirector: it pisses off my neighbours but relaxes me sooo fine...
    1. Re:This thing is just *ugly* ! by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

      this'll get modded as flamebait, but it's a little thing us PC users call form over function. I personally LOATHE MacOS so much that I'd say that even Win2k is better.

    2. Re:This thing is just *ugly* ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can make a pc case in any shape you want if you and you alone are the only maker of the proprietary hardware that goes inside of it. Windows pc makers have standards that they need to comply with.

  71. not an imitation by Servo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Folks, read the article. This unit was not an imitation of the iMac. They simply released an updated version of the unit to compete against and use the momentum of the iMac. Gateway's unit is now on its fourth generation.

    That being said, you are all right about one thing, it does not have the class and elegance of Apple's design.

    --
    A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. -Benjamin Franklin
  72. Apple Ripoff Tandy? by Niddix · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry but the iMac looks a little like the TRS-80 Model 3 and 4. Apple must have ripped off the design.

  73. Just a non-portable laptop by 3Suns · · Score: 1

    For the last time, there's nothing special about these things. They're just laptops that aren't portable. Maybe ok for setting up an internet kiosk somewhere but I can't imagine anyone actually getting one for personal use.

    --

    -3Suns

    ~~~~
    The Revolution will be Slashdotted
  74. The cordless iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The new iMac has no cords. Look at the advertising photos. There is no mouse cord. There is no power cord. There are no speaker cables. There is no network cable. You will believe this. You will obey the Information Purification Directive. You will accept the power of the Jobs Reality Distortion Field. There are no cords. There are no cords. Fnord.

    1. Re:The cordless iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the cables, apparently there's just a big ugly hole drilled in the work surface, beneath the base of that makeup mirror.

      So much for ergonomic design. Better have the workmen in to drill more holes in the hardwood desk.

  75. Well of course not by dragonfrog · · Score: 1
    I don't think Sony, or even SGI could come up with sexier than a G4 iMac. Considering this is a Gateway, it's surprisingly good, frankly.

    As another responder pointed out, the surprising thing is, what a lousy deal this is - no DVD, less RAM, less HD... I guess that's what the Microsoft tax will do to ya.

    Oh, yeah, one other thing - supermodels, curvy? They have the figures of 12-year-old boys. Curvy models all got fired in the mid-70's, when they hired the anorexic pill-freaks.

    1. Re:Well of course not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess that's what the Microsoft tax will do to ya.

      The Microsoft "tax", as you put it, is about $20 for people like Gateway. What, you think they pay retail price for Windows or something?

      Linux freaks, gotta luv 'em.

  76. actually... by linuxpng · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I believe IBM did this first with the Netvista line. The netvista predated the imac almost a whole year but was very pricey. I guess it's more in who makes it popular.

    1. Re:actually... by inkswamp · · Score: 1

      This will get a little ranty... my apologies up front.

      I believe IBM did this first with the Netvista line. The netvista predated the imac almost a whole year but was very pricey.

      Wasn't that line also missing a few important features? Someone directed me to it recently and it occurred to me that it was lacking in a few important areas, but I don't recall now. So it's not that it was just pricey, but also lacking.

      I guess it's more in who makes it popular.

      C'mon... that sounds like sour grapes. Apple takes enough beating in the press and elsewhere--at least give them credit when it's due.

      Let's see, did IBM back their flat-panel with a consumer-oriented concept about being the user's digital hub? Was the software distributed with it honed to the point of serving the user's needs in that very specific manner? Was the display thought out so carefully that IBM arrived at the inevitable conclusion that it should somehow "float" above the machine (really, Johnathon Ive is absolutely correct in pointing out that if you're going to make the flat panel stuck in the traditional position, it may as well be a CRT. What do you gain besides looks othewise)? No, IBM made a machine with a nice look. End of story. In all other ways, it fails to distinguish itself.

      There is a lot of evidence in the new iMac that Apple gets design on an esoteric --almost philosophical--level. They get it in ways that other box makers simply haven't even considered. In the mad rush to be the fastest, the most cutting edge, a lot of companies just forgot all about catering to the very real needs of the home user and about giving them designs that look good and work well.

      The prevalent attitude amongst the Wintel crowd (which is an attitude I've argued against for years) seems to be that if it looks nice, it's a "good design" or that Apple was only playing with the look because they had nothing else to impress people with.

