tasty new imac rumor...warning - it's different
i was on macsurfer today when i saw a page from a website i've never heard of offering the following speculation. i make no claims about authenticity, other than the fact it's an interesting idea.... fire away.
=============
July 10, 2002 - Dispite recent rumors that Apple will introduce a 17-inch version of its popular iMac at the upcoming MacWorld Expo to be held in New York, Apple will instead release a swivel-display version of the current shipping iMac.
The iMac+ will offer the same display technology as in the current shipping version, however will implement a new display connector and a MacÂ*OSÂ*X only software utitlity that enables automatic portrait or landscape viewing. Although not a first to offer such capabilities, the iMac+ will be the first to offer this in an All-in-One unit such as the iMac.
Decisions behind this are widely believed to be that a 17-inch version of the iMac would place it too close price-wise to the professional versions of Apple's PowerMac G4s, and that simply modifying the connector of the iMac to enable swiveling would offer a much more unique product as well as a low-cost approach to increasing sales. Pricing is expected to remain the same as current shipping models, of which will be discounted by $100-$200 to reduce current inventory.
=============
July 10, 2002 - Dispite recent rumors that Apple will introduce a 17-inch version of its popular iMac at the upcoming MacWorld Expo to be held in New York, Apple will instead release a swivel-display version of the current shipping iMac.
The iMac+ will offer the same display technology as in the current shipping version, however will implement a new display connector and a MacÂ*OSÂ*X only software utitlity that enables automatic portrait or landscape viewing. Although not a first to offer such capabilities, the iMac+ will be the first to offer this in an All-in-One unit such as the iMac.
Decisions behind this are widely believed to be that a 17-inch version of the iMac would place it too close price-wise to the professional versions of Apple's PowerMac G4s, and that simply modifying the connector of the iMac to enable swiveling would offer a much more unique product as well as a low-cost approach to increasing sales. Pricing is expected to remain the same as current shipping models, of which will be discounted by $100-$200 to reduce current inventory.
Comments
First, the arm holding up the iMac's display is, in Jon Ive's own opinion, the most elaborate and difficult piece of engineering in the whole machine. It's a lot of the reason the machine took them two years to design. Pulling it off was no small feat. Modifying it to allow a whole other range of movement would probably be no small feat, either.
Second, landscape-portrait reorientation requires support from the video chipset. The number of video chipsets that currently support this kind of reorientation: 0.
A 17" iMac (particularly a 3:2 widescreen one) would win over new buyers (if the price isn't outrageous).
"Hey cool, a 15" flat panel iMac. Ooh, but it's a bit pricey."
"This 15" flat panel rotates to portrait."
"Really!? Where do I sign!!!" <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
Screed ...now if were a 17" and rotated...
well then sugar and spice...
No, I don't know what I meant by that either.
[ 07-11-2002: Message edited by: sCreeD ]</p>
I'd hand over my credit card for an iMac with a 17 inch swiveling monitor!
<a href="http://www.flex.com/~daniel/imac/"; target="_blank">http://www.flex.com/~daniel/imac/</a>;
If you scroll the page down it says;
This is of course, a joke. But if you had an iMac+, you wouldn't have to scroll down here to know that, now would you?
Have fun at the MacWorld Expo NY!
<a href="http://www.flex.com/~daniel/imac/"; target="_blank">iMac+</a>
And if you scroll down to the very bottom of that page, hosting exactly that ?article? it says...
[quote] This is of course, a joke. But if you had an iMac+, you wouldn't have to scroll down here to know that, now would you?
Have fun at the MacWorld Expo NY!<hr></blockquote>
*sigh* dumbass
Anywho, at the investor's meeting this year, someone did ask Steve about adding this capability to the iMac, and Steve rather flatly replied that it wasn't a feature ?included in graphics cards today,? though gave no indication of whether or not Apple intended to persue such a feature. And sure, it'd be cool, but really, who would this win over?
Try reading the *entire* webpage before going and spreading obvious b.s.
ciao,
michael
<strong>I'm not buying it.
First, the arm holding up the iMac's display is, in Jon Ive's own opinion, the most elaborate and difficult piece of engineering in the whole machine. It's a lot of the reason the machine took them two years to design. Pulling it off was no small feat. Modifying it to allow a whole other range of movement would probably be no small feat, either.
Second, landscape-portrait reorientation requires support from the video chipset. The number of video chipsets that currently support this kind of reorientation: 0.</strong><hr></blockquote>
1. Apple could have been designing the arm for a pivot function alongside the one we have now. That gives them 2 1/2 years to get it right.
2. Samsung does <a href="http://www.samsungelectronics.com/monitor/lcd/171t.html"; target="_blank">make</a> a 15" swivel LCD monitor. What's more, they make a 17" swivel. Surely there are card supporting it.
Pivot monitors are very useful for some applications such as document prep and imaging (medical images are commonly in a portrait orientation) and not having it will keep Apple out of a few markets, but I don't think it's a good enough feature to justify a big shift. It seems like a 'throw in' item - "Oh, BTW, these things pivot now..."
There is no special hardware required, an extension to windows allows the desktop to be rotated in 90 degree increment.
I havent seen any benchmarks examining performance costs of the rotation software. It may have an impact.
There is an extension for macos 9 that rotates powerbook screens ( I think ).
