or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › New 27" iMac designed to also work as a display
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New 27" iMac designed to also work as a display - Page 3

post #81 of 223
I think most people who value a 27"-30" monitor are not looking for the lowest cost solution. Most people would not need both MBP and an iMac. Looking at the current sales trends portability is more important than screen size and processing power. You don't agree that if given the option, enough people would choose the MacBook + ADC to negatively impact over all iMac sales.

Plus the MBP won't be far behind with quad core processors and 1TB HDD.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

That doesn't really add up. A MacBook Pro + 30" ACD would still be at least $3000 all told, a little less if you go with the 13" model. And that's going with the 2.x Ghz units and a small hard drive. I doubt that would hurt the $1699 iMac with a 1TB drive, or a quad core for $2000.
post #82 of 223
No they won't. Think about it. If there was a lot of demand for Blu ray on the Mac there would already be a booming third party BR player market. The only company I can think of that makes BR players targeted for the Mac is LaCie its not even their best selling product.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sockdoggy View Post

Maybe Apple will release its own external Blu-Ray player? ie like the HD-DVD attachment for Xbox 360.

There seems to be a ton of discussion/speculation with this display in port so I think Apple will shed some light on it sooner than later.

Can't believe my old login still works!
post #83 of 223
and a mini display port fits a tablet nicely too .

ah if only we had matte too across the board the apple world would have been near perfect.
post #84 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by afreemanmd View Post

Well, I am still waiting to purchase a large monitor, at least 30 inches, which has iSight capability built in. I don't want or need a CPU included. It appears closer to the day when this might happen as iMacs are now sporting 27 inch LED backlit screens. A thirty incher is not that much bigger.

Is it really a problem to get a separate web cam? The integrated web cam can't be very easily redirected or repositioned, you move the entire display. If you use an old small DV camcorder, you can probably get better results with zoom, direction and focus capabilities, and probably better sensors too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Most people could only buy one or the other. Looking at the current sales trends portability is more important than screen size and processing power. You don't agree that if given the option, enough people would choose the MacBook + ADC to negatively impact over all iMac sales.

I'm not suggesting buy both an iMac and a notebook. I don't know how many people would be seriously considering an iMac vs. a notebook + ACD, they are different use cases.

Quote:
Plus the MBP won't be far behind with quad core processors and 1TB HDD.

Quad core, maybe a year from now. 1TB is the same. At a higher cost too. But neither is a problem now that would merit delaying a larger LED cinema display.
post #85 of 223
So, will the new 27" iMac work, with cable adaptors as necessary, as a display with my late 2006 MacBook Pro (Core 2 Duo) that has a DVI port?
post #86 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

No they won't. Think about it. If there was a lot of demand for Blu ray on the Mac there would already be a booming third party BR player market. The only company I can think of that makes BR players targeted for the Mac is LaCie its not even their best selling product.

FastMac sells very expensive internal drives for Macs, but only Macs with 11.7mm slotl-oading drives and larger. Nothing for any Mac notebook that has come out in several years. LaCie sells an external which has FireWire, but you can also buy any other external drives on the market, providing there is driver support. It just doesnt make sense when other vendors are having trouble pushing them even with an OS that allows for AACS and isnt itself trying to compete with the optical format and reduce the need of optical media altogether. Seems like a pointless battle for some to be crying for B-R in Macs.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #87 of 223
For people interested in plugging an DVI/HDMI source into this screen, keep in mind that physical connectors are not necessarily adequate for bridging two technologies, and that compatibility isn't always a two way street.

For example, Apple put DVI ports on its pre Mini DP Macs which supplied both VGA (analog) and DVI (digital) video signals. You could use an adapter to extract either VGA or DVI signals. Many models also provided Composite Video signals over the same physical port, so with the appropriate dongle, you could hook your Mac to a TV.

That doesn't mean that you can do the reverse, such as using a VGA-ony computer to drive a DVI display, just because you can find a cable with those physical connectors on each end. VGA is not forwardly compatible with DVI.

