Slashdot Mirror
17-inch flat-Panel iMac Dead
EnlightenmentFan writes "Apple plans to stop production in June of the iMac with flat-panel 17-inch display, according to this article at Asian tech-news site Digitimes. As with the now-history 15" flat-panel iMac, sales started strong but stalled once the early-adopter crowd had bought in. Probably-not-unrelated story (also posted today): Chungwha Picture Tubes is boosting the price of its 17-inch LCD monitor panels."
I have had limited exposure to Apple machines in the past, and I have to say I do like them.
But this is not the first time that Apple have had an unsuccessful product on their hands - the iCube went the same way. I mean, to me it was an excellent product, but I think it was just too expensive.
Apple are quite a big company, but they are not THAT big - perhaps they should learn from this and the iCube, and plan a little more carefully before they launch certain products? It must have cost them a lot of money in R&D and the parts for these things?
"Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
How could they? I thought they'd finally invented the perfect personal computer, and that the 17-inch LCD iMac would never be discontinued. I guess I thought wrong. :(
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
I will give them that. The real problem with that pariticular form factor is that youc cannot really upgrade the display easily and think that hurt the overall sales. It is hard to upgrade when the monitor is bolted to the chassis. But who wants an iMac when you can get a Dual G4 with one of those really pretty cinema displays. I would trade an appendage for that. I will just have to make do with my BRAND SPANKING NEW powerbook G4. Oh baby. Santa is my friend.
perhaps we should wait until MacWorld Expo to set straight the rumors, and see if perhap a new/great product will be introduced in its place, or if this will infact happen at all.
Apple normally doesn't throw out this kind of information, and if so, they do it quietly.
But if the information is true, it's really not an indication that the iMac is disappearing, but being revised. The iMac is still a very popular computer and is not a failure in any instance. The 15" systems were discontinued only because the 17" systems arrived.
Count on the new iMac with the same 17" display, but with improved processor speed, and optimized for Jaguar.
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
APPLE STILL SELLS 15 INCH monitor imacs. THere is no way they have a 7 month inventory backlog on 15" panels, so the article cannot be correct about then being discontinued in june. On the other hand it is true that apple stopped selling 15" monitors. It's conceivable they might discontinue 17" monitors in lieu of just using 3rd party monitors. if their profit margin was slim this would be a shrewd move to drive down the price of the macs, while still retaining their premium 22" monitor offering.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
MacOS Rumors recently noted that certain stores were unable to order more CRT-based iMacs and eMacs. This is what Apple does when they are about to update a model. And now this?
Maybe Apple is finally taking everyone's advice, and realizing that consumers would far rather have a small, integrated box, like the Cube, that can interface with VGA and DVI as well as ADC monitors, and that is price-competitive with the cheapest x86 boxes. The revival of something like the Cube, but sans monitor and starting at $600, would actually get price-conscious consumers to consider getting a Mac instead.
The last two stories are:
17-inch flat-Panel iMac Dead
MicroBSD 0.6RC2 Released
shouldn't that be:
MicroBSD is Dead (or dying) and
17-inch flat-Panel Released (We've seen dupes, and late posts so why not)
just when you though you got things figured...
The 15" iMac is alive and well. Tis only the 15" standalone LCD display that has been discontinued.
If this story is at all true, it simply means that 17" iMacs are impinging on the sales of G4 towers, and the iMac will remain 15" only for the time being.
What?
Clearly likely that the entire model line will be refreshed by June anyway.
They are just too dang expensive.
Drop the price, like a THOUSAND dollars, and I'll bet they move like hotcakes.
Sources: 17-inch flat-panel iMac to stop production in June
David Tzeng, Taipei; Chinmei Sung, DigiTimes.com [Thursday 2 January 2003]
The 17-inch flat-panel iMac will terminate production in June, following the same fate as the 15-inch flat-panel model, which stopped production last October, said local PC makers familiar with the matter.
It is estimated that about 500,000 to 600,000 flat-panel iMacs were sold in 2002 following their introduction last January. The once highflying desktop computer, which created a buzz with its desk lamp-like look, is expected to sell another 300,000 to 400,000 units between now and June.
The flat-panel iMac, which debuted last January, became a smash hit shortly after being introduced. Sales peaked in March, with local manufacturers working round the clock, fulfilling shipments of over 10,000 units a day.
Sales of the 15-inch flat-panel iMacs practically stalled in June 2002 after selling more than 300,000 units between February and May, resulting in an early production termination in October.
"First you gotta do the truffle shuffle."
This flies in the face of the rumor mill that has been rumbling that *all* iMacs were going to be 17" or larger. Although I think this article is more believable.
I don't get the reference to the "now-history 15" iMac...". Did the poster mean to imply that the 15" iMac is being phased out, or that the 15" iMac has waned in it's popularity. Surely apple isn't phasing out *both* the 15" and 17" iMacs. right?
Hon Hai replaces LG as sole supplier of Apple's iMac/eMac PCs - report
TAIPEI (AFX-ASIA) - Hon Hai Precision Industry Co Ltd (2317.TW) has replaced LG Electronics Co as the sole supplier of Apple Computer Inc's iMac/eMac desktop PCs, with 2003 shipments estimated at up to 1.0 mln units, the Economic Daily News reported without citing a source. While Chunghwa Picture Tubes Ltd (2475.TW) will provide 17-inch monitors for the eMac machines, AU Optronics Corp (2409.TW) has been certified as a TFT-LCD panel supplier to Apple Computer, it said.
