Apple Product lineup for 2005

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
After considering the posts, here is what the product line will evolve to in 2005, IMHO.



Comments

  • Reply 1 of 17
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by nsousansousa

    After considering the posts, here is what the product line will evolve to in 2005, IMHO.







    g6, 1.5 years after the g5 intro? before we even see a g5 pm rev b? are you mad?





    DONT SMOKE CRACK!
  • Reply 2 of 17
    kenaustuskenaustus Posts: 911member
    The hot seller going into 2005 should be the new iMac - engineered for 2+ years of G5 chips.



    Sometime in 2005 there should be a new PB, with IBM and FreeScale fighting for the chip to be used.



    PM's will increase in speed as engineering issues are solved.



    Moving the iMac, PB and PM to G5 chips allows for movement in the iBook and eMac ranges and I believe that they will evolve, again after a competition between IBM and FreeScale.



    In short: speed, speed and more speed for computers, along with improved price competition - but not as much price competition as mac lovers would like.



    iPods will have color screens, integrate with iPhoto (and maybe QuickTime for short clips) and users will be using the large drives for backup as well as music.



    The Music Store will continue to grow, driving MS nuts, and Apple will address how to sell movies online (The Movie Store). You won't be able to download the movies to your iPod. I believe that you will be able to "buy & burn" old movies you love and can't get anywhere else AND that there will also be a movie rental option - lower price, no burning to DVD and you can watch it for 30 days or so before it is automatically deleted. NB. DSL users only.



    There will probably be "one more thing . . ." that, like the iPod, iSight and Airport Express will be something that we don't think of before it is released.



    All in all a good year, 2005, and I'm glad that I was able to get a small number of shares while it was at 15. That brings up the last prediction for 2005 - the stock will go to 45 or 50 if the market is not hit with a serious decline from unexpected events.
  • Reply 3 of 17
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,416member
    I still have strong feelings about the online Movie Store... I still believe this would be too much bandwidth or too much quality loss to lower the bandwidth needed for such a tool. And why just buy old movies... you can usually find any movie you want.



    I'm not too sure how speed will go next year either, perhaps all the cpu companies will fall out of their slump and find the magic stone to boost speed like gpu's.



    All I want apple to do is lose this 1 year update cycle... I think that was a poor decision this year. Perhaps it couldn't have been avoided...



    I think in the graphics department apple did a great job, a x800xt would be appreciated on pci-e... it definitely was too premature to do on the g5s... so next year right?



    Hopefully lower the price on the eMac another 100...
  • Reply 4 of 17
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    I think that the bandwidth concerns will be satisfied by the new qt mpeg4 codec as this will be on the hd dvd's Apple then can stream the content under tiger and QT.



    but for that, We must wait. Perhaps the new ipod with video will use QT 6 and then an upgrade.



    Remember, QT is another of apple's baby's that run on windows platforms.



    Apple has an edge here with itms an itunes and a push to quicktime on the pc platform will allow for apple to invade the pc desktop.
  • Reply 5 of 17
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,416member
    Good points, but I seriously doubt this will happen in 2005.
  • Reply 6 of 17
    pbg4 dudepbg4 dude Posts: 1,611member
    About the movie store idea. I was in Wal-Mart yesterday (in my defense, my wife dragged me there) and they had DVDs as cheap as $5.50 each. Movies I'm interested in went for $10-15. I don't see how Apple could come close to that price and still be able to pay for the bandwidth.
  • Reply 7 of 17
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,294member
    Quote:

    \tI still have strong feelings about the online Movie Store... I still believe this would be too much bandwidth or too much quality loss to lower the bandwidth needed for such a tool. And why just buy old movies... you can usually find any movie you want.



    Your common sense is shining through emig647. Let's contrast Music downloads with Movies.



    Music



    1. CDs are individual songs grouped on polycarbonate discs. Users are free to bounce around the disck listening to their favorite songs.



    2. Downloading is natural because we are accustomed to listening to singles and there is nothing that we miss besides maybe liner notes. The audio remains pure enough so to speak.

    3. Portability. We have umpteen players for home, auto and portables.



    Movies



    1. DVDs are generally feature length movies on polycarbonate discs. They are generally watched in their entirety but users have the ability to skip to favorite parts.



    2. Downloading would be unatural IMO. While downloads would allow for watching movies in their entirety you run into issues that most people don't see.

    a. Which codec? AVC, MPEG2 or WM9???

    b. Audio. AC3 and DTS are the standards. what do dls use?

    c. Extras? DVDs sold well because