Slashdot Mirror
17" and 19" inch iMacs Coming in 3Q
ikioi writes "It looks like Apple will have 17" and 19" flat panel iMacs later this year."
It's funny- the publicity photos of the 15 inch macs really make it look a lot
nicer then it is. I finally saw one up close a few weeks ago- the arm and screen
is super smooth, but the base looks like a cheap toy. That said, larger screens
for the iMac definitely push it into a new territory... not sure if it would
convince me to buy one, but it sure would add magic shell to the ice cream.
I'm a sucker for high-tech toys... but I'd pay a premium for an "executive" iMac... one with, say, some brushed aluminum and maybe leather wrist rests below the keyboard. TAM meets 2002 iMac!
And I'll leave it at that.
Bigger is Better, and I can't fucking wait.
I was very surprised that they only had the 15 monitors when they first came out, these are VERY welcome improvements
RonB
It is human nature to take shortcuts in thinking.
That white around the screen dazzels me.
I'd like a black one.
Listening Apple?
...I wonder if additional counterweight will be added to the base to sustain the heavier LCD panels...
That iMac base has got to be the ugliest piece of computer equipment ever to leave the Apple factory. It picks up dirt like a hoover so that cleaming white hemisphere that looks pathetic when you take it out of the box becomes a dull grey lump of crap after a few weeks. The material reminds me of those plastic chairs that we had in elementary school.
Why couldn't they have used a material like the G4 case to form the base?
I have been pwned because my
Seriously doubt the validity of this one. It's a single source w/ no history of getting Apple rumors right.
My guess is Quantas is going to be making displays for Mac towers, and the author thinks all Apple computers are iMacs.
I'd buy one in a heartbeat if it were so, but I'm not holding my breath.
Remember, slashdot got hoodwinked by the "iWalk" Apple PDA hoax twice.
A bigger LCD is great, but it will most probably add a lot of $$$ to the price, and the current iMacs aren't cheap as it is for what you get hardware-wise. And the iMac has been about being Apple's entry-level, low-cost computer. Now it's more likely to become like the G4 cube - too expensive for the low-end buyer and too low powered and non-expandable for the high-end power user.
It looks like a stupid art-nouveau sculpture that belongs on the desk or in the livingroom of a damn Trillionaire with a passion for kitch-futuristic-bubblegummy-art...
a computer needs to look RUGGED! :D prefferably with a dented case, or no case at all (although that could have negative influences on the air circulation for the cooling system). You want a computer that looks cool? Well it should have decorations of your own on it: for example, my monitor has a cool "Commodore 64" badge on it and some nifty stickers, and my case has a shitload of writings/stickers/sticky-stuff on it. This looks way cooler than any Mac you buy from the store in a fruity color and a "design" look.
my 2 cents on the Mac issue
ps: don't gimme any bullshut about the mac hardware, I'm talking about the looks
"The majority is always sane, Louis." -- Nessus
http://slashdot.jp
Is does that mean 17 and 19 square-inch?
Widescreen iMacs set for Q3 - report
Or maybe not, after Apple finds out they spilled the beans.
Now if only Apple could figure out how to make an LCD that has an acceptably wide viewing angle in both the horizontal and vertical direction. Then it would be practical to add a pivot joint to the end of the steel arm, allowing the screen to be pivoted from landscape to portrait layout.
An iMac with two screens. I guess it would look kinda like Mickey Mouse!
Attack of the grammar nazi!
15 inch macs really make it look a lot nicer then it is
Once again, CmdrTaco shows his firm grasp of the English language.
For clarification:
First I do this, then I do that.
I like this more than that. This looks nicer than it really is.
Sometimes I wonder how some slashdotters made it through high school....
the way i have the height of the imac'a screen adjusted you can't see the base. hell, when i'm using it i don't generally look at the base anyway. all i see is a nice and smooth LCD screen.
the bigger problem to me is the keyboard not having a power button to turn on/off the system. i have to search for it on the base and *then* i have to look at the base. of course, the way i solved this problem is by not powering off the machine. did i mention that i'm using OS X? =)
bah. start over
I disagree about the "cheap toy" complaint. As an iMac owner, I can confirm that, yes, it is a toy. But it's not cheap.
My only complaint about the base is that all of the inputs are in the rear. It's so silly. Why should I have to reach around to plug in my iPod?
This is a carmic punishment for stealing mp3s from poor musicians with your iPod
This may be extrapolating a bit much from one little tidbit, but whatever. I think Apple is setting themselves up to completely miss the price point for the market, after they came so, so close with the OG iMac.
sig-free as of 28 July 02!
better head back to 4th grade and unlearn what you've learned.