No electrons were harmed creating this post, though some may have been subjected to electrical and/or magnetic fields.
Both 19" and 22" iMacs have been rumored. It's MacWorld time.
It's not the end of the iMac. Apple will be in business next month. They will still be selling one button mice. They will still be annoying Wintel gearheads.
So far as I can figure, there are two types of people who bought this thing. The first group is predictible and, as such, irrelevant: Mac die-hards who would buy the latest-and-greatest regardless.
Then, there's the people living in this posh little urban apartments who bought it because it'd look cool on their Britanny Computer Desk from Crate & Barrel. These people are a good market, because they have too much money and they use it to buy things to make them seem hip. This may be a slightly down time for these people, but they're still around and you can bet your bottom dollar they'll be back in force the second the economy upticks.
For a little while, it really looked as if that was the new key market for these iMacs -- the designer crowd. But the problem with selling to the designer crowd is that if you don't have something *different* every six months or so, you've destroyed the whole point of the attraction. Once grandmas in the Midwest start getting these things on their desk, it's time to move on.
Well, this thing's overstayed it's time, and there's still no heir apparent. C'mon, Jobs -- you decided on the target market. Start selling.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
The 17" iMac was one of the very few Apple products I've had any interest in. If there's any truth to this, maybe they'll have a sale on the remaining stock.
No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
Perhaps that's more accurately described as "only adopter" crowd. This is a fact that many Mac fans wont face up to. "Good design" is on consumers lists of possitives but it's pretty far down the list below "good price"
The article has a related blurb (registration required) at the bottom that says that a 19" iMac will be available in 3Q.
If the 17" iMac caused the death of the 15", it would follow that the 19" would kill the 17".
If this is true, it probably means the PowerPC 970 is going to be ready to ship in Macs for MWNY.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
The recent rumors were that apple would intro a 19" iMac this January. But with LCD prices for this size range not dropping and possibly increasing, that rumor is fading. Additionally, a 19" 'head' on the same iMac base would not be aesthetically pleasing (it would look funny). The only way that Apple is dropping all 17" iMacs and moving to all 19" is with great pricing on the new screens and a form factor change. Don't forget that it is always possible that Apple is working on a new enclosure (mood Mac story)that might use a different 17" LCD.
.....of getting things wrong.
Actually the last quarter financials did not imply the LCD iMacs were quite so dead in the water. Most of Apple's $$$ recently has been from 10.2, and it is the G4 towers that have really not been selling as well as they should be. Everything else was steady. The reason Apple's profits were not as nice as some people would want (even in this market) was due to a lot of cash going to opening stores and in the buying a few software companies out.
It's possible Apple is switching to another plant. At one point Apple invested a lot of $$$$ in some LCD manufacturing plant, though i forget which one. That was why they did better in the LCD shortages than some other manufacturers. They traditionally have invested in some of the plants that produce their parts, and that seems to give them a bit of leverage when parts get tight and i guess helps them when they have their demands of secret products and quick production changes.
Somebody else would know better, but is the main Apple LCD supplying plant, or were they using it to get the initial supplies up to match initial demand? They have done that in the past too.
MacWorld Keynote is next week, i assume *something* will change there and maybe in the few weeks following. Last year the G4 towers were bumped to 1GHz in a no-press website update about 3 weeks after MacWorld SF.
The first time I saw an IMAC with the 17" flat panel...I almost wanted to own one. Despite being a die hard pc user, the flat panel on the imac came close to converting me.
To this day it just seems like the quality of the image with the bold, bright colors is the best flat panel out there.
YMMV
It seems to me Slashdot got trolled bigtime on this one. I don't see Apple discontinuing either of the flat-panel iMacs, especially since everyone seems to like them.
Now stopping production to update the product line? With MacWorld coming up, that doesn't seem to be much of a stretch. Or maybe they're just moving production to a company that doesn't broadcast all of Apple's future moves to the entire world.
I haven't seen anything online suggesting that 15" production will stop altogether, so be wary of those who predict that every iMac will be a 17" model as of next week.
Apple, like most computer manufacturers, will EOL (end-of-line) a product depending on when they release a new model, as well as how many existing models they need to clear out of their stock. Apple could well have just stopped production on the current-generation iMacs because they're about to be replaced, and did so in October because they knew that interest in the initial models was fading fast after almost a year.
Mind you, would I (and others) like it if there were nothing but 17" models at about the same prices? Heck yeah.
Well if the article is right, then Apple will be releasing new models at MWSF right? This in itself is a bit of a scoop, you wouldn't expect them to have an all new iMac since the this model has only been out for a year or so and the point in which sales dropped off would not have given them enough time to design an all new iMac (esp considering how long it took for them to come up with the latest one). I assume then that they are simply retiring the current line and coming out with different screen sizes with tweeks in configuration.
;)
Either that, or they have strengthened the arm enough to stick a 19" crt on it
If these rumors are true, I'm betting they're discontinuing the line just so they can bring out a series of colored iMacs. The current white line is very polarizing - you either love it or you hate it. I can see Apple announcing a line of non-white machines, most likely black, magenta, and navy, before then, maybe during Mac World New York. The line's just too successful to think otherwise.
Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses
I give a shit, because Apple makes some cool shit.