      The look of the machine is the tip of the iceberg. There's so much more to it than that, but it's easy to lose sight of that simple fact when we're all getting caught up in the daily inanities of the Great AMD-Intel Processor Speed Circle Jerk.

      So, I disagree with your conclusion that it's more in who makes it popular. It's not marketing or an attitude or the result of fanatical Mac users (like me) flooding discussions with pro-Apple tripe. It becomes popular when the company making it has a reason other than looks to do it that way, when the company really understands design beyond the shape of the box and caters to users in a way that elicits a response.

      --Rick

      --
      --Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
  77. Precedence. by saintlupus · · Score: 2

    Gateway, however, did beat Apple to the punch with the first all-in-one computer to feature a flat panel.

    We've had these deployed at work for well over a year now.

    How exactly is this a knock-off? And how exactly can you justify trying to charge for this sort of "editing"?

    --saint

  78. Just use a laptop? by ksb · · Score: 1

    Nice though these systems look, they just seem to have the limitations of a laptop without any of the advantages?

    1. Re:Just use a laptop? by crazybastard · · Score: 1

      these types of machines are upkeep disasters waiting to happen... the HP one i use (to check my webpages in IE) is all usb and infared cordless devices- keyboard, mouse etc.

      my complaints are

      • The batteries are always dead or missing when i get to it
      • the mouse is a bit glitchy anyway
      • when the keyboard doesn't work... that's when things are in danger of getting smashed...
      • it is just big enough to be 'non portable' and has the same kind of flaky hard drive in it that a laptop would have.
      • Upgrading? adding things like cards? Nightmare...
  79. That's the Profile 3, not 4 by WiggyWack · · Score: 1

    The picture in the c|net article is of the Gateway Profile 3 which has already been out for a while.

    The article itself talks about the Gateway Profile 4 which is coming out this summer. THAT is the one that's supposed to be the "first" PC imitation of the new iMac. It's not out, so there's no picture of it yet.

    Yeah, I think c|net putting that picture there made it confusing for people. It obviously confused CmdrTaco. :)

    --
    Macintosh humor! MacComedy.com
  80. AIO nicknames. by saintlupus · · Score: 2

    up through the G3 AIO (giant tooth)

    We call them the "Baldheaded Barbies" at work -- the plastic shield with all the holes in it looks like a doll's head that the hair has been brutally ripped out of.

    Then again, maybe I should have spent less time as a child tormenting the girl next door by destroying her toys.

    *shrug*

    --saint

  81. Re:Chia Tux by SkulkCU · · Score: 2


    tail in front of your screen...
    sprawling over your keyboard and taking a nap on it...


    This is why some of us own chia pets, and not actual animals. (That, and allergies.)
    I wonder if anyone's made a Chia-tux?

    --
    .sig last updated Jan. 14, 2000
  82. Eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the heck? This frightens me... Dear Slashdot: Gateway has been selling the Profile models for the last 2 years. If you'll note the name: Profile 3. This is the third version of the Profile system. I usually expect Slashdot to be a little more intelligent than this... iMac knock off? I think not.

  83. Doesn't lool like an iMac to me by NitsujTPU · · Score: 1

    People have been selling unibody computers for years, it's just that people weren't buying them because you can't upgrade them. If the monitor goes, you have to toss a perfectly good machine.

    So, Macintosh makes one (just like the Mac Classic for anybody who's tuned in), and makes it with a flat display, and Gateway makes a flat display unibody, and now it's a knock-off? They might be picking up on a market that Apple openned, but I seem to remember the PC market trying to do this before the iMacs were out with web-pads, funny that nobody else does!

  84. majorly misleading post by binarybum · · Score: 1

    We've had gateway profiles way before the imac was released. If anything, apple ripped this concept (the concept by the way is just a laptop on a stick) from gateway (who ripped it from someone else I'm sure). Hardly fair to compare gateway's much older design with the imac that hadn't even been conceptualized yet.

    oh, btw. before you make any comment about the imac looking elegant, please make sure you've seen one IRL. They are suprisingly large and IMHO just plain hideous.

    --
    ôó
  85. Eurocom's had these for years. by dadragon · · Score: 1

    Eurocom has had these for years, they're probably not as advanced as the Gateway, but still...