You don't reach around! Why keep plugging / unplugging from the base? Just leave a firewire cable plugged into the back with the the other end laying aside for easy access. Or is that too simple?
What next here at apple.slashdot.org? Faster iMacs coming? With bigger hard drives? More memory? Heaven forbid that Apple updates their models!
I'm a part-timer for Apple and done a few table-tops for them here and there. It's already old news that there's a love-hate relation with the new iMac, so just lay-it-off already. if you don't like it, feel free to use the money you saved to buy a few dozen of those hello-kitty dildos/vibrators instead. As for accessories, other than a good 4.1/5.1 soundcard and a good TV card, most of the other parts are easy to find.
Duh! So you have an excuse to hug the damn thing.
If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
When I am buying a computer, I am buying a computer and not a football with a LCD display sticked into it using a dildo.
People like you should be duct-taped to a chair and forced to attend a university course on marketing. There is something called "positioning", meaning that there is a "market segment" that likes computers that look like smiling footballs. Then there is the "13373r 7h4n y00" market segment that likes to build their computers themselves from the cheapest possible parts (that would be you). These two "segments" are different. Get a clue!!!
Sound great. the only problem with my iMac is the tiny screen.
:-) But a couple PCMCIA slots would be sweet.
I sure hope Apple start producing a wireless (bluetooth?) keyboard & mouse. (anyone know of a USB one?).
who said the iMac is not expandable - i'd say 3 USB + 2 firewire ports is expandable. what else you need? its got a SuperDrive too, dammit
xxx love from UK xxxx
Publicity photos are SUPPOSED to make things look better than they actually are. Do you gasp in horror at fast food restaurants when you look down at your hockey puck in a bun and then wonder why it looks NOTHING like that appetizing picture on the menu/commercials?
(side note: it's THAN damnit! we have specific vowels for a reason!)
> It's already old news that there's a love-hate relation with the new iMac
:))
:)
I don't hate the iMac, I think it's just a piece of hardware. But sometimes I just cannot resist throwing baits at the mac lovers, who don't seem to think it is just that - hardware.
> use the money you saved to buy a few dozen of those hello-kitty dildos/vibrators instead
So, you thereby state the hello-kitty vibrator is a good substitute for this product? Personally, I don't use those. But hey, maybe I should give it a try!
What a dumb comment about iMac appearance. Everyone else in the world says they look better in person than in photos except for our fearless leader. They look DUMB in photos. They look good in person. And they don't look cheap.
Every geek in the world complains that Macs cost too much and design is not important and they buy the typical crappy Dell box. Would our beloved leader like for Apple to invest a couple of hundred bucks for a base made out of hand sanded rosewood so he could then bitch about the price?
You look at the friggin monitor. As long as the base doesn't fall apart while sitting somewhere for 3 or 4 years who cares what it looks like? And it don't look "cheap" anyway.
It must be Monday.
> Then there is the "13373r 7h4n y00" market segment ...(that would be you)
:)))
Woo-haa! Good bait, two fishes already. Reel'em in!
I hope its silent, like many apple products are.
The main point of buying certain apple products over the years is the fact that some are designed without always-on fans and are silent.
It would be nice if these are as quiet as the imacs have been.
looks pathetic when you take it out of the box becomes a dull grey lump of crap after a few weeks
What? As opposed to a beige box? Or are you just bashing Apple's style because it's the "in thing" to do?
Well I hate the new iMac. Only a total idiot would value form over function with computer equipment, and dont even get me started on making a machine with a removable media drive without the ability to manually eject it.
thanks to this post, those iMacs will be "steved" - ie canned.
Jobs likes surprises, and if his surprise is spoiled this far out he'll take his toys and go home.
Which means - these things will never see the light of day, or their release date will be substantially changed
-- james
It's funny- the publicity photos of the 15 inch macs really make it look a lot nicer then it is. I finally saw one up close a few weeks ago- the arm and screen is super smooth, but the base looks like a cheap toy.
My wife's reaction was exactly the opposite. She thought pictures of the new iMac were awful. She thought it looked goofy. We just saw one in person a few days ago and she loved it. Afterward, she kept asking me questions about it. Seeing it really changed her opinion of it.
Personally, I was impressed with the display. I have a 15" CRT display at home and the viewable area is noticeably larger on the iMac's 15" LCD display. On top of that, the colors and images are sharp and clear. One of the things that drives me crazy about LCD displays is that they tend to darken or solarize when viewed from an angle. The iMac's display didn't do that.
Also, FWIW, this "news" about the bigger iMac displays is being treated as an unlikely rumor amongst some of the more in-the-know Mac sites. Just FYI.