Even if I never buy anything, I like looking at the latest whiz-bang wild-ass thing Apple's done, because even when they miss, it's at least because they're trying something new. The G4 Cube was such a beast... it missed the mark completely, but it was a cool lookin' box. Better than beige, better than bling! art.
It's like going out and test-driving cars when you don't even want a new car -- you do it just to see what's out there, and because it's fun.
If you need an explanation for this sort of thing on the other hand, why are you here?
Tell that to the thousands of people who have spent thousands of dollars on OS9 apps.
It's too bad that your friend didn't have a problem with static discharge - because he could have had it repaired for free.
Take a look at AppleCare Document 88195. If you call either of the numbers at the bottom of the article, tell them about your problem, persist, and - and this is the most important part - quote the document above, they will get a supervisor on the phone with you, and that supervisor will take down your information, have a FedEx box sent to you, pick it up (with your display inside), and ship it back within weeks - fixed.
For free.
This happened to me, and I put off researching about the problem until it was happening every couple of seconds. There would be a popping sound, accompanied by a dimming of the screen and an odd zoom effect that would slowly morph back into a useable screen. At first it happened infrequently. Toward the end it had really screwed up some of the monitor's geometry, especially when manipulating large patches of white space on the screen.
If you're questioning whether or not Apple would really fix something like this for free (and even pay for shipping it), check out The MacFixit Forums and search for "pop-dim-zoom" for the last year or so.
Oh, and my studio display is an old one - it's bright bondi blue, from the days when G3s and first-gen iMacs reigned supreme.
concrete5: a cms made for marketing, but strong enough for geeks.
I seem to recall a foreign site months ago saying that Apple was discontinuing 15" iMacs, but what really happened was 15" LCD displays went away.
Maybe a similar translation error is occuring here?
I am an Apple Reseller. This is all wrong. As others have pointed out the 15" LCD iMac is absolutly still being made. I have proof that both the 15" and 17" are being produced.
Apple serial numbers include the week the product was produced. I got a delivery this very morning of both 15" and 17" made in the first week of december 2002.
blackfly
Go to the Apple Store at Apple.com.
Click on the iMac.
Notice that not only is the 17" iMac for sale, but so is the "defunct" 15" model.
Just another tribute to the Slashdot school of journalism.
While Mac OS X is breathtaking, and the aesthetic design of the cases is both stylish and functional, the processor technology lags far behind the x86 market, and the equipment is quite simply overpriced.
What is more, much of Mac OS X is written outside of Apple (BSD, Mach, gcc, et al). In theory, Apple's OS development costs should be somewhat below Microsoft. There are more than a few cases where Apple's OS tools are substandard, also.
I suggest that Apple release a $350 450MHz G3 with USB and a standard VGA connector. It could double as a gaming machine. Please bundle StarOffice, and it is also time to ditch IE (I hate popups).
Apple also ought to investigate the embedded market with OS X, especially since Linux has made great strides in this area. A Tivo running a stripped down OS X with Apple branding would have an enormous impact on Apple's visibility.
Get an XServe. Rack mount, no pastels, indicator lights on the front.... XServe design.
The only 17inch studio display that could make static popping was the long discontinued 17 inch CRT. This has been gone for two years.
The 17in studio display is and has been an LCD, and LCDs don't make static popping noises.
And, this article isn't about the 17in studio display, it's about 17in LCD iMacs.
So, the mod who rated your post was as mis-informed as you are.
Kind of strange how they've been selling computers for the past 20 years if NOBODY is willing to buy them...
Even if I never buy anything, I like looking at the latest whiz-bang wild-ass thing Apple's done, because even when they miss, it's at least because they're trying something new.
And when they hit, you're going to see the same basic ideas in cheap Chinese-made PC hardware four to six months later.
All you trolls (you know who you are) can bitch all you want about Apple, but even you have to admit that they are far and away the most influential computer company in the world.
I write in my journal
that's funny, I bought FOUR in the last 9 months.. a TiBook and G4 dual for home, a G4 for work, and a 17" iMac for my GF for xMas.
I'm going ot go out on a limb and say two things:
1. You have never USED a Mac running OS X (and you probably wouldn't know what to do with a shell, Apache, MySQL, a good GUI, etc anyway)
2. You have never actually built a box (or even better, bought one from Dell, Gateway, etc.) that was FEATURE EXACT and *then* made your "overpriced" out-your-ass comments. Given you cna't compare processor speeds per say (assume 1.5x to 2x speed of G4 == speed of Intel) go ahead. Make sure you include OS, basic productivity SW and so on.
God I hate moronic zealots (both PeeCee *and* Mac) it's fine to dislike somehing based on KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE... but fukcing-a 99% of the people who say "Macs suck, they are overpriced and blah blah blah" have never priced or USED one!!!!
OK, my rant for 2003 is done.
Department of Homeland Security: Removing the rights real patriots fought and died for since 2001
since quartz/aqua is built atop a bsd core, why couldn't apple just recopmpile it to run under linux. it shouldn't be THAT hard. i can't comment about problems with X, since i have 7 xclients set up in my classroom that run great, but, i know that most desktops/users wouldn't need the client/server architecture, and would love to run something like aqua on x86. there is no reason apple can't sell it on top of linux. it wouldn't need to link to any gpl code, and if i'm not mistaken, it's already compiled under gcc. imagine a new P4 running linux with aqua on top. it requires no porting of darwin, it doesn't really cut into mac sales, and it would be easy to get apps like photoshop, dreamweaver, etc., ported. well, that's what i think.