    Oh, if you think those are a little pricy, keep in mind that the prices are quoted in Canadian Dollars.

    They even have a 17" model. Beat that, iMac!

    Disclamer: I like macs. I'd like to see a 17" iMac, but something tells me I'm not going to.

    --
    God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
  86. Taco, get a clue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember a few years back when folks were hacking that cheap-o web subscription device (with flat panel) into a Linux box? What was it called?

    Just because it has a flat panel with a computer built in does not make it a Mac 'imitation'..

    Or, should we say that Apple is copying Next or SGI by selling non-beige computers?

  87. Fewer apps overall. by Chas · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Go into a store. Look at the shelf devoted to Mac software.

    Then go look at the shelves devoted to PC software.

    As to the more expensive....that's merely an exercise in sophistry from both points of view.

    Windows supporters will argue the price based on the cheapest OEM version they can find.

    Mac supporters will try to set limits, as you have, to exclude OEM versions from consideration.

    All it speaks to is the fact that Apple one way of obtaining their software and Microsoft has multiple ways.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
    1. Re:Fewer apps overall. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, I can see the REAMS OF CRAP that's available for the PC. The majority of which is GAMES.

      The REAL apps are available for both platforms. I'm talking productivity apps, graphics apps.. Go look again.

    2. Re:Fewer apps overall. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Boy I don't remember looking at any shelf for software now for years. Anything I want is either a download from the company's web site or I order it on line....

      Shelf based software is for the psuedo wanna be geek that can't figure things out themselves with out a compUSA idiot drooling on the floor in front of them...

      Move up to the internet age, there are BILLIONS of web sites out there and how many of them have duplicate information or are just plain USELESS? PC software is the same mess...

  88. Through which logic did you reach this conclusion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Do you even know what you're talking about? If we use your logic than we can say :
    Windows XP offers :

    - Windows 3.11 software
    - Windows 3.0 software
    - Windows 95 software
    - Windows 98 software
    - Windows 2000 software
    - Windows XP software
    - Command line applications
    - X Window System software(yes it runs here too)

    so where is this new software that max os x lets me run that i can't run on windows xp? What will run on mac os x that windows xp doesn't have an equivalent to?

  89. bah, they're all free... by BOFslime · · Score: 0

    er.. i mean i get them as gifts from other... yeah.. thats it. complete with license certificates..

  90. iMac iMpostors by RapaNui · · Score: 1

    Mmm.....

    To carry an analogy to the extreme:

    Who remembers the _second_ person to climb mount Everest?

    How about the _second_ person to break the sound barrier?

  91. Design is more than just looks by inkswamp · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I just saw someone ask this: Why doesn't someone like Dell or Compaq, with their billions of dollars, hire some designers to come in and create some nice looking systems?

    This is exactly where we Mac users get to sit back and laugh and say "we told you so." We've taken a pummelling over the years because Macs weren't standard, weren't cutted-edge enough, couldn't lay claim to the buzzword-du-jour, but Apple has always done interface and design like nobody else.

    Why don't Dell or Compaq create something "nice looking"? They do create "nice looking" but they don't create "nice using." Unlike Apple, their users just don't (apparently) demand that. Design isn't just how something looks, but how something works and how something fits into the workflow of whatever you're doing. The look is the least of it.

    But Compaq and Dell and other box makers will continue to try to do "nice looking" because they don't get the whole human user interface concept the way Apple does. They don't get design on the multiple levels that Apple and most of its users do. It's something that we long-time Mac users have argued ad nauseam about in countless discussion forums (and will no doubt continue to do so) for ages and have been written off as pathetic Apple apologists.

    --Rick

    --
    --Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
    1. Re:Design is more than just looks by Nameles · · Score: 1

      Semi-Off Topic

      Compaq, Dell, et all have decent looking cases on the outside and the front, but thats about it. Have you seen most Compaq systems from a few years ago or so? It's a pain in the ass to get it open because it uses some weird ass screws.

      The inside is another story. I've seen that the insides of these things are the worst. Everything is messy inside, if you can even get in there, usually hardly any room to get around and move stuff.

  92. sun ray by dyslexia · · Score: 0

    It looks more like a sun ray than an imac.

    --
    --Have a Johsonville brat.
  93. I'm not sure it's an imitation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just because Gateway designed an all-in-one LCD computer doesn't mean it's a ripoff. Now if the Profile looked exactly like a iMac? Sure.