Similarly, just because some Macs provided Composite Video through the DVI connector didn't mean they all did. You can't extract signals that aren't there.

The current DisplayPort specification allows for "other" signals to be delivered over a DP cable, potentially audio or USB. Existing Macs apparently do not actually support either, so there's no way to plug MDP into HDMI and get both audio and video output. Audio just isn't there.

Additionally, Macs with MDP connectors don't just provide DP output. They also provide DVI and HDMI-compliant signaling, which is why you can plug in a dongle and export video from a MacBook Air to a DVI display or an HDMI TV.

That doesn't mean that a PS3 can generate a DP signal! Even if you can find an HDMI to DP cable, if the signal isn't being created, it won't be delivered (!).

Based on Apple's wording, video input features on the new 27" iMac allow for DP input, not whatever anyone might want to plug in. You can't wire a VGA connector to a MDP connector and expect your PowerBook G4 will drive the new display.

For the same reason, you will probably also not be able to simply plug in anything else you might want to see on your fancy display. While we're at it, also keep in mind that the resolution of the display won't magically be supported by devices that can only manage something less. To use the full resolution of the display, you have to use a connection technology that supports that bandwidth, which minimally requires dual DVI, HDMI, or DisplayPort.

And of course, it appears that only one of those will actually work.
post #88 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by irasiegel View Post

So, will the new 27" iMac work, with cable adaptors as necessary, as a display with my late 2006 MacBook Pro (Core 2 Duo) that has a DVI port?

As the article replies have been stating, it will. You can get a $5 cable from Monoprice that is (male)DVI-to-(male)DP. []Easy peezy.[/I]
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #89 of 223
Just to add another aspect to this thread"providing a 2560x1440 native resolution".

This capability ups the ante on getting resolution independence completed in Mac OS X.

Nullis in verba -- "on the word of no one"

 

 

 

Reply

Nullis in verba -- "on the word of no one"

 

 

 

Reply
post #90 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by BertP View Post

Just to add another aspect to this thread"providing a 2560x1440 native resolution".

This capability ups the ante on getting resolution independence completed in Mac OS X.

very true. more so than ever.
post #91 of 223
I'm simply laying the foundation of my logic. If we had the option to either purchase a 27" iMac or a MBP + 30" ADC. Because most people would pick one or the other, more people would choose the MBP + 30" ACD, than would without the option. Which I believe is one of the primary reasons Apple is not yet offering the option.

iMac sales are inevitably going to decline.The MBP is going to flourish for years to come. Its good business for Apple to try and get as much mileage out of the iMac while they can. Even though I think more people would benefit from having a wider ACD option right now.

intel's 2010 roadmap isn't totally clear yet. We do know intel will have 32nm mobile chips, as aggressively as intel has been pushing, quad mobile chips could happen next year.


Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I'm not suggesting buy both an iMac and a notebook. I don't know how many people would be seriously considering an iMac vs. a notebook + ACD, they are different use cases.

Quad core, maybe a year from now. 1TB is the same. At a higher cost too. But neither is a problem now that would merit delaying a larger LED cinema display.
post #92 of 223
Macs need Blu-Ray because you cannot get 1080P movies in iTunes!


Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

FastMac sells very expensive internal drives for Macs, but only Macs with 11.7mm slotl-oading drives and larger. Nothing for any Mac notebook that has come out in several years. LaCie sells an external which has FireWire, but you can also buy any other external drives on the market, providing there is driver support. It just doesnt make sense when other vendors are having trouble pushing them even with an OS that allows for AACS and isnt itself trying to compete with the optical format and reduce the need of optical media altogether. Seems like a pointless battle for some to be crying for B-R in Macs.
post #93 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by bird24 View Post

I have been a pc user my entire life and purchased an iphone two months ago. I was so impressed that I took the time to look a imac's at a retail store. Fell in love with them and decided to purchase one when I heard about these new imac's. My questions is as follows:
Which system would perform faster, 3.33 Ghz with a dual core or a 2.8Ghz with a quad core i7? Obviously the assumption is with the same video card, ram, etc. Thanks

i7 is very impressive. Further that is four cores supporting SMT so you can have eight (8) threads going at a time. Plus SMT is vastly improved over the previous implementations so it is seldom a negative. Overall I7 should be very pleasing.