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
First of all, the new product announcements are in a few days. That could clear things up. Second, are you all really going to take the word of an obscure Asian business journal as the death knell of the best selling computer Apple has built in the last three years?
The 15" iMac has been consistently rumored to have been discontinued, but this has been refuted by other sources. It is still for sale on Apple's site and in retail stores - but the reigining theory is that it will be history in favor of the 17" model. It has to do with better margins for 17" LCDs vs 15".
Another story widely posted Thursday details the iMac (and eMac) production being switched to a new manufacturer, so maybe the reporters got half the story.
And lastly, how the heck do you kill a computer six months from now? That makes little to no business sense. The rumors of the iMac's death... you know the rest.
Most Mac-rumor sites seem to think that Apple is going to drop the 15inch iMac in favor of the 17inch. I highly doubt Apple is going to stop selling both the 15in and 17in iMac. The LCD iMac does not seem to be another "cube" for Apple... this product has sold a -lot- better.
Slashdot needs to leave stuff like this up to macrumors.com, macosrumors.com, or thinksecret.com
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
i agree 100% with you. Moto does not seem to be making the chips like they should. The rumors of the pending IBM 970 chip (rollout in 2nd half of 2003) are not going to help G4 tower sales for the next 6 months. I would think there will be at least 1 G4 tower revision between today and July. It may be next week, or in the following weeks/months. I think the people buying G4 towers now are people that NEED them. people that are thinking of upgrading, like me, are waiting or pondering the upgrade kits.
i could pay $1600 for a dual 867MGhz (or students can still get a single 867MGhz for about $1300 from the edu store) or pay $450 for a 800MGHZ upgrade card from Sonnet. Since the DDR doesnt seem to be benchmarking too much better, upgrading the processor on my G4 400MGhzAGP really seems like a reasonable hold over for the next year. Even if the 970 chips only end up in Xserve or something, the G4 towers should have the motherboards tweaked by then.
Then why does the 3 companies mentioned all use ideas and hardware pioneered by Apple?
USB(And serial busses in general,forex: ADB), the mouse, windowing consumer OS, Intelligent bus (NuBus, PCI was just a better implemented versionof the same basic idea), WYSIWYG, colour high-res displays on consumer hardware, multitasking consumer OS (Yeah, Amiga did that right first, I know, but Apple was the first comercially successful version)
Dell is certainly not influential, they've never had a new idea (Apart from their busness model). HP/Compaq hasn't done anything significant in 10 years,
IBM, now they're influential, but not really in the PC business, but in the Server and laptop space they certainly are.
"You've got an invalid haircut" -Warren Zevon - Life'll Kill Ya
Everyone is waiting for the price to go down. Flat panels are way too overpriced. If the average flatpanel prices were cut by 1/3 people would start buying.
Save the World! Use a Quote!
a tiny home-computer maker with about 5% of the market hardly constitutes the "most influential computer company in the world".
Remember the fruity-colored iMacs? How soon after they were released did you start seeing all sorts of products made out of brightly colored translucent plastic? Apple-- specifically Jonathan Ive and his group-- influence far more than the computer market.
I write in my journal
A few things:
You have a $200 walmart pc that will still have shaky support for a wide variety of devices. There will definately not be any of this plug and play nonsense.
Consumers will continue to buy macs just as they do BMWs or Mercedes - because they're willing to pay more money for something better. Apple will never nose out the Wintel duopoly, but it will always (hopefully) have a following of loyal users. I should know, I bought my second Tibook this year. My old one I sold to my friend to replace his iBook.
I've had, literally, dozens of x86 servers at home and have over the past 10 years. So, it's not that I don't know what cheap is. True, lets go down and buy the newest fastest video card or lets get some cheap drives and upgrade to raid. However tho, now I just want something portable that works.
The DVD playback on a Tibook has no equal. AND, since I can make movies and DVDs on my Tibook, the Fujitsu equivalent - the Celcius - (which is the only x86 laptop company I'd ever consider buying from after constant crap from Dell, Compaq, HP), doesn't even have DVD burning. But it does have 1/2 the ram costs $600 more. Laptops vs. desktops are different; true. But Apple designs machines, not commodities. Wintel is all about commodities. And there you have it.
Actually, they never stopped making the old iMac, it's just being sold to Education only now. There's a 17" version with a G4 CPU called an eMac.
The iMac form factor lasted 4 years as the primary form factor for Apple's consumer boxes. The Current iMac form factor will likely last nearly as long, with some changes (Colour, internals, screen size)
Apple's got a patent for PC's that can change their colour, that will show up in the iMac line (If it ever becomes reality), and that's a remote possibility for MacWorld San Fransisco in two weeks.
Likely the only actual changes will be a speed bump, possibly a new system board with DDR Ram like the PowerMac and a switchover from 15" to 17" as the rpimary form factor (With the 15" LCD living on in the budget config).
A new GPU is also likely, either a Geforce4MX or a Radeon 9000.
"You've got an invalid haircut" -Warren Zevon - Life'll Kill Ya
An article at MacWorld UK says that Apple is going to be switching its supplier of iMacs and eMacs. I think it's likely that the real story here is that LG will stop production of the iMac in June, NOT that Apple will stop making them completely. Obviously I can't be certain that both reports aren't true, but this certainly looks like another example of bad journalism.