  94. check your own facts by markj02 · · Score: 2
    There have been plenty of all-in-one LCD computers prior to that--they are called "laptops". And there have also been non-laptop all-in-one computers prior to the Mac; they were used in many industrial applications.

    The 20th Anniversary Macintosh also resembles the Compaq Concerto. The Concerto not only had a smaller footprint while providing the same functionality, but also could be used as a laptop and as a pen computer.

    While the Concerto is really old now and was too heavy as a pen computer, as a laptop and as a desktop machine, it was an elegant, unpretentious, and practical. I would find an iMac with that form factor much more appealing than what Apple actually came up with.

    1. Re:check your own facts by petard · · Score: 2

      Nowhere did I claim that Apple was the first to offer an all-in-one LCD computer (I thought desktop was implied given the subject matter of the article)... I only disputed C|Net's claim that Gateway did it before Apple.

      --
      .sig: file not found
  95. Doesn't anyone remember the Monorail? by JuggleThis · · Score: 1

    (i386) All-in-one systems aren't new. Doesn't anyone remember the Monorail? It was an all-in-one Pentium computer. An old girlfriend of mine had one in college a few years ago.

    You can see one here:

    http://www.armory.com/~vern/toys/Monorail.htm

    1. Re:Doesn't anyone remember the Monorail? by VPN3000 · · Score: 1


      Thanks for making mention of the Monorail. The company I worked for years ago did software testing for these things. They are really crappy computers, but are amazingly reliable (the 5 year old ones from the tests are still cranking away). This is another bit of evidence that the slashdot posters will talk out of their ass a bit when it comes to the facts.

      Using the same logic they've used for the remarks concerning Gateway ripping on Apple, I guess we'd have to say that Apple ripped off Monorail. Geez, starts to sound like small children after a while, doesn't it?

      Let's face it, there's nobody getting 'ripped off' here. The path to more innovative products has enough room for designers to start taking advantage of modern technologies as they become accepted and cheaper to manufacture.

      Victor

  96. It looks more like... by BitwizeGHC · · Score: 2

    some LCD VAIOs I saw in CompUSA a few years back. Very nice sleek case design, with the CPU and such built into the back of the display, kinda like this Gateway unit, only cooler. :)

    --
    N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
  97. The other way around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually the Gateway profile XL came out in 1999 with a 15 inch LCD, so i don't think its accurate to say that they knocked off apple since its a continuation of an existing product line

  98. The eurocom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    looks like ass. And not a nice sexy supermodel mind you. I mean the kind you're likely to find on a ditchdigger.

  99. IBM Netvista X, etc.. kaypro? by ayeco · · Score: 1

    Apple might have help the public image, but this idea isn't new at all - IBM Netvista X series, Gateway, etc. Gateway's isn't a copy of the new imac, NOR is it a copy of the old imac.. at least not anymore than the old imac is of an old Kaypro.

  100. stock prices by Cinematique · · Score: 1

    The numbers say it all...

    APPLE COMPUTER INC ~AAPL~ 24.66

    GATEWAY INC ~GTW~ 6.07

    1. Re:stock prices by 90XDoubleSide · · Score: 3, Informative
      Price per share is basically meaningless; it just gives you an idea of the ratio of the companies value to the number of shares they have issues. You should look at the market capitalization, which is the sock price times the number of shares:

      • Apple Computer, Inc. $8,714,424,780
      • Gateway, Inc. $1,966,516,110

      The market cap can't really tell you how the company is doing, you need to look at the change in price, as this lovely chart will show. To get an idea of Gateways financial woes beyond the stock price, you could look at recent market news, such a S&P's plans to cut Gateways credit, which was already downgraded to junk a few months a go, even further. See, if you get more meaningful facts, they look even worse ;)

      --
      "Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
    2. Re:stock prices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not wearing any socks. Does that make my sock price 0 or infinite?

  101. Macdot? by rasactive · · Score: 1

    Seriously, is it just me or is Slashdot turning into a big Apple advertisement? Every Mac article rants and raves about how great it is to be a Mac user, and hahaha look at those stupid fuckers on x86. The scary part of this all is that any post that has a counterpoint on Mac immediately gets modded down. It's almost like what the trolls say happens during linux discussions (though I have seen way many more good criticisms and backhanded compliments of linux get modded up rather than down).

