LCD iMac

[quote]Why not just make a wireless display? When you think about it a little, it wouldn't be feasible to clog up the airwaves with a million monitors with 60-some million colors and thousands of pixels being manipulated in near real time. Why not just send rendering messages to the screen, and have the screen (wireless/portable) render things itself?<hr></blockquote>

That's a tried and true idea for handling remote user interfaces, which require a minimal amount of data to be sent back and forth. Interfaces tend to be assembled out of static components and changed rarely (from the point of view of a computer).

Keep in mind that in order to implement this idea, you're building a computer into the monitor - essentially building a X terminal - which will drive the price of the monitor up accordingly. Also, video and OpenGL animation will be impossible unless you build in a powerful CPU, AGP and a video accelerator - and then you have a full-blown Mac on an AirPort network, not a wireless monitor.

[ 11-12-2001: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>

Wireless monitor = mega radiation. Right? Plus, how would you power the thing?

Any way, what if you have more than one screen around? Wouldn't it mess up the other's picture? Imagine a computer lab of these things and the screen of one overlapping another! :eek:

Apple would be wise to take a look at all the things that make its and others' current systems a needless pain in the ass, and to fix them.

Off the top of my head, I can think of a few things:

- Make the keyboard and mouse cables longer or eliminate them.
- Allow for upgradeable graphics.
- Continue to include a handle that is accessible from the top of the package. It is reassuring to see a right way of moving the computer, and of course protection against dropping it.

[ 11-12-2001: Message edited by: Mac The Fork ]</p>

Hey, I think that a wireless, water-proof, touch-screen with built in easy-networking is really the future.

It may drive the price up accordingly Amorph....but since when did Steve Jobs or his allegiant followers give a damn?

A low-cost solution would equal a crappy design. Who wants that? Microsoft would I'm sure.

[quote]Originally posted by Fran441:
<strong>Wireless monitor = mega radiation. Right? Plus, how would you power the thing?

Any way, what if you have more than one screen around? Wouldn't it mess up the other's picture? Imagine a computer lab of these things and the screen of one overlapping another! :eek: </strong><hr></blockquote>

No, it'll just run over Airport, no mega radiation. We used to sneak around the lab shooting microwave guns at other people but that's another story It would be powered by a powerbook-battery sized battery.

Hey, M$ is making the X Box now. Who says a computer isn't that far behind?

Think iBook with the screen where the keyboard is.
Have a docking/transmitter station that can accept the wireless thingy as a screen. Thingy recharges while in the dock.
The thingy would need the processor and harddrive but cd, printer, keyboard etc would be in/attached to the dock.

Anyone remember the Duo? Same general concept but updated and without the clunkiness and duplication.

Pen interface when not docked.
If the pen interface was pressure and tilt sensitive then we'd have the ultimate Photoshop/Painter machine. An artist's sketchpad.

[quote]Originally posted by Fran441:
<strong>Hey, M$ is making the X Box now. Who says a computer isn't that far behind?</strong><hr></blockquote>

God! If they make a computer I do not know what I am going to do! That would be so shity! I can not even discribe it!

An LCD iMac would rule, colored in Snow or Sage.

I think what you're talking about, while certainly a great idea and the general direction we seem to be heading in, is still a few years down the line. What you are describing (base station that does all the computing and terminal LCDs that accept input and deliver output) is a less sophisticated implementation of what a lot of futurist speculators (most notably Ray Kurzweil) are predicting: namely, each house with a kind of "mainframe" computer that stores your data and performs calculations and is accesible from anywhere via ubiquitous wireless networking. Certainly a very cool idea, but won't happen for a while. Your idea, though, seems like it could be implemented immediately. I doubt that the general public is mentally or financially capable of such a dramatic upgrade to the concept of what computing is, however (yes, I realize the concept of terminals are not new, but how many average Gateway Joes know what a VT100 is, much less how neat such a system is. I mean, think about how many posts you've read from OS X upgraders complaining about their "new" multiuser file structure).

Whoa. sorry. I didn't mean for that to be so long.

[quote]Originally posted by Fran441:
<strong>Hey, M$ is making the X Box now. Who says a computer isn't that far behind?</strong><hr></blockquote>

That would be fun! All the current box makers would have to realize that everytime they install windows they are subsidizing their competitor. That would cause the biggest migration to Mac OS and Linux ever.

I have been an avid follower of the Mac since I was 6. That is right, since the original 128K machine. Now, the idea of an LCD iMac is a great idea. However right now it will never work. For one reason and one reason only: Price.

The cost of LCD's are coming down, but not enought to make it worth while to make it into an iMac. Yes, the cool factor would be awesome, and it would work out great, especially since everything to them is size and function. I don't see this happening til 2003 at the earliest.