I remember reading somewhere that Apple has ordered a run of 19" screens (presumably for the iMac).
If this is so, I'd think we're just seeing another product cycle. I'm betting Apple keeps the current iMac alive until they upgrade the Powermac.
This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
it seems unlikely that Apple would scrap the flat panel iMac all together considering the success it has brough them. also, as an Apple technician, the eMac CRT screens are notoriously bad with about 60% of them having to be replaced a few months after purchase.
if Apple wants to survive this year, they have to introduce a new CPU altogether. they've pushed the G4 as far as it can go and die hard Apple fans are not going to put up with yet another speed bump.
as for Macworld, i'm prediciting a new lifestyle device and perhaps a new iPod (perhaps one that sync wirelessly with your computer?)
they own 30% of Samsung, IIRC.
Just raise the taxes on crack.
for pete's sake, is it that hard to understand?
Apple was using LG Electronics and they have ceased production. Hon Hai Precision Industry is now making the eMacs and iMacs.
Your claim that a 800Mhz Cyrix is going to "run circles" around a 800Mhz G4 is beyond absurd. Benchmarks from half a dozen sites have clearly shown that the 800Mhz cyrix can't compete with 500-600Mhz celeron's. Those processors in turn are MURDERED by even equivalent speed G4's.
So the iBook wasn't for you. That's OK. Take a prozac. But if you can't figure out that for some users, macs are a great choice, you're doing them a great disservice in recommending something else.
For some computer users (i.e. the mass majority of computer owning consumers), its not the act of hacking away at their boxes that they derive satisfaction from, but the finished product they get from it that interests them. They don't admin networks or write cgi scripts, they make greeting cards and mix CD's for friends. Apple makes great consumer applications, and a lot of people buy them and have a good time. You shouldn't have giant bleeding ulcer's over it.
I appologize on behalf of Apple Computers that they had the gaul to release products that don't appeal to you. I might as well extend that to every other company on the planet who's goods or services you don't patronize.
This is where I get my recommended daily allowance of "Foot in Mouth."
I think most Mac users would choke on their Wheaties if someone told them that they "should" add serial/parallel ports and a floppy drive to their systems. You DO realize that the only reason they've been on computers so long is because they're legacy devices, right?
And it's fairly evident that you haven't really used or read about Macs as of late. 256 MB is very much useable on most Macs (like my PowerBook 867) running OS X. It's also entirely possible that MacWorld San Francisco will bump up the minimum memory to 256 on at least the iMac, as well as add USB 2 and/or Firewire 2.
Furthermore: the current Firewire spec has actually been demonstrated as being about as fast (or faster) than USB 2 in practice. Most Mac users probably wouldn't care much about USB 2 except that they would want to ensure ultimate compatibility.
Apple sells computers. Porting OS X to a non-Apple platform just means that they'd be in the business of competing with themselves. I.e., why buy a Mac if you can simply buy OS X to run on your Intel box? It doesn't business sense for Apple to do this.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
thank you for proving my point =)
/., and America wouldn't have to bomb Iraq when a Bush is in office.
I said do a COMPERABLE system. Did I say "my mac is as fast as the top of the line p4?"
NO!! BUT IT'S SO MUCH EAIER TO SPEW CRAP THAN THINK!!!
I'd say my dual 1GHz G4 is about as fast as a 2.1 GHz single processor P4. You may think otherwise... *sigh*
I hope someday there is a cure for "I need to bash what I don't understand" syndrom... then I wouldn't have to post on
As far as my "retard" interface, yesh, the Bash shell is pretty hard to mess up, no messy buttons to press, no contextual menus, so way windows can get lost behing the other ones... tho I miss not having a START button in case I'm too fuckign stupid to know what to do after I turn the damn thing on.
Department of Homeland Security: Removing the rights real patriots fought and died for since 2001
"For $1000 I can get a $200 Walmart PC that will run circles around an imac performance wise"
Where do I start? Does that $200 PC come with iDVD? That piece of software alone is extremely important to the performance of my computer. It is the best free DVD software package I have seen, and reviews back up this assertion.. I can get a quality DVD setup faster because of the better user interface in iDVD than other software. To me this is an important part of the "performance" equation iDVD is free with Superdrive Macs). Same goes for iMovie (Free), which is arguably the best consumer editing software out there. Again, I get work done fast, and produce the quality that I want. Another nice feature is that OS X is UNIX based - nice feature for travel with my laptop (yes I could load Linux, but why go through the extra trouble when it is all in one neat package). The development software (free) is really cool too.
Performance is not just chip speed, but software quality and other features. Also for certain tasks like Video, Apple supplies some of the best software there is (Final Cut Pro), and it won't run on a Wal Mart PC.
"I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX
it was stolen.
Linux - Because Mommy taught me to Share.
"I have had fewer Win2K crashes since 1999 than I have with OS X since 2001."
From this post, I can limit the possibilities to two:
1.) You're full of crap.
2.) You only used Win2K for about 5 seconds.
Win2K, even on a "properly assembled" or "optimized" (or whatever the Windows people call it these days) machine bears the true mark of any Windows OS -- buggy and unstable. I work with Win2K machines every day. I also work with a MacOS X-running iBook every day.
I've been running OS X since 10.0. I've been running Win2K since mid-2K. Guess which one has never crashed? (Not once.)
blog |
Hi.
/. world why, in my book, Apple can do no wrong (for now).