--Rick
--Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
of course, this is still rumored material. although apple rumors often turn out being true to some extent, I've heard that 17" are likely but not much about 19" displays.
No, it appears he's bashing their style because it doesn't fucking work.
Only 19"? C'mon, Apple...
Strap a 23" Studio Display on one of these babies and watch it, er... topple over?..
Stéphane "Alias" Gallay
Now, where did I put this witty quote?..
... would value function over form and function with computer equipment.
I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
Apple forgot to check to see how the new 19" monitors would affect the weight and center of gravity on the new iMACs. As a result the new models are being recalled due to the fact that when in most any position but directly up (very hard on the neck) the new iMACS have a tendancy to fall over, damaging the LCD screen and thus voiding your warranty :)
They should do something like they did on the outside of the iBook. That's actually painted magnesium under clear plastic, I believe.
This space unintentionally left unblank.
Will it have a microphone? My girlfriend has a G4 Cube, and it doesn't have a microphone. I thought all Macs since like the Classic came with mics. She even got the Apple monitor that "goes with it" (the 17" CRT) and no mic. :( I consider a microphone essential.
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
It's funny- the publicity photos of the 15 inch macs really make it look a lot nicer then it is. I finally saw one up close a few weeks ago- the arm and screen is super smooth, but the base looks like a cheap toy.
It's funny -- whenever I see a PC case at a computer shop it looks cheap. An then when I see cases on sale (having cut a few knuckles servicing said cases) I know why.
"Where's my other sock?" - A. Einstein
There is nothing low cost about it. You can probably get two much better PC's for the price of a single iMac.
Nope, it's not. There's a fan that draws cool air in the bottom of the dome and vents hot air out an array of holes around the base of the display arm.
The space inside the iMac was just too confined to allow for normal convection to do the job.
and put a red hand print on the front and name it 'Wilson' ala Castaway. Sheesh, what a sloppy design. Apple rhymes with crapple. These dogs are a pain to work on and are not expandable like the G4's. What a waste of a flat panel. Are they Blowing Goats(tm)? Sure they are...
Sheesh...
Everyone knows that the Hello-Kitty vibrators are passe and all the cool kids are using the Badtz-Maru vibrators now.
My only complaint about the base is that all of the inputs are in the rear. ... Why should I have to reach around to plug in my iPod?
Rotate the base. I tried this at the Apple Store, it works. Just turn the base slightly and you get easy access to the ports. Remember, the arm turns.
t'nera semordnilap
The base of the iMac doesn't not look like a cheap toy. I've seen them in person too.
Besides, the base of the iMac is probably one of the most over engineered cases for a computer right now what with its Faraday cage underneath the plastic shell.
mbbac
Magic Shell is nasty.
And it's like 99% palm kernel oil or some other super nasty crap.
Crap! I have to order a new computer for a teaching gig, and the odds are it won't be replaced for five years. So I'll get an Emac, and then watch these 19" beauties appear and taunt me a few months later.
Yeah, the fan is usually off AFAIK. It's also a multi-speed fan so it'll only blow as much as needed.
mbbac
Having a bad day?
I have to disagree. Mine looks the same as the day I pulled it out of the box. As long as you dust it off periodically like you would anything on your desk it'll look fine for years.
Hell, they give you a dusting cloth *with* it.
I'm actually kind of glad they're getting away from the clear-plastic look...it's starting to get dated. I guess I'm over the "oooh shiny!" stage.
-brain
Let's face it, it's a very big personal-preference issue. Personally, I met an iLamp at CompUSA in the week after release; the LCDs are high-quality for LCDs, but the casework didn't inspire me, nor did the friction of the monitor arm- remember the 20th Anniversary Mac concepts shown in Wired back when? A counterweight system would probably have been pricey and hard to ship, but I can't imagine anyone 'violating the sacred plane of the monitor' when they have to wrench and tug and discover there's no rotational give.
I'm a small fan of the 'chrome' look, which the Al casemakers and the new Apple rack try to riff on (Lian-Li does make some stupid-looking cases, I'll agree)... However, irrespective of that, the iLamp's base is white plastic, and as such... it looks like a chunk of white plastic. It's also not nearly small enough to impress me (you'd have to ditch the CD-ROM for that, or mount it vertically with the display, as some designs have)), though I suppose it's an improvement for CRT iMac owners.
While the design does combine both "tit" and "phallus" aspects to good measure and much short-lived joking, I think women are just happy to see something with a few curves that isn't beige, the same thing that endeared them to the iMac. My big gripe isn't with the styling, it's that The Computer For the Rest of Us (or rather, the rest of *Them*) can't seem to enter a product to market at an entry-level price point, even with the supposed inexpense of the PowerPC (a lie; Motorola's fabs suck, hence even Apple faces shortages) and the corners cut on the hardware (white plastic vs. more-expensive-to-QC polycarbonate, flimsy CD trays, highly-reduced-part-count mainboards)...