Apple will never release a 15" portrait screen, the reason is very simple.
Most websites are optimised for a minimum width of 800 pixels, and a 15" portrait is only 768 wide. Hence ruining the users web experience.
If they go to a 17" screen then it is a possibility.
For me, the lack of portrait mode is a big disincentive for buying an Apple LCD monitor. I have made it a requirement of my next computer setup that it be dual screen, with one screen in portrait mode.
<strong>It'd be a neat (technical) trick. But I doubt that would win over a single additional customer.
A 17" iMac (particularly a 3:2 widescreen one) would win over new buyers (if the price isn't outrageous).
"Hey cool, a 15" flat panel iMac. Ooh, but it's a bit pricey."
"This 15" flat panel rotates to portrait."
"Really!? Where do I sign!!!" <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
Screed ...now if were a 17" and rotated...
well then sugar and spice...
No, I don't know what I meant by that either.
[ 07-11-2002: Message edited by: sCreeD ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
WRONG.. Single user here. I don't care about big displays. I would like them tinier.
BUT, swivel! I'll buy.
So, you're wrong. UNLESS you meant single as in marital status. Because, I'm happily married to my lovely wife of 11 years.
<strong>Apple will never release a 15" portrait screen, the reason is very simple.
Most websites are optimised for a minimum width of 800 pixels, and a 15" portrait is only 768 wide. Hence ruining the users web experience.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think the proposal is for a rotating screen, which has advantages over a non-rotating one (ie pages are generally portrait). The user can swvel the thing if they want/need.
This type of rotating screen is not new, Radius made one for the Mac years and years (and years and years) ago - probably about 1990.
In some ways, a 17" iMac would take care of some of the problems inherent in the 15" model. You'd gain over 1.5" in actual screen space, in addition to going from a vertical resolution of 768 pixels to 1024, which would decrease scrolling on long documents or web pages or whatever.
PLUS, you'd still have all that horizontal space.
I think rotating displays are gimmicky and too limited-appeal and aren't THAT "gee whiz!".
I'd rather see a nice 17" at 1280x1024 (just like the Studio Display). Or a cool-ass widescreen 17" of some sort. Now THOSE options would appeal to more people, hands down.
I honestly can't imagine anyone seriously considering a new iMac just because the screen can rotate 90 degrees. Honestly, how often would that really come into use?
<strong>Well, if the choice is between a nice, roomy 17" LCD iMac (with the same resolution as the 17" Studio Display) OR a gimmicky, limited-appeal feature like a rotating screen (yawn...), I know which one I'D opt for.
In some ways, a 17" iMac would take care of some of the problems inherent in the 15" model. You'd gain over 1.5" in actual screen space, in addition to going from a vertical resolution of 768 pixels to 1024, which would decrease scrolling on long documents or web pages or whatever.
PLUS, you'd still have all that horizontal space.
I think rotating displays are gimmicky and too limited-appeal and aren't THAT "gee whiz!".
I'd rather see a nice 17" at 1280x1024 (just like the Studio Display). Or a cool-ass widescreen 17" of some sort. Now THOSE options would appeal to more people, hands down.
I honestly can't imagine anyone seriously considering a new iMac just because the screen can rotate 90 degrees. Honestly, how often would that really come into use?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hey! you know WHAT? I think the pivoting thing would be my SOLE reason for buying it.
I've got a Nakamichi RX-505. Can anyone tell me WHY? (Based on the answer above)
So, unless you are making the buying decisions for me, I would be buying one ASAP.
Not kidding. Sorry to turn your 'guessing' of the world upside down.
I mean like, a *real* reason.
being able to view more of the page isn't much of a reason for your basic dumb consumer.
actually if you take a look at the back of the iMac, it looks like it would be pretty easy. just rotate on the joint. i've seen ones that do it. the arm has the structure to support it, i'm sure it could be done.
as for the video card support crap, that's total BS. although a card might not support it, other software does, and has been doing so for years. lame ass excuse.
and for the comments on who would want it and why, i can tell you that right now.
it is worth a TON of time and money for people to be able to see an entire 8 1/2 by 11 sheet of paper on one screen, w/o scrolling. for those who produce professional documents layout is key, and being able to see a page at 100% w/o scrolling all over is very important.
i know at least 3 people who own pivoting monitors so they can do their word processing on them. and i know people who didn't buy specific 15" LCD's because they couldn't rotate when another 15" could.
main reason at that decision? a 15" LCD was running $350 to $400. a 17" was running $700 to $900, that's a huge price difference.
a rotating LCD on the iMac would be a good idea.
what does it hurt?
<strong>Can anyone give a reason why anyone would want a rotating iMac screen?
I mean like, a *real* reason.
being able to view more of the page isn't much of a reason for your basic dumb consumer.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yep, how about vertical mame games, you would get a much larger game screen. Desktop publishing was the reason for the first portrait apple display and that will still hold now.
[ 07-12-2002: Message edited by: gsxrboy ]</p>
<strong>
I've got a Nakamichi RX-505. Can anyone tell me WHY? (Based on the answer above).</strong><hr></blockquote>
If I remember rightly they had that cool-as-s**t auto reverse system where the tape actually whizzes out on an arm and them gets flipped around before returning to its home and playback recommenced. Very snazzy..
(Just from memory like 6 years ago..)