/. mods do by now, so I'll light one up and let 'er rip.
... and it's /portable/, too, no way!?]
.Net... but man, in the shops I worked in during the late 80's and 90's if you had Ethernet to the local microwave link (56k) to the computer room across town, holy shit. *That* was performance.
... hey, maybe MS' bugs were a *positive* thing for them and their slick hardware bed-partners, eh?
... shudder ... need to get things working under Win32/CYGWIN. I can barely tolerate a 'make' in that universe on *good* hardware anyway...).
...
...
...
...)
...
...
... other ... 'operating systems'. I believe you can actually *get* to Java in OSX, heh heh ...
.Net, etc.
/other/ reason I can see for getting a decent PC these days, and it is a bad one. IMHO.]
I've decided I don't rant nearly often enough about shit like this and for some reason your post has set me off, so I'm gonna pitch in here and tell the
I am not someone who cares what
Here goes:
My 500mhz tibook ('chipped', incidentally, from a 400mhz one, quite happily) gives me *plenty* of bang for the buck and for me: IT IS THE PERFECT COMPUTER (almost).
Why? A few good reasons:
- 1Gig of RAM [this is !pure sex! to old-timers, lemme tell you
- Case design is *PHAT* and groovy, and goes extremely well with my perspex furniture, next to my 19" rack here in the living room...
- The display just can't be beat. I'm yet to be as impressed with a laptop display as I was with the one on the tiBook when I first saw it up close and personal...
- OSX
But now, really, the *ONLY* reason worth arguing about and in this case the tiBook truly shines for me:
- Productivity
Now, I am really, really productive on this box.
About as productive as I, personally, could ever be without getting some sort of scarey Rael'ian upgrade.
I should say that I'm not a 'typical' user, though I don't think there is such a thing actually.
I'm a (mostly C+Unix, still, after all these years) programmer, since - essentially - '79.
Well, I started using Unix and mostly hacking around then, anyway, but even still the line at that time between programmer/user was always pretty blurry.
During the 80's and 90's my platform-of-choice was always whatever unix-box was available. These were computers: so well made they could do more than one thing at a time, inherently.
Performance back then, at least in my personal sphere, was often expressed in terms of *modem* speed. CPU speed? Well, that was already being measured and appropriated out of our direct control, as it is about to become, yawn, with
As a programmer, I've always had the notion of running my code on distant computers.
CPU-speed was something for the *ADMINS* to worry about, based on user-demand, not me. As long as my code ran as well as it possibly could, and did the job, that was just fine.
Coder vs. Admin vs. User. In that order.
It seems to me, then, that the more you get involved in administering a box, the more you fret about its performance and get sucked into the upgrade loop
On the other hand, it's always sweet as a coder to work out how to make things run faster without needing *any* new hardware... That's the best possible result from the above equation, in my opinion... (API's that imply that this can still happen always get my vote!)
And anyway, no matter what you do, there's *always* a way to make code run faster and better without needing hardware upgrades... at least from my perspective.
Getting back to my rant-topic, with the tiBook I am extremely productive, and extraordinarily content as a computer programmer and user.
With my tiBook I can quite happily replace a small network of PC's I used to use for development with 4 VirtualPC sessions instead, each running its own particular PC-based OS (mostly BSD and Linux for me, but I have a Windows image around if I ever
Admittedly, these were ancient PC's (Pentium-I and -II class), but nevertheless they were, in spite of their hardware specs, being used productively in my computer room, and they're even virtually productive 'now' in VPC land.
(Not to mention that - when needed - I can *really* push my apps into the free space that 1GIG provides: portably. Whoa. Did I mention 'pure sex'? 64k was sexy, 1GIG is out of control)
So yeah, I guess I'm moderately old-school, computer-wise but for some reason this results in me feeling honestly that OSX is a dream to code for, from inside to out, top to bottom. It is the apex of a loooong - in computer-market terms - computing history.
I honestly do *not* want to get caught up in the horrid trap that is Windows: here's a strange thought - computer hardware should be getting *faster* as code is better and better tuned as it ages, not slower!!! It's the API's, dummy! The API's are Microsofts' hamster-wheel - they'll *never* get faster, only slower!
As someone who first cut their teeth in Windows hacking with the *first beta* of Microsoft Virtual C (not C++) for Windows3.1 (Pre-WFW 3.11) and subsequently ran screaming in terror back to his MIPS/RISCOS login until Borland came along, I think you can get the point about OSX being nice to code for
Speaking of that lovely MIPS login and all it offered to my personal working/coding (and thus, computing) 'heritage', I suppose I should admit that my 'personal hardware' history leading up to tiBook glory is a little off-beat. I guess it goes something like this:
-- Apple II - okay, hands up who *didn't* grow up trying to convince their folks to buy them one of these when they came out? That would have been me, but only because I spent *all* my free time in the Computerland Apple store, hacking away. I didn't *NEED* to buy it, what I needed to do was quit school and make enough money to own my own computer, fast! Heh heh... then Dad bought me:
-- Oric-1 + Modem. First personal computer, mostly a terminal, but it could play games and run a plotter. That was neat. With this, I discovered Unix at a lovely 300 baud, and thus C
Oh boy. I didn't *need* to own the computer in order to use it... oh boy, oh boy, oh boy
Skip forward 5 or so years to '87/'88:
-- MIPS R3230, across the room but accessible when I needed to load a tape. I had a couple shit 286's running Desqview, which was my first 'sniff' at PC-land... but they only ever ran telnet to that box.