Maybe the iMac2 boards will see recycling into something cool, but I'm not so sure. Even the iMac couldn't reuse Gossamer (AFAIK), despite retaining the same specs as the Beige G3 I just scored off eBay. (For better or worse, that thing is a brick; Apple were obviously insane then, for they put a nearly-uATX mainboard into a case that must weigh 80 pounds.)
"but the base looks like a cheap toy"
How dare you say that? The imac is the most beautiful piece of machinary ever devised. Except maybe the ipod or or the powermac... or maybe.. the macse and the lisa.. I would say more but I must clean lord Job's toliet.
It picks up dirt like a hoover so that cleaming white hemisphere that looks pathetic when you take it out of the box becomes a dull grey lump of crap after a few weeks.
Mine's been out of the box for three weeks now, and the gleaming (note the spelling) white base is still gleaming white. Perhaps if you used that Hoover yourself, the dirt wouldn't wind up in your computers.
Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
The material reminds me of those plastic chairs that we had in elementary school.
That would explain the rumors floating around Apple Tech Support that "got sat on by a confused first-grader" is the most common support incident with the new iMacs.
Ergonomica Auctorita Illico!
The only time I really notice the fan on mine is when I have the CD tray open. I'd say it doubles in volume, or more. But even then, it's still not enough to overcome the jet engine sounds from the Athlon on the floor next to it.
this year should see the 25th birthday special edition thingy..... there have been some mild rumors over the last year about it. the TAM was produced in very limited numbers, and by the time the public could get it, it was kinda outdated for the price (in terms of the inner schiznits). That being said, it was pretty neat, and did make it into some movies and TV shows (Batman & Robin, Seinfield etc). there are still online user groups dedicated to them, but then again there is for most everything Apple has ever made.
seeing as the TAM came out in March 1997 (discontinued in March 1998), this would be 5 years later. maybe we will see something at MWNYC? it is kind of odd you don't see Apple saying anything about the 25th anniversary of the company. seeing how the company is doing a lot better today than 5 years ago, i would think they might do *something* to celebrate.
Given how much secrecy Apple shrouds their product announcements in, the veracity of this story is either suspect or else Quanta Computer's tenure as the supplier of the flat panels is short-lived.
A few years ago someone from ATI leaked some details about an upcoming Apple product (like the day of or the day before the announcement) and ATI was immediately and severly slapped down by Apple.
The big change that might actually convince me the flat-panel iMacs are worth buying would be support for dual display mode, i.e. the ability to extend the desktop across multiple monitors. Then the current 15" wouldn't be too small, since I could just go out and buy myself a flat-panel lcd display of whatever size I choose to go with it. My PowerBook G3 currently supports this, but the current flat-panel iMacs only support video mirroring on external monitors.
It's funny- the publicity photos of the 15 inch macs really make it look a lot nicer then it is.
The photos make it look nicer, then Taco finds that it truly IS nicer. I am amazed.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
"a lot nicer *then* it is"
I can't believe they never learn.... *sigh*
You Can manually eject the CD Drive on a flat panel iMac. The hole is just hidden behind the cd door...
Meep Meep!
I was mildly disappointed that the 23" display didn't have an iLamp-style arm, since it would have really helped a lot ergonomically.
I guess it would have required a really heavy base, but it sure would have been cool.
I have to say that I love the ergonomics of the new iMac, to the point that I'd love to own one - something I would never have said about the previous generation. But it wouldn't be my main computer due to the relatively puny screen real esate.
Personally, I think a 17" or 19" iMac would be too much of a conflict with their PowerMac. And have you ever seen a 19" LCD? THis seems like a slightly insane rumour that's being bought thanks to a slow news day.
D
If you want ports on the right, you can have that. If you want ports on the left... you can have that too. It does make the optical drive go in an odd direction, but boy, it does make plugging things in easier :)
I've read quite a few posts here riding the iMac because of "cheap plastic"... as if there were no other kind of plastic. Check the plastic on 90% of the P.C.'s out there and compare to the iMac... then you will be able to know and see just what cheap plastic is all about...
I am in Apple's target market. I am a long-time Unix user. I appreciate quality! I lust after their laptops. But I just can't buy one, yet.
This is because I can't use the keyboards on their laptops. I need the key to the left of the 'A' to be a Ctrl key. This is not just a want; it is a genuine need based upon ergonomic reasons.