    Take this discussion for example. It's been pointed out several times that the Gateway Profile has been out for years now (as opposed to the new iMac). Do these posts get +5 informative? No. Does some post telling everyone how great it is to own a new iMac because you can adjust its monitor with a magical pole get modded to +5 insightful? Yes. I think Apple is a good company, but some of the moderators need to pull their heads out of their asses and start modding up comments which are not necessarily criticisms, but simply pointing out the fallacies of the article.

    Mod me troll or flamebait. I feel better now anyway.

  102. Welcome to the past, dude. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe you weren't paying attention when you read the article. Gateway has been making these things for ages so you can hardly call their Profile line an "imposter". There's nothing new about either system.

  103. What's new about this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Such PC's (as others have noted) have existed for years. IBM, Tiger, Monorail and even Gateway them selves had a PC like this over 2 years ago. What the h e double hockey sticks is this doing on Slashdot!?!?

  104. actually, gateway did it before by vukv · · Score: 1

    Actually guys, picture shows Profile 3, which is on market for almost past 2 years (?!), so they had it quite some time before Apple did...


    Also, there are bunch of smaller European manufacturers that had all in one lcd design - since people are willing to spend a bit more money there for computers than in USA.

    So while Imac is pretty (??), it definetly was not anywhere close to being first integrated lcd system... sorry mac fans

  105. No kidding... I remember the original Profile by DaedalusLogic · · Score: 1

    My RA had one my freshman year, so I think it could be said Apple is taking cues from PC design. The iMac of course looks better, but that's very low on the reasons to buy a computer. To each his own... but Gateway stole nothing from Apple on this one.

  106. Engineering Issue? by n8 · · Score: 1

    When I read an article about the Imac's design I believe they attempted an all the stuff behind the LCD design. The problem according to the engineers were that hardware sitting on end like what appears gateway has done causes HD and other failures more quickly. Oh well!

  107. arrrrrggghhhh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I swear if I see Timothy or Cmdr Taco write "a step in the right direction" I am going to poke my eyes out with my cuecat reader.

  108. Re:Through which logic did you reach this conclusi by autechre · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We'll start with the fact that Windows XP doesn't run all of that software perfectly. No Microsoft operating system has maintained perfect backwards compatibility, and there are many programs which have fallen through the cracks.

    Also, I don't understand this obsession with "more applications". How many applications do you use on your computer? Do I care that there are more applications available for Windows XP than there are for Debian or Mac OS X? No, because most of those applications are useless, or duplicates.

    freshmeat.net lists over 18,000 applications. I work there, and even I'm not crazy enough to say that they're all important. I'm certainly not going to use more than a tiny percentage of them myself, and again, there are plenty of duplicates (different things for different people, but how many different Web server programs do you have running?)

    If you've got that all important Windows application, Connectix will happily sell you VirtualPC to run that app on MacOS. But chances are you can find a replacement, either in X11, OS 9, or OS X software.

    Another poster mentioned the fact that the majority of PC software available is games. I own a Playstation 2 and a Dreamcast. My (Debian) computer is for old console emulators and xScorch. :). Other than that, I use it for Web browsing, work, music, etc. Even Windows XP can't compare with the amount of RPGs available for consoles (Square, Capcom, and Working Designs, mostly). I'd rather have a modern *nix workstation (either OS X or Debian) for my largely non-gaming tasks, and buy the right tool for the job WRT games.

    As for what OS X has that XP doesn't: there's a reason that print publications still use Macs for DTP, and it's called ColorSync. I know, because I also work for a print publication :) .

    --
    WMBC freeform/independent online radio.
  109. Name one. by cirby · · Score: 1

    Oh, yeah, you can't.

  110. Re:Large LCD screens (and cats) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except the radiation emissions mutate your cat into a frog...

  111. 3rd Generation Profile by GuyverDH · · Score: 1

    This is an article about the Profile 3 - as in 3rd Generation Profile - if anything, the iMac is a clone of the Profile.

    The Profile II and III were both LCD screen based. I also got to see several of the in between design versions, as my cousin worked on the design team.

    --
    Who is general failure, and why is he reading my hard drive?
  112. How 'bout the Apple IIc by manonthemoon · · Score: 1

    While the available LCD screen wasn't bolted on it was probably the earliest transportable with an LCD screen, that could be used as an all-in-one.