-- MIPS Magnum Pizza-box (first 'desktop' computer, and by that I mean it was on my desktop rather than sitting in the computer room next to the other MIPS, WANG, and Tandem systems I worked on, where, actually, it belonged. To have it on my desk was the only way to guarantee nobody else bigger than me would use it, sort of
(I should note that during the MIPS-era I'd lusted after a Next Cube, 5 weeks before it was announced by Steve, publicly. Somehow the MIPS guys had details on it, and boy did I want it. (Mostly as a *TERMINAL*, but I had designs on that DSP... a *TERMINAL* with a DSP! WAY COOL!!) I'd heard that NextStep was sweet (later found this to be true with NS4/Intel) but alas the box was just too expensive for me to justify it to the bosses as a 'new terminal', so I missed out on that one. It hurt to see Next die, but it was well-deserved.)
-- AST 486 running something horrid. I think it was early versions of SCO Unix. That was a nice thing to see on cheap PC's, but I remember it had weird int's. I mostly did filesystem work then, and I *HATED* the test disks from this box for their endian'ness! If you can't guess why, I'll tell you: I never had the SOURCE!
-- Then I dl'ed this thing called Linux in '93 from some fast server in Finland, and got it running on whatever PC-hardware was around. At this point in time, I still didn't care much for PC hardware: I don't care what anyone says, the *mentality* of an 8-bit design is still there... but somehow, Linux made it better.
I became a PC user and Windows developer during the darkness that was the 90's, mostly due to client requirements, but I gave up soon after Windows 98. Microsoft can eat shit: I'm not working to make them bigger and greedier any longer, no matter *what* they try to offer me. It's a trap, programmers!
However, around '94/'95, there was hope for my personal computing needs, such as they were (Ethernet to something fast was always more important than my desktop system, though, as a coder...)
-- SGI Boxen, too many to mention, mostly Indigo2/Indy class though. I decided I couldn't afford an Octane, and O2 was too close to PC territory and then, a few months later, that Windows NT-ONLY workstation scared me off SGI for good... FOR SHAME! I thought there was hope for SGI when I saw that laptop in the tornado movie, but godamn it was only a prop and not even a very good one at that. Too bad, but it set the fires a-burnin' that would only later be put out by my tiBook
-- For general-purpose hacking and coder-chops (its important!) I scrounged and got myself a BeBox. This was a *fantastic* hacking box. Man, what a great idea. Unix-ish'isms, a promising GUI, and a tight new kernel. Hey, even the filesystem was groovy: AND IT HAS MIDI!!! Yay!
Damn, did I pick a loser. Oh well, at least I'd avoided Amiga!
-- So, for production (that is what we're talking about here) at this point I had to switch to PC laptops running Linux. Oh, the pain, the agony, after so many beautiful years of avoiding Intel... still, we had some good times, me and Linux and I loved her from the start (still do, deeply!), until the golden era began:
-- tiBook running OSX.
And now, here we are.
In my opinion, Apple is a computer company that has survived for so long and is now, even still, worth supporting. Maybe IBM too. I conside their Linux work to be amends, though.
Steve is back at Apple and he has delivered on his promise:
OSX. PowerPC. Totally Portable.
You can groove in BSD-land with you-name-it shell, mix and match even, or play nice and cool in Cocoa-land with Objective-C
Hack away at pure C with the tried and true (POSIX), or do fancy-schmancy graphics tomfoolery with PDF-based widgets and glorious things like Aqua. With what is, frankly, a pretty fresh API for a GUI - oddly enough it also feels well proven, actually, I'd say. Maybe there's some OpenGL mojo in there, too.
Oh, I forgot to mention Java (I don't do Java), but hey: I've heard tiBooks are *primo* Java hacking boxes, and the JDK integration in OSX is smoovier and far less S&M'ish to
MySQL. Linux-friendly. fink. gcc. gcc *3.1*.
A 'Media hub', and then iSome... Watch -or- burn DVD's (so sci-fi!).
All of this: WHILE SITTING UNDER A TREE!
Plus, no matter how far I travel (and I've travelled far) I am yet to see any other laptop *function* as well in tems of pure hardware design. It's aged, but its aged well and it has actually survived our journeys together.
Every other laptop I've ever owned would have been completely grungy and getto by now - however, this tibook has somehow managed to maintain its shine and lustre thorugh an almost complete circumnavigation of the planet.
Okay so its 'aged beauty' might have something to do with the fact that I've *actually* replaced my own keyboard, case and hard drive (not to mention the aforementioned chippin' for speed) - but how many times can you say you've done *THAT* with a PC notebook? (see www.pbparts.com for starters, a link *all* tiBookers should appreciate and use well, as I have...)
Development-wise, I've never *EVER* had to be worried about processor speeds. Whatever flavour chip is available, I've always been able to run my code *plenty* fast.
Performance != Productivity.
CPU speeds are irrelevant now. They have gone past the point where human perception really matters - and not only that, parallelism technologies are on the rapid track (Internet++) to putting us all where we can just *rent* extra CPU time where its needed: on computational backends like the terribly-late
Arguing, or actually, getting caught up in arguments about CPU speeds is a dead giveaway that the person doing the arguing is someone who simply isn't using their computer productively enough, and thus they have time to notice... which as a phenomena, is oddly enough, also observable in someone with a 'slow' computer...