What Apple will do is when the G5 comes out, I can see them sticking the G4 in their iMac line, bringing iDVD back to where it was meant for, the consumer. I honestly see the G5 coming out MWSF and ALSO the G4 iMac. Steve has said that he wants the DVD-R/CD-RW in the consumer machines, and while that won't happen this MW, I can see it happening in MWSF 2003, probably when the iMac2 (LCD version) will come out.

[ 11-12-2001: Message edited by: Mike Eggleston ]</p>

A 15inch LCD with a G4 would be a super nice machine. I still think we'll see a flat CRT (17inch???) before an LCD simply due to cost.

By the way, I just received my 17inch LCD and it's beautiful. I've got it next to my Sony 21inch and i think the LCD is nicer.

[quote]Originally posted by Amorph:
<strong>

That's a tried and true idea for handling remote user interfaces, which require a minimal amount of data to be sent back and forth. Interfaces tend to be assembled out of static components and changed rarely (from the point of view of a computer).

Keep in mind that in order to implement this idea, you're building a computer into the monitor - essentially building a X terminal - which will drive the price of the monitor up accordingly. Also, video and OpenGL animation will be impossible unless you build in a powerful CPU, AGP and a video accelerator - and then you have a full-blown Mac on an AirPort network, not a wireless monitor.

[ 11-12-2001: Message edited by: Amorph ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Hmmmmm.... I'm liking this line of thinking, Amorph.

Apple AirPort = embedded processor and OS
Apple iPod = embedded processor and OS

Apple Studio Display 2 = ????????


Digital hub, anyone?

[quote]Originally posted by david:
<strong>I think what you're talking about, while certainly a great idea and the general direction we seem to be heading in, is still a few years down the line. What you are describing (base station that does all the computing and terminal LCDs that accept input and deliver output) is a less sophisticated implementation of what a lot of futurist speculators (most notably Ray Kurzweil) are predicting: namely, each house with a kind of "mainframe" computer that stores your data and performs calculations and is accesible from anywhere via ubiquitous wireless networking..</strong><hr></blockquote>

= Golden Convergence (any other Robert Morgan fans out there?)

= Thin-client network computing (any other Larry Ellison fans... ehhhh, never mind )

= Digital Hub (any other Steve Jobs fans out there?)

[quote]Originally posted by Mac The Fork:
<strong>Apple would be wise to take a look at all the things that make its and others' current systems a needless pain in the ass, and to fix them.

Off the top of my head, I can think of a few things:

- Make the keyboard and mouse cables longer or eliminate them.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Agreed 110%.
The fact that Apple has to include USB extention cables for their G4 towers (do they still do that?), instead of just making the Pro Keyboard cable a DAMN meter longer, is an absolute and total phukkin embarassment, as is the fact that the Pro Mouse cable is too short for an iBook unless you happen to be left-handed (Think Different!!!)

Picture being at the million dollar house of a client, setting up a brand new $1499 iMac, and setting it up in a $900 computer hutch.....

"Ooooops, sorry Mr. Wealthy Client, the keyboard cable won't reach from this slide-out keyboard tray, to the iMac. You'll have to go to Circuit City or Best Buy and hope that you can find a USB extension cable... or of course you can order one over the Internet!!"

BEEN there and DONE that!! - MORE than once...
DAMN, I hope someone at Apple is reading this!


<strong> [quote]
- Allow for upgradeable graphics.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'm not quite as strongly in agreement here. The pro line has upgradable graphics, the consumer line can upgrade RAM and hard drive and add USB or FireWire externals till Ted's talking cows come home...

If you are wishing for the entry-level Mac to have the same options as a PC ATX, I hope you will always be disappointed. That would never fit into Apple's business model.

Graphics card upgradability in consumer machines pales in comparison to the biggest thorn in the side of iMac sales to non-Apple-fanatic consumers - the small and completely non-upgradable 15" CRT display. 15 godddamm inches has cost Apple hundreds of thousands of unit sales over the last 12-18 months!

MY solution? Cross a Cube with an LC and give it an ADC connection (just choose your Apple Studio Display LCD size, and upgrade it any time you want!!!).
Bundle prices for ASDs, of course...

That's your LCD iMac, and if Apple does something drastically different than this, I'll be severely disappointed (as will Apple's plans for marketshare growth).

If Apple really, REALLY wants to expand marketshare (as opposed to drooling over using the ADC to force people into buying your high-margin ASDs), they need to give it a VGA port as well. They'll probably end up selling an Apple Studio Display, once the former PC users are hooked on their iMac 2 and ready to replace their ugly beige CRT.


<strong> [quote]
- Continue to include a handle that is accessible from the top of the package. It is reassuring to see a right way of moving the computer, and of course protection against dropping it.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'm all for cool and functional handles, and I hope that the Cube/LC iMac 2 has one that reminds me of the handle on the original iBook (especially if it has a VGA port - think of toting it to a LAN party or from network to network...). Now THAT would embody the spirit of the original Mac, and the spirit of the iMac "Classic"...