  113. No comparison! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    bwahahaha! Anyone comparing the imac 2 to
    one of those x86 macines needs a new pair of glasses!! There's no comparison.

  114. LCD all-in-one Computers by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    This product clearly misses the boat. Apple understands that computers can look good, though I do think they spend too much money on that. Simpler designs are just as effective. This is a design which I like better than apple's offering, but what I really want is a completely rectangular system - No odd-shaped projections on the sides, no monitor sticking out of a gumdrop. There should be some kind of stand you can put it on, or you should be able to hang it on the wall - What an amazing concept. It should use a desktop hard drive, but a laptop CDROM, to minimize depth.

    The problem with these computers is that they are too much like computers and not enough like an appliance, even the imac. I want something I can just hang on my wall like a picture, but treat like a computer.

    But let's face it, people who buy these all-in-one computers don't need too much upgradability. They will most likely never upgrade anything but the memory. So build me something like a laptop without an internal keyboard. Make it legacy-free, since I don't need to expand it. Give me a 2xType II/1xType III PCMCIA slot, a standard laptop CDROM slot, USB, and IEEE1394. Leave off the speakers; If you want, provide some sort of attachments for them on the sides. I don't mind. But I'm not going to want to use your crappy speakers anyway.

    This should run any OS that the market segment for a machine like that will want to run on x86 - linux, windows ME (yecch), windows XP.

    802.11 would be a nice feature as well. Twisted-Pair Ethernet, however, is mandatory - Come on, this is the age of broadband internet. There is no excuse for any prebuilt PC (or laptop) to not have ethernet.

    These relatively unexpandable computers will never gain widespread popularity until they have very large screens for much lower costs, however. Or they come down significantly in price. And I would like to see a fairly large (18"?) HDTV-aspect display model.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  115. I wish it rotated by slim · · Score: 2

    From what I've read, you can't (without going at your expensive new monitor with a hacksaw) rotate these monitors into portrait orientation. That seems a terrible shame. A lot of the time you want landscape, but on those occasions you want portrait (DTP, playing "1942" in MAME, etc.) it would be a terribly nice thing to be able to do.

  116. FUNNY MOD UP!!! by lowell · · Score: 1

    mod this up

  117. Wireless Keyboards & Mice MIA??? by UNIBLAB_PowerPC · · Score: 1

    Jobs actually talked about that. He said the main reason they didn't have wireless keyboards was because they didn't have a good way of powering them yet.

    Uh, now I find that rather odd. My wife has a Logitech cordless mouse on her iMac 333, running Mac OS 9.1. Whenever the batteries start to fade, the OS displays a new-style "floating palette" error message that the batteries are too low and should be replaced. What part of this is unintuitive? Or how hard would it be to put Das Blinkenlights on the front of said iMac to show when a keyboard/mouse link can't be established, or possibly combine that with the current warnings? Think about it: with the current crop of wireless IO goodies like mice and keyboards -- there's usually a USB dongle-like transmitter/receiver that's always powered. What I find hard to believe is that if these dongles were shoved into the mainboard design, why can't they keep the same warning messages? And if so, let's revisit the first question: what is unintiutive about a well-written warning message that your keyboard/mouse needs new batteries? Why not use rechargable batteries, and then recharge through a retractable USB cable built into either the keyboard or the machine itself?

  118. looks nothing like it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...that gateway PC looks nothing like the new iMac.

    there have been 'bulit into back of LCD monitor'
    PCs for a long time now....i saw an HP one
    about 2 years ago in a local retail store
    (green/blue hus colouring).

    anyway, if nyone does make a 'anglepoise lamp'
    clone then expect Apple to hit them with a suit
    liek they did with the orginal iMac clone makers

  119. That is a piece of garbage by billc124 · · Score: 1

    That Gateway looks like a pile of garbage compared to the IMac. I'm not a Mac user or fan but that is just my two cents.

  120. Re:Large LCD screens (and cats) by Chaset · · Score: 1

    Given your comment, I thought you might enjoy this:
    http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/2 92.html "Joy of Tech" It's not just for the cats, though. (I don't have any) I sometimes turn on and muck around with my Athlon box when the room gets too cold.

    --
    -- "This world is a comedy to those who think, a tragedy to those who feel."