Of course you question is open ended there are places where i7 might not be all that much better than the old chips. Also the new I series chips are at their best when Turbo Boost can kick in. On top of all that Apple has a very powerful new technology in SL that can leverage the multi core processor very effectively.

That tech is called Grand Central Dispatch or GCD and is described as a system wide thread pool. Once all of the software developers are in the pool individual apps should be able to better leverage hardware resources. Err there is a joke in that last sentence, the developers only have to get in the pool if they are in Vegas.

To put it another way going to i7 keeps the hardware viable for a longer period of time. Especially as software and the OS expands support for multi core processors.


Dave
post #94 of 223
post #95 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

Chill out, man. The 27" iMacs are not yet available (not until next month). So nobody has been able to test them (other than Apple engineers). This story is basically a heads-up to start thinking about it.

27" with 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo is shipping. Only Core i5/i7 models are not available until the next month.
post #96 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post

Macs need Blu-Ray because you cannot get 1080P movies in iTunes!

Then buy a Blu-ray drive for your Mac and run Windows. As of today, that is your only option to watch 1080p Blu-ray video on a 1280x800 resolution, 16:10 ratio, 13 MB. \
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #97 of 223
You know, these video inputs need to be displayed in a WINDOW OR FULL SCREEN, like the old 7100/AV used to do -- that is the functionality I am still looking for on my Macs...
post #98 of 223
Nah, 17" 1920x1200 native! ;-)


Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Then buy a Blu-ray drive for your Mac and run Windows. As of today, that is your only option to watch 1080p Blu-ray video on a 1280x800 resolution, 16:10 ratio, 13 MB. \
post #99 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Id wait and read performance reviews first because the faster machine may not even be necessary for your needs,

This I have to disagree on, when buying desktop machines buy as much performance as you can reasonable afford at the time. Performance being the mix of RAM, CPU and GPU requirements. Buying a machine configuration that revolves around the processor doesn't balance your system correctly.

The upgrade approach just doesn't cut it anymore and for many Apple computers isn't even possible. Your goal being to make one investment in the machine that will last atleast until the generation of hardware inside is completely outdated. Or to put it another way plan a purchase to be viable for atleast 3+ years.
Quote:
but the i7 is better despite the lower clock speed. Its also more future-proof as Apples SL and apps start to utilize Grand Central Dispatch more. Better architecture, too.

Yep, i5 & i7 are lightyears ahead of the old Core twos. The new iMacs with these processors are now on my reccomend list. That is I won't feel bad at all to reccomend them to somebody if they fit the users needs. This is something I couldn't do a month ago or even a week ago. Now Apple has gone past my expectations and delivered rather impressive hardware.

Unfortunately there is nothing to reccomend for people that need an XMac. Except for the issue of disk storage these new iMacs are going to be more suitable solutions for more people than ever before.


Dave


Dave
post #100 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post

Nah, 17" 1920x1200 native! ;-)

Same situation. Grab a Blu-ray drive online and play in Windows. Or buy a 27 iMac and run a cable to your iMac from your Blu-ray appliance, assuming its close enough.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #101 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glockpop View Post

For people interested in plugging an DVI/HDMI source into this screen, keep in mind that physical connectors are not necessarily adequate for bridging two technologies, and that compatibility isn't always a two way street.

For example, Apple put DVI ports on its pre Mini DP Macs which supplied both VGA (analog) and DVI (digital) video signals. You could use an adapter to extract either VGA or DVI signals. Many models also provided Composite Video signals over the same physical port, so with the appropriate dongle, you could hook your Mac to a TV.

That doesn't mean that you can do the reverse, such as using a VGA-ony computer to drive a DVI display, just because you can find a cable with those physical connectors on each end. VGA is not forwardly compatible with DVI.

Similarly, just because some Macs provided Composite Video through the DVI connector didn't mean they all did. You can't extract signals that aren't there.