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: FormerLurker ]</p>

LCD iMac, wireless keyboard & mouse packaged neatly like SE/30 - me first!

Here in Japan probably half the computers now come with LCD displays. CRTs are becoming rare. However, prices are not cheap. The Sony with the LCD and the built in MD is about $2,500 for example.

This should not be viewed in isolation. The iMac can keep a CRT (albeit a slightly larger one would be nice, and flatter and maybe wider). Then a kind of reborn cube can fill the gap between the iMac at the low end and the towers at the high end. This middle product should be a minitower with maybe one empty PCI slot and upgradable components to give the prosumer more options. Being a minitower with limits to the possibilities for adding lots of stuff it might be fanless or at least have a very quiet fan. Then the price for a complete system could be under $2,000.

The way Apple is pushing the iBook with all the ads etc. and not really bothering with the iMac I can't help but wonder if the new LCD iMac is actually the iBook, if you get what I'm saying.

Maybe they will just let the iMac fizz out?

[quote]Originally posted by Fran441:
<strong>Hey, M$ is making the X Box now. Who says a computer isn't that far behind?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Hehe... y'all don't get it. Look further ahead.

XBOX OS is based on NT kernel and DirectX for all the multimedia stuff. You have to think ahead.. think .Net

High speed broadband... .Net... you don't NEED a special version of Office for XBox... you can just use it whenever you want through central server and you only for what you use, or a monthly/yearly subscription.

Think of all sorts of other apps that can be used that way too.

Basically, XBOX has the potential to become an MS Terminal while the bulk of the apps, etc are all hosted by MS or whomever wants to provide .Net enabled apps.

In this way MS tells developers to offer their apps in this new way and you will have people buy .Net servers to host the apps. Plus the fact that .Net will host all your personal data, you wont even have to bother with credit cards or whatnot... its just charged to your bill automatically.

Welcome to utopia (from MS pov) and to hell (if you actually have a mind of your own)

ZO

I'm really starting to think that Microsoft products hypnotize you somehow. Who in their right mind would want to use something remotely close to that?!

[quote]Originally posted by bradbower:
<strong>

Not only will they be able to control your information, reap in larger amounts of money through the licensing scheme, and make the developers buy .Net servers and server software, but they'll also be rendering warez pretty much useless, impossible, or at least really, really difficult and easy to be found out.</strong><hr></blockquote>

This is both a good aspect and a bad aspect.

Imagine now you buy Norton Utilities for, say, 69$. But you only use it 2-3 times (say you are a normal, newbie user). In .Net scenario If you ask for disk repair / system diagnostics through .Net (or whatever) you would intead only be charged maybe, .50$ per use... maybe a bit more. Then you could buy a "5 get 1 free" pack, etc etc. So in the end, for the end user everything COULD actually be cheaper. You even always have the latest version available, etc.

That is for mr/mrs newbie who just want an appliance, and thats it. Obviously doesnt work with people like us who like to make bootable CDs, hack the hell out of everything etc...

It will be a while before we succumb to take in what we are fed... but the vast majority of people just want a normal computer to do basic things.

PS Maybe we should start a new thread for .Net and the X-Box and other subvesive MS strategies... hmm, actually good thread title

Here we go!

I don't like LCD monitors. It's okay on my ibook, but I'm not doing major work on it. My iMac replacement will be a G4 (G5?) and I'll be looking for the discontinued clear 17" CRT. I don't like how sensitive LCD's are to viewing angles, it makes editing Photos very difficult.

[quote]It may drive the price up accordingly Amorph
<hr></blockquote>

...and that was a side comment. You missed the bombshell: No video. No OpenGL animation. No movies. No games. Not unless the monitor is, for all intents and purposes, a Mac. Not an embedded client. A Mac. In that case, the problem's already solved, because the current AirPort already supplies plenty of bandwidth between one Mac and another. If you want the embedded, XTerm-style solution, you have to forgo almost all kinds of real-time data (something low-bandwidth like MIDI might still work...).

AirPort will need to get several hundred times faster and a lot less prone to disruption in order to fully replace a monitor cable. There's no way it's going to happen any time soon. There are microwave antennae available now that could handle that load, but they're big, hungry things that would cook you in your sleep.

want to know what the LCD iMac will look like? look no further than the old Studio Display. not the current ones, but the old one. Remember is was kinda dark blue.

Think something like that.
Keyboard and mouse attatch near the side/back of the unit.

oh, and it'll be G4 Apollo.