The tiBook is the perfect computer. Look at its heritage. You cannot argue with its heritage.
Okay. I think I've said enough about this. I now return to a state of torpor. Thank you for reading.
[Incidentally, I'd happily trade a mint vintage BeBox for a vintage ~mint NS Cube, if anyones interested... oh, and yah, before anyone starts, I know that "Productivity != Games", which is the only
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
For $1000 I can get a $200 Walmart PC that will run circles around an imac performance wise, and a nice 17" Viewsonic monitor. The current rate for a 17" imac is $1999. Does anyone else see the problem for Apple here?
e e-software-hassles wave. The problem is, none of those waves has done anything to create a solid customer base
Yeah I see a few problems:
1) You're paying $1,000 for a $200 computer. Would you also like to buy a bridge? I have one in Brooklyn you'd love.
2) While you might like a CRT monitor, I don't have shitloads of space on my desk, and since I don't need highend color matching, an LCD monitor is much better suited to my needs.
3) Did that $200 POS come with firewire? A decent graphics card? Good software packages (iDVD, iTunes, iMovie)? What about gigabit ethernet and auto sensing (both of which are useful to me)? Did that POS even come with a decent processor?
Apple's problem is that consumers have grown up.
Right, because a true sign of having grown up is getting into pissing contests with other people as to who has the fastest processor, or the most ram and not realizing the people have different needs and sometimes don't have the desire to spend hours tinkering with compentents or the need to crunch numbers into oblivion.
Windows is just as easy to use and more reliable (I have had fewer Win2K crashes since 1999 than I have with OS X since 2001.)
Ok, you're definately not using a well configured mac, or possibly you fucked arround with the kernel? Or maybe you're intentionaly trying to crash your computer? The last time I saw OS X crash unintentionaly was when it was in beta. If seen prgrams themselves fail, but nothing that brought down the system. The last time I saw Win2k crash was when I upgraded the video card drivers, which proceeded to lead to a mess of problems and ended up in the install of XP which needs a reboot every week when my router rolls over the IPs.
People know that Apple's 700MHz CPUs are slow compared to the 2+ GHz X86 CPUs, and that Apple is charging twice as much for RAM and old Nvidia/ATI cards than X86 vendors.
Anyone who buys the RAM or Video card update directly from Apple is a moron, just like anyone who did the same from compaq or Dell would be a moron. You can buy macs on the cheap if you know how to shop, the same goes for PCs. But actualy try and price out equvilent computers from vendors and the prices are very close.
Buying my ibook was the worst computer-related decision I have ever made, and after seeing how an Apple system performs for the cost, I will never do it again, nor would I encourage anyone else to.
I am truly curious to know what made buying an iBook the worst computer related purchase you've ever made.
Apple has been riding on waves lately; the Jobs-is-back wave, the visual-aesthetics-are-nice wave, and is now trying to stay on top of the Linux-geeks-really-want-to-watch-a-DVD-with-no-fr
Right a loyal base of devoted customers with brandname loyalty, a wilingness to forgive mistakes and reward sucesses, fans willing to suport your product, vouch for it, sell it and contribute to it. People who will walk into stores like CompUSA and help people with information on macs when the incompitent employees falter. Definately not a solid customer base. In a time when vendors are merging and laying off employees to stay alive, Apple is right where it's always been, but that's not a solid customer base.
Apple is falling back into its old habit of hyping gimmicks to the undying cult of Mac Geeks, who cannot keep that company alive.
Apple: Proudly going out of business for more than 20 years.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
From Northern Light:
Source: AFX News - Asia
Date: 01/01/2003 20:22
Hon Hai replaces LG as sole supplier of Apple's iMac/eMac PCs - report
TAIPEI (AFX-ASIA) - Hon Hai Precision Industry Co Ltd (2317.TW) has replaced LG Electronics Co as the sole supplier of Apple Computer Inc's iMac/eMac desktop PCs, with 2003 shipments estimated at up to 1.0 mln units, the Economic Daily News reported without citing a source.
...that someone read the article.
Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
As you see now from the comments, the headline and blurb are completely wrong. See other posts (many modded up to 5) for corroboration. This is bad info that needs to be corrected. A Slashback is fine, but it should be in the original story too. Please update this! Thanks.
One simple rule for its versus it's
People in the industry read /. and they trust it to accurately reflect its claims. You guys act like news editors (it says "news" in your logo!) yet you do not abide by the same rules as other news organisations are held to. Accountability? Whatever...
Stories like this can only harm companies like Apple. When ondustry people see it and say "Slashdot says..." others take it as truth. It would appear that Slashdot editors are starting to suffer from the same syndrome much of its readership does; not reading and checking facts and accepting the blurb as containing the facts. This is exactly how this came to my attention. Someone in the industry wrote to inform me that the 17" iMacs were dead (and were therefore not a viable investment).
I've come to expect this sort of thing from Timothy, but I was shocked that Hemos posted this one. I think you owe it to your readers, the industry and Apple to correct this story, if not pull it altogether.
This is bullshit. Own up.
- I am made of meat.
http://images.slashdot.org/banner/devc0017en.gif?1 041572708346
How fitting.
- I am made of meat.
Not likely.
--Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
I'm a 23 year old woman, and I think iMac's are great! That's pretty much the demographic that Apple is going for, and it is working.
Sex - Find It