The current DisplayPort specification allows for "other" signals to be delivered over a DP cable, potentially audio or USB. Existing Macs apparently do not actually support either, so there's no way to plug MDP into HDMI and get both audio and video output. Audio just isn't there.

Additionally, Macs with MDP connectors don't just provide DP output. They also provide DVI and HDMI-compliant signaling, which is why you can plug in a dongle and export video from a MacBook Air to a DVI display or an HDMI TV.

That doesn't mean that a PS3 can generate a DP signal! Even if you can find an HDMI to DP cable, if the signal isn't being created, it won't be delivered (!).

Based on Apple's wording, video input features on the new 27" iMac allow for DP input, not whatever anyone might want to plug in. You can't wire a VGA connector to a MDP connector and expect your PowerBook G4 will drive the new display.

For the same reason, you will probably also not be able to simply plug in anything else you might want to see on your fancy display. While we're at it, also keep in mind that the resolution of the display won't magically be supported by devices that can only manage something less. To use the full resolution of the display, you have to use a connection technology that supports that bandwidth, which minimally requires dual DVI, HDMI, or DisplayPort.

And of course, it appears that only one of those will actually work.

1++++
Finally, someone who can correctly explain the video input situation on the new 27" iMac (thank you Glockpop). Those who have suggested that you'll just need a simple adapter cable need to read what is written above. I hope this puts to rest some of the misguided statements that have previously been made on this topic.

The best we can hope for is that Apple will sell some range of custom adapters/converters that will allow users to connect DVI or HDMI devices to this new iMac. Either that, or Apple has added special circuitry inside of the new iMac that can detect the form of video signal that it is receiving and switch in the correct DVI/HDMI path to drive the display. Without either or both of the above you won't be able to attach a DVI/HDMI device to the display without using a fairly expensive video converter (which still may not work very well because of the high native resolution of the 27" iMac's display). If you want to see what may be required you can follow the link below (a $180 DVI to Mini DisplayPort video converter):

http://www.atlona.com/Atlona-DVI-to-...r-p-17859.html
post #102 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

Have to hack EFI, that's where all the decisions are going to go down. It acts as a gatekeeper between OS calls and hardware. (any OS)

EFI and it's GUID partition are part of Trusted Computing which verifies what can be done with your machine. Internet access will be needed by EFI to verify keys/hardware etc so a server has to be set up too with cracks etc. (good going with that for long)

Should be interesting, I always wondered why Apple allowed full screen record in Snow Leopard. But with no OS running while HDCP content is playing...

I think some HDCP keys were cracked or something, because Sony bricked a lot of PS3 BluRays with a firmware update. A lawsuit is ongoing and perhaps this is why Apple may have pulled BluRays from the new iMac's too.

I'm thinking that the display port in bypasses the computer and treats the screen like a dumb monitor. That way, it can still be HDCP compliant without OS level "trusted computing" and copy protection hassles.

Not sure how you enable audio if you you're not doing it over the same cable, however, and it would be shockingly wrong if Apple went through the trouble of making this beautiful display device accessible to other devices without accounting for sound. Still holding out some hope that Apple has gotten around to implementing the audio spec. Seems odd that they didn't right out of the gate.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #103 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I'm thinking that the display port in bypasses the computer and treats the screen like a dumb monitor. That way, it can still be HDCP compliant without OS level "trusted computing" and copy protection hassles.

Gizmodo has a 27” iMac in hand as of yesterday. Afraid that their first review might overlook this cool new feature and not knowing who else had the machines that would actually listen to readers requests, I asked them to check a few things. I got a swift reply stating that they my questions would be answered and that the review would be tomorrow or the next day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by My Questions...

\t• Is there a physical button or is it done through OS X?
\t• Is it auto-sensed?
\t• Can the iMac be off while using it as HDTV/monitor?
\t• Can the DP input work with HDMI sources—Blu-ray players, DVRs, cable boxes, PS3—like the DP spec says it should?
\t• If HDMI sources work, does the DP port also send audio to the iMacs speakers or would an alternative method be required?