When Apple redesigns their laptop motherboards to use built-in USB keyboards, instead of built-in ADB keyboards, they will have fixed the problem. They have not yet done so.
Note: is is now possible to use the built-in ADB keyboard with Debian GNU/Linux, but as of yet, Apple has not made it possible for unix old-timers to use with OSX. Nor is it possible (as far as I know) to use with FreeBSD, NetBSD, or OpenBSD.
For full details on how the ADB keyboard was mis-designed, check out my previous slashdot posts.
Please note that my intention is not to troll. My intention is to warn other long-time unix users that Apple's laptop keyboards are not yet acceptable, and also to try to communicate this fact to people inside Apple. I want to effect change. I want Apple to fix this last problem, so that I can enthusiastically support them. If I didn't care, and if I didn't want to see this positive change, I wouldn't have bothered spending the time to make these posts.
Unfortunately, I have almost no hope. Apple has demonstrated for more than 10 years that they will not address the concerns of unix users. I sincerely hope that they change their ways. The fact that they now have a very-high quality unix OS gives me hope that they might start to care about unix users.
I am not really a Mac user but greatly envy their design.With regard to the new iMacs, I am wondering whether there are *ergonomically* competitive products in the PC/Linux world? Specifically the current iMac offers: (i) compact footprint; (ii) *Silent running*; (iii) dvi interface to flat panel; (iv) firewire out; (v) high quality keyboard and mouse. In my view some disadvantages include: (i) screen attachment limits placement; (ii) trailing edge CPU price/performance compared to PC world; (iii) No USB 2; (iv) Sealed construction; (v) Prefer Linux OS. Actually I think that the pricing of the iMacs in this cost benefit picture is a wash. I recently configured a P4 box based on the Shuttle FlexAT board in a "GBox" cube case with a 15" LCD as an iMac "equivalent." The cost was approximately 1500 US. The specs on the box were somewhat better than a similarly priced iMac: 1.6GHz P4/512M Ram/40G HD. However the unit was: Unacceptably noisy; larger; made use of vga rather than dvi connection to the flatpanel. So what are the iMac-like options in the PC world ie silent; compact; dvi video out? Or is it just better to run Yellow Dog on the iMac
You can very easily remap the control key to the caps lock key.
I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing. -- Thomas Jefferson
Actually, the inner surface of the plastic shell is painted, rather than the magnesium skeleton.
http://www.macosrumors.com/
"Our information thus far differs significantly from what this article offers up; we do believe that there will be a 17-inch widescreen display option either this summer or towards the end of the year -- but nothing larger, at least not yet...."
Shiny is starting to get dated?
Actually I think they are going the other way. The ibook is shiny but the PowerBook is not. The G4, eMac, original iMac, and all of the Apple displays are shiny but the xServe is not. The flat panel on the new iMac is shiny but the base is not. Finally to top it off more than half the things you encounter in OSX are shiny.
Conclusion
Shiny wins! Shiny is cool! Revel in your shiny flat panel and use it to conceal the dull white base! Notice they gave you a shiny keyboard and mouse to go with that iMac?
Livin large man!
And if the new iMac works the same way as the Quicksilver towers, holding down the mouse button as the computer boots should trigger firmware to eject the CD.
IIRC.
That nice plasticized corner with "Slashdot" on it.
The Helvetica-like sans-serif font for "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters" and the 'ruled' background it and the topic icons rest on.
Strange isn't it?
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Since a large chunk of PPC production goes into embedded applications, they take heat seriously.
Chip too hot = no sales
Steve Jobs has always hated fan noise so until there is a zero noise fan, PPC, Transmeta, or some other low heat chip will be what macs run on.
I'm GIMP impaired ;) Is there anyone out there that can pull down a photo of the iMac and resize the display accurately, to give a sense of what the new iMac would look like?
My iMac has a beautiful white base, the screen has a viewable area larger than most supposed 17 inch CRT monitors, and comes with powerful DV edititing and DVD writing software... all of which is more than I can say for any cheap-ass Intel system I've ever seen.
The editor is clearly (a) jealous that he can't buy a comparable Intel machine (b) trolling for this response. Besides, that base is metal, has the editor even touched the machine?
My single complaint is that it's lack of a L2 cache hampers the otherwise kick-ass 800Mhz G4's performance, but it still rocks quite nicely, beating any PIII machine performance-wise as long as you stay away from Classic. Some day I'll replace the keyboard with a third-party model that sports a power button, but generally, I'm just happy that I don't need to restart when Word crashes ( incidentally the only app I've ever seen crash on OS X )...
Stuff your anti-Apple opinions. The company is starting to do things right for once, you'd think Slashdot would be more supportive of the only real competition for Microsoft...