[quote]Graphics card upgradability in consumer machines pales in comparison to the biggest thorn in the side of iMac sales to non-Apple-fanatic consumers - the small and completely non-upgradable 15" CRT display. 15 godddamm inches has cost Apple hundreds of thousands of unit sales over the last 12-18 months! <hr></blockquote>

Oh, I thought the assumption was that it is going to have an LCD anyway. My reasoning behind upgradeable graphics is that of all the cards consumers would likely swap in, it would be a graphics card. The only thing I remember that went in the 'Mezz' slot on the first iMac was a graphics accelerator. That would sort of take away from the original concept though.

[quote]Originally posted by FormerLurker:
<strong>

= Golden Convergence (any other Robert Morgan fans out there?)

= Thin-client network computing (any other Larry Ellison fans... ehhhh, never mind )

= Digital Hub (any other Steve Jobs fans out there?)</strong><hr></blockquote>

What ever happened to RKM?

[quote]Originally posted by Amorph:
<strong>You missed the bombshell: No video. No OpenGL animation. No movies. No games. Not unless the monitor is, for all intents and purposes, a Mac.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Kinda sorta not really. For OpenGL you'd just need a fast video card and some to store all the textures locally. For movies you'd just need enough ram to buffer the clip, which would be much easier if the video card had hardware decoding (hmm... wasn't Raycer working on that?). Now it may well be that the easiest way to do all this is to make a little comp, but it wouldn't be nearly as expensive as I think you think it would. If all of the rendering/decoding was handled by the video curcuitry, then you wouldn't need a CPU. Since nothing other than video information is stored locally and computers can boot from ROM, there'd be no need for a hard drive. So relatively speaking, there's not much to this.

I think the motherboard of such a device would consist of an AirPort slot, USB (for user input), an AGP slot, memory, and whatever curcuitry is needed for everything to talk to each other. I suppose we could add a FireWire port so people could use removable media if they weren't near the actual computer. I'm probably forgetting something, but I'm still pretty sure that this would be at most maybe $100 more than the cost of the monitor + video card + airport card.

Even if it wouldn't be this cheap & easy, as long as the actual computer has a good video card and there's a way to connect this wireless monitor to it, do we really care if we can't play UT on it? Personally, I'd *love* to be able to just pull a cable out of my monitor a then be able to take it downstairs so I can work on my java homework and watch TLC at the same time. Why not just get a laptop then? Because I can't give a laptop desktop capabilities just by plugging it into to something.

[quote]Originally posted by Hi Ho Quicksilver:
<strong>What ever happened to RKM?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Some kind of disease, I heard. Of course, it also could have been the shame/bankruptcy after AAPL lost 50% in one day a year ago.

...and hasn't recovered...hiss...

Alex

Logic logic logic. Apple discontinued all CRTs, save the iMac. What's more likely: they'll use a CRT, or an LCD in the new iMac?

- Pook

[quote] I don't like LCD monitors. It's okay on my ibook, but I'm not doing major work on it. My iMac replacement will be a G4 (G5?) and I'll be looking for the discontinued clear 17" CRT. I don't like how sensitive LCD's are to viewing angles, it makes editing Photos very difficult. <hr></blockquote>

I've been sitting in front of an apple 17inch LCD for a few days, doing brochures, magazines, photo-editing and web sites and i can say without a doubt that i love it more than my Sony 21inch CRT. IT's bright, text is crisp, and unless you want to sit directly beside it, the viewing angle is outstanding. Im using it in a room with a lot of sunlight and even that's less of a problem on the lcd than the Sony.

Oh how i wish i had the dollars for an ACD,

I have a new idea for a next-generation iMac that I'm going to draw out. I'll post a pic soon.

[quote]Originally posted by super:
<strong>I've been sitting in front of an apple 17inch LCD for a few days, doing brochures, magazines, photo-editing and web sites and i can say without a doubt that i love it more than my Sony 21inch CRT.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Agreed. I have an almost-two-year-old Cinema Display, and while the colors aren't 100% perfect, they're very good, the crispness is to die for, and there are NO viewing angle issues whatsoever. (I also have a TiBook, and unfortunately it does have viewing angle issues, so I certainly know what you're talking about.)

Alex

The (old) idea of LCD i mac is not so stupid dispite the prize problem.

Steve jobs like the innovation, LCD i mac will be a way to do a entirely new design based upon the all in one. Perhaps he can make an all in one flexible design (who knows ?)

Apple is only manufactaring at this time LCD screen, despite the prize problem. Steve Jobs credo is : the digital hub, lcd screen are digital not cathodic screen. So it won't be a big surprise if he make this choice. When the I mac came, Apple use only USB, he stop SCSI for the i mac line, he stop the floppy. So you can be sure he will stopped the Cathodic screen if he think it is the future. The goal of Apple is not to be cheap but to be affordable.

I am sure that junuary 2002 will be an interesting event ...

If Apple is going to show a new imac, it will have an LCD including a low cost model without any screen but VGA. The low cost model is no real imac, ok, but cheap. Maybe an option to built in the imac screen later.