I didn’t ask specifically ask about HDCP, but I’m guessing that connecting to a Blu-ray player will likely occur if they test HDMI connectivity.

Quote:
Not sure how you enable audio if you you're not doing it over the same cable, however, and it would be shockingly wrong if Apple went through the trouble of making this beautiful display device accessible to other devices without accounting for sound. Still holding out some hope that Apple has gotten around to implementing the audio spec. Seems odd that they didn't right out of the gate.

A lame way you might be able to get audio through the speakers is through OS X, either by USB (if you want HQ or via the audio input/mic jack on the iMac. I’m hoping this is now how it will have to be setup.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #104 of 223
The new iMac is a bag of hurt. Apple blew it by not providing the Blu-ray for a 16:9 HD monitor. And the messed up thing is you know its gonna arrive around April. So anyone who buys now is gonna be really pissed off then. And not only that but this gives Microsoft a clear line of attack. Consumers are buying Blu-rays up in droves by the zillions yet Apple ignores it as they have become a profit whore.
post #105 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Gizmodo has a 27” iMac in hand as of yesterday. Afraid that their first review might overlook this cool new feature and not knowing who else had the machines that would actually listen to readers requests, I asked them to check a few things. I got a swift reply stating that they my questions would be answered and that the review would be tomorrow or the next day.

Those poor people at Gizmodo-How else would it play using a blu-ray machine if it didn't bypass everything and went in straight as a monitor.? Duh?
Trying pugging you DVD player into your current iMac lately?
And this is yet another reason why it should have HDMI.
post #106 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Gizmodo has a 27” iMac in hand as of yesterday. Afraid that their first review might overlook this cool new feature and not knowing who else had the machines that would actually listen to readers requests, I asked them to check a few things. I got a swift reply stating that they my questions would be answered and that the review would be tomorrow or the next day.

I didn’t ask specifically ask about HDCP, but I’m guessing that connecting to a Blu-ray player will likely occur if they test HDMI connectivity.

Cool! I look forward to their report.

Quote:
lame way you might be able to get audio through the speakers is through OS X, either by USB (if you want HQ or via the audio input/mic jack on the iMac. I’m hoping this is now how it will have to be setup.

Yeah, but that would mean bypassing the OS for the screen display while still having to use it just for audio, which seems sort of insane. I guess their might be some way of just using the audio circuitry, but it sure does seem like it would be easier to just enable the audio spec.

That of course assumes that they are bypassing the OS to use the screen passively, but if they're not it doesn't seem likely that any Blu-ray input would ever work, without system level HDCP (which OS X doesn't do, AFAIK), even allowing for the right adapters.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #107 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso View Post

Complete and utter bullshit.

Not at all - just fact.
post #108 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Any many millions more than you and your millions do want it.

lol, where are these millions you speak of? Marching on the streets?! Blu-Ray is far, far from universal or ubiquitous.
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #109 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by sennen View Post

lol, where are these millions you speak of? Marching on the streets?! Blu-Ray is far, far from universal or ubiquitous.

Right here-
11.7 million households and the holiday season hasn't even arrived:

http://www.dvdtown.com/news/blu-ray-...ard-times/7098

As you can see - much better than digital downloads and growing at an amazing rate.
post #110 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I
iMac sales are inevitably going to decline.The MBP is going to flourish for years to come.

i don't necessarily agree with your premiss.

If what we have (as a product mix) today, persists, then, likely, you are right on!

However, add a Tablet to the mix, and everything changes-- especially if the iMac and Tablet can connect to each-other as co-equals.

I believe that the laptop will become the niche payer for non-business users.

*
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #111 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I want the beautiful display without the extra computer.

LG will make one if Apple doesn't. Around $1K
post #112 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

i don't necessarily agree with your premiss.

If what we have (as a product mix) today, persists, then, likely, you are right on!

However, add a Tablet to the mix, and everything changes-- especially if the iMac and Tablet can connect to each-other as co-equals.

I believe that the laptop will become the niche payer for non-business users.