I'm not sure a 19" iMac makes much sense cost wise. The whole point about the iMac is it's relatively low cost, but with a 19" display, it would probably cost at least $2000. For that price you could get a PowerMac with a 19" flat screen CRT.
:-)
Although, I must admit, if they did come out with one of these things, I would seriously consider it for my summer upgrade
---
Open Source Shirts
Oh man, I lived in a dusty apartment like that, too! Everything not made from the right material got *TOTALLY* dusty. I eventually moved out... .
Why edit yourself? I mean, how many million people read your posts?
Its amazing how the marketplace reacts to apples products- the iMac looks dorky in pictures, but when you see on in person, you see how finely crafted it is. I ordered one sight unseen (the specs fit my needs more than anything else) and was extremely surprised at how well built it is.
The other amazing thing is just how innovative putting the display on that arm really is. I know people are going "what's the big deal??": and others have commented that larger displays would tip it over.
Well, the base is really good sized and heavy- the arm, as is, could handle a display significantly larger and heavier (I've tested this by pulling on the arm to try and tip the mac- it takes al ot of weight to do so.)
But what's really amazing about this machine is that you move the display. Regularly. When its on the arm like this, you can adjust it to precisely how you're sitting at that point in time.
If you're in front of a computer a lot, you move around in your chair-- unconciously, I'm sure-- to remain comfortable, keep your legs from falling asleep, etc. With the iMAc, you can trivially move the display to fit where you're sitting at that moment in time, or move it over to show your girlfriend something going on on the screen ( find myself doing this alot)...
Just a half inch adjustment makes an improvement on the ergonomics. And people always move around.
Now, after using an iMac for a couple months, I can't stand to be in front of a display that doesn't move (like my other computers)-- and canstantly have to stop myself from adjusting them. I was at WWDC and used one of the huge HD Cinema displays there, and kept moving it! All 30 pounds of it, or whatever- it really huge and moving it was liek dragging a metal table across a linoleum floor- its not meant to be moved... but I'm spoilt.
As to larger displays- the weird thing is that this 15 inch display seems too big for me. I keep finding myself surprised at its size. I can't imagine a bigger display on this machin-- not because the arm couldn't handle it but because it would be too much display.
It wasn't this way with CRTs where I demanded employers provide me a 21 inch trinitron, as an ergonomic requirement. but this 15 inch LCD is better in terms of image quality and usability than a 21 in trinitron running Mac OS (which is equal to a 30 inch trinitron runnign Windwos or Linux-- windowing systems that waste/misuse a lot of real estate.)
Constantly slashdot articles that talk aobut Apple products, such as this one, dismiss them out of ignorance. you cannot see the utility and innovation of the iMac from looking at it in a picture. You have to use it ot realize that you really do want to move the display regularly.
People get used to using Windows / Linux (different operating systems, essentially the same look and feel) and then dismiss the MAc because they don't fit what they're used to. This is exactly like a white person being insensitive around blacks or a straight person being homophobic- its fear and hatred of whats different. Except instead of people we're talking about technology so its less dangerous, but just as illogical. But then- these prejudices do get translated, into real world effects as people are denied jobs or mistreated by the ignorant.
As a class of people who have been mistreated by Windows non-thinkers, its time to stop doing the exact same thing to Apple products-- which, are treated even worse, because they have the jealousy effect by being both not-microsoft and truely innovative.
Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23
Frankly, if a 19" flat screen is all the iMac has to recommend it (and I'm not saying it is), I'll pass.
Does anyone know of any reasonably-priced ($2K or less) 19- or 21-inch flat-screen displays for the PC?
I am alone, yet I also surf the universal backwash of undifferentiated Being, which is LOVE.
The only product that has been "steved" was the Newton. Its not clear why, but that was his doing.
Other than that, this idea that something will be "steved" because it was leaked is just more irrational bigotry towards all things apple.
Steve is an extrordinarily rational mane. Passionate, yes, but he is leading the market, and paying very close attention to the market. That's why apple's been so successful lately.
There were rumors abou the iMac itself for about a year before it came out, yet the product was not "steved" wit was amazing.
Apple may or may not ship larger displays soon... I expect they won't and I think its wise that they don't-- the prices of the larger displays don't yet make sense for a consumer machine.
Also, its worth noting that as a consumer product, the iMac sells millions of units a year. A larger display is going to have a much lower yeild which means that there may well not be production capacity to support the high volume, lower margin business.
And then when Apple doesn't announce them in July, you'll be back here telling us that you were right, they were "steved".
Well, if by "steved" you mean choosing to ship products for which they can fulfill the demand, then you're right. But "irrationally canned" is just bigotry on your part.
Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23
You said:
I don't hate the iMac, I think it's just a piece of hardware. But sometimes I just cannot resist throwing baits at the mac lovers, who don't seem to think it is just that - hardware.
What you said, essentially means:
I don't hate the dark skin, I think it's just a skin color. But sometimes I just cannot resist throwing baits at the Nigger lovers, who don't seem to think it is just that - skin color.
Do you now see what people rise to that "bait"? Why people take it seriously?
It is a prejudice and it a prejudice that has real effects--- products don't get ported, you get passed over for jobs, you deal with derision and what is essentially hatred, in a variety of contexts-- airports when you pull our your power book, online when you deal with bigots like you, etc. etc.
We are no more "zeolots" than MLK was. We deserve recognition for having the content of our character to use a better
Think about it.
Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23
Parent had a rating of '-1 offtopic'... but it's similar to a '2 insightful' in a later post in the same sub-thread on big screens tipping. Sigh.
All these complaints about the dome are typical of what happens when you look at a picture of something in place of actually sitting down and using it. In use, I can't see the dome; all I see is the screen, keyboard and mouse, which is all I need (or want) to see. And the ergonomic benefits of the easily adjustable screen make this the most comfortable computer I've ever used, period.
And that's in 25 years of using computers every day.
There is a thin line between genius and insanity. I have erased that line. -- Oscar Levant
I do like the idea of Mac OS X very much (a well-designed interface with a good, stable underpinning that allows people who Know What They're Doing to hack around); it's certainly a better operating system than Windows (IMHO) for most desktop users.
However, I really agree with the comment that Linux "waste[s]/misuse[s] a lot of real estate". How is this the case? Are you comparing MacOS to only something like KDE or Gnome? I really don't think that MacOS X is so very much better at screen real estate than Enlightenment; in fact, some aspects of it annoy me greatly. Apple decided that I don't want to windowshade things anymore; in E, I can iconify (what OS X does now) or windowshade them. Also, I really miss the floating menu (you can get this with a hack on Windows, but I haven't seen any sort of equivalent on Mac OS). The fact that all applications in Mac OS share a menu bar at the top of the screen might save some real estate, but I have a hard time believing that it's such a huge difference (especially for someone like me, whose screen is mostly covered with Eterms). And the inability to set "focus follows mouse" is a crying shame.
To those who will yell that, "Those are 'hacker' things and Apple doesn't care about catering to you"; you're right. But that proves that they don't have the uber-OS (and I'm not sure that anyone can). Apple certainly deserves a lot of credit for their ideas and implementations, but they're not perfect for everyone. For most "regular" users? I do think so, yes. But not for me...not at the moment.
WMBC freeform/independent online radio.
CmdrTaco, you can stuff your anti-Apple shit. Did your wife dump you?
Glass is always full, huh?
This is one comment that I've seen in several places, but cannot really fathom: "the ports are on the back so I have to reach around to them."
Do you really carry your iPod's cable around with you? I have a G4 tower -- connectors definitely on the back and under the table, too -- and I have a couple of cables that I've connected to the back and brought around to the front where they wait to connect to my MP3 player or camera.
I guess it boils down to whether you use the computer in such a way that you connect to a port or to a cable.
> this 15 inch LCD is better in terms of image
> quality and usability than a 21 in trinitron
> running Mac OS
Excuse me? I have a 21" monitor at work on a PC that runs at 1600x1200 at approx 150 DPI. There is no way a 15" 1024x768 can come close to that. I don't like having windows take up my entire screen and at work I don't have to have that. I can read small fonts just fine and I can have 2 full page documents side by side on my screen while retaining legibility.
On my iMac (CRT), I can't even have 1 page on the screen without the font becoming unreadable (with font smoothing on *or* off).
Sure an LCD screen might be nicer than the same sized CRT but it can't match high resolution and DPI.
Look at the eMac. It has a 17" CRT with a *higher* resolution than the iMac.
The issue is the built-in keyboard.
I know that I could carry an extra USB keyboard, and I could use it just fine. However, I don't want to have to carry extra stuff to use my laptop. I want to be able to use the built-in keyboard. I can't use the built-inADB keyboard, because of its bad design.
As the post you referred to also indicated, this is only possible for USB keyboards.
All Apple laptops have built-in ADB keyboards.
The CapsLock key is not remappable (as far as I know) in MacOSX, FreeBSD, NetBSD, or OpenBSD. (It is remappable in Debian GNU/Linux, but I also have a need to run OpenBSD, and would want to run OSX if I paid for Apple hardware.
that is all.
###SE###
that is all.
###.CX###
It's called VIA ...'viewable image area' (diagonally), and it's about to go the way of the do-do, in favor of ratios...