*

and college students- perfect for dorm living.
post #113 of 223
11.7 million out of 127 million households, 9% isn't really that much.


Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Right here-
11.7 million households and the holiday season hasn't even arrived:
post #114 of 223
You can't plug DVI/HDMI devices into DisplayPort displays unless they support HDMI/DVI. The 24 inch Apple Cinema Display doesn't so I assume the iMac wont either.

DisplayPort is not compatible with DVI/HDMI. Yes, there are $10 adapters but they only work when your connecting a computer with a DisplayPort output to a DVI/HDMI display. This only works because the video card is capable of generating a DVI compliant signal. The DisplayPort connector is simply a passthrough. This does not work the other way around.

Also, even with the $200 adapter, it still wont work with the iMac because there is no conversion adapter capable of supporting the native resolution of that display. If the iMac is like any other apple display, it probably lacks a scaling processor so it can't accept 1080p or 720p signals. The iMac can operate at different resolutions internally but this is scaling done by the GPU, and will not support scaling though external input.

To plug something like a PS3 or any other DVI/HDMI device in, you would need a box that can convert the signal, AND scale it up to the displays native resolution. Some displays have this built in, Apple displays don't.
post #115 of 223
This past quarter Apple sold 3 million Macs, 2.3 million notebooks, 700,000 desktops. At best Apple sold 500,000 iMacs. Its a clear trend.

I don't undertand what a tablet would do to help iMac sales.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

i don't necessarily agree with your premiss.

If what we have (as a product mix) today, persists, then, likely, you are right on!

However, add a Tablet to the mix, and everything changes-- especially if the iMac and Tablet can connect to each-other as co-equals.

I believe that the laptop will become the niche payer for non-business users.

*
post #116 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

This past quarter Apple sold 3 million Macs, 2.3 million notebooks, 700,000 desktops. At best Apple sold 500,000 iMacs. Its a clear trend.

I don't undertand what a tablet would do to help iMac sales.

One of the contributing factors to mac sales, is probably the fact that you practically need one to develop for iPhone.
post #117 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

i don't necessarily agree with your premiss.

If what we have (as a product mix) today, persists, then, likely, you are right on!

However, add a Tablet to the mix, and everything changes-- especially if the iMac and Tablet can connect to each-other as co-equals.

I believe that the laptop will become the niche payer for non-business users.

A tablet that isn't a desktop replacement doesn't eliminate replacing the desktop with a laptop. It just makes it an accessory.

A tablet is a desktop replacement would replace both desktop and laptop but I'm going to bet it kills the desktop faster than it kills the laptop. Unless it's a convertible tablet in which case it is a laptop.

The biggest downside of a MBP + 30" ACD vs 27" iMac is cost. The $2199 i7 iMac is cheaper than the 17" MBP which is the only likely MBP to get the i7 and probably at the $2,799 price point the current 3.06 17" MBP costs. A 27" monitor with the same panel as the iMac will likely run you around $1000 if you buy it from LG or Dell. Probably $1400 from Apple.

For $4200 I can get a Mac Pro setup and a Dell 27" and have 8 core.

Good thing I already have a 30" ACD at work or I'd be hurting when I go to replace my current MBP.
post #118 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

11.7 million out of 127 million households, 9% isn't really that much.

Wasn't Blu-Ray released in '06? And does that figure also include the PS3?

droves?
post #119 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glockpop View Post

To use the full resolution of the display, you have to use a connection technology that supports that bandwidth, which minimally requires dual DVI, HDMI, or DisplayPort.

Depends on if it will upscale. I'm guessing not but you never know.

Quote:
And of course, it appears that only one of those will actually work.

At 1920x1200 this works:

http://www.atlona.com/Atlona-DVI-to-...r-p-17859.html
post #120 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Depends on if it will upscale. I'm guessing not but you never know.



At 1920x1200 this works:

http://www.atlona.com/Atlona-DVI-to-...r-p-17859.html

you need that, and the separate HDMI scaler box if you want 720p or 1080p support.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › New 27" iMac designed to also work as a display