16:10
4:3
...etc.
My Linux desktop looks nothing like Windows, but is in fact based on NeXT/OPENStep, you know, that other OS designed by Steve Jobs. Not every Linux user uses Gnome or KDE, ya know.
The fact that all applications in Mac OS share a menu bar at the top of the screen might save some real estate, but I have a hard time believing that it's such a huge difference (especially for someone like me, whose screen is mostly covered with Eterms). And the inability to set "focus follows mouse" is a crying shame.
These are usability issues. Ok, the menu-bar thing is a screen real-estate issue as well. When you have repeated menu bars, you do burn a LOT of real estate. plus, putting it on the window slows you down, as compared to putting it on the top of the screen.
Same thing with "floating" menus- they are much slower for the user to use than a top of screen menu. (Though Mac OS does have them if you use the second mouse button-- another thing that actually slows people down, which is why Apple still ships a one button mouse.)
The focuse following the mouse point is the most annoying feel that I've ever had to deal with. I'm happy with the way MacOS works and cannot imagine why you'd want it another way-- but those are just my feelings. The science behind it is, it slows you down-- you end up getting the wrong focus, often, instead of the focus you want.
These complaints are regular are repeated and all of them have been answered at least a decade ago. Scientificly, objectively, all of these issues are ones where apple chose usability. There's a reason they are that way and the alternative is to slow all your customers down and make your product harder to work with.
I won't answer further in this thread because this has been laid to rest years ago-- its a scientific fact.
Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23
Excuse me? I have a 21" monitor at work on a PC that runs at 1600x1200 at approx 150 DPI. There is no way a 15" 1024x768 can come close to that.
.38mm pixels and they'd claim that their display was super superior cause it would do 1280x960 compared to the 72dpi 800x600 Mac display I was using... course they also complained of headaches alot.
Of course not. The iMac is legible.
150 DPI is unreadable.
This reminds me of the arguments I used to have with BBS weenies back in the day every PC came with a el-cheapo 13 inch (though it claimed to be 15 inch) monitor with
Again, you're using silly specs to compare with a product you haven't seen. Running 150 dpi makes your display useless.
Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23
I'd like to be able to rotate it sideways.
Cake or Death? Cake Please!
you may also try to run X11 with KDE (or Gnome, or a simple WM) side-by-side with OS X, thanks to the people at fink.sourceforge.net... very convenient to have open source and legacy software in one session (of course, you can also use fullscreen and toggle, but...) Breaks Apple's design rules, for sure. See
s cr een.png
;-D )
http://spottyblue.stanford.edu/~progene/images/
for a screenshot (no menue bar, because 2nd screen on my TiBook
(continuing my tradition of posting replies to old comments that nobody except possibly the parent poster will ever see... sigh. LAST POST!)
I disagree. I understand the theory behind the statement; CRT monitors are measured diagonally, so a 17" isn't really a full 17" across.
That's not the theory. First of all, LCDs are also measured diagonally. Nobody ever thought the size was horizontal. With an aspect ratio of 3x4, the difference between the diagonal and the long side would be really, really significant. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? The Pythagorean triple is 3:4:5, so the long side is 20% less than the diagonal.
You also mentioned flat tubes -- did you mean that they cheat by counting how the tape measure wraps around the curvature of the screen? I guess that's something, but even pre-flat-tube screens don't curve that much. Besides, I don't even like true flat tubes: I am an absolute Trinitron snob -- it's got to be vertically flat, but a little horizontal curvature helps to break up the reflections; flat-tube screens seem to pick up too much glare.
Anyway, no, the trick is that CRT sizes are given as the diagonal of the tube, including the 3/4" or whatever at each edge that is under the plastic, and unusable. It's the size of the actual tube, but not the size of the image that you can see. That's why they are advertised as, e.g., '15" CRT (13.8" DVI[1])', '17" CRT (15.6" DVI)', or '19" CRT (16.9" DVI)'. LCDs are also measured diagonally, but the size given is the "true" (viewable) size. Hence, the 13.3" screen on my 'Book is only about a half-inch smaller than a 15" CRT, which is hardly noticeable. Ditto for the desk-lamp iMac's 15" LCD (I checked "http://www.apple.com/imac/specs.html" and that number is listed as viewable) vs. a 17" CRT. Though I can't say as much about the resolution being stuck at 1024x768 -- that is a real limitation. Still, the current desk-lamp is pretty nice, and a 17"/1280x1024 version would be truly sweet.
[1] Diagonal Viewable Image
David Gould
main(i){putchar(340056100>>(i-1)*5&31|!!(i<6)<< 6)&&main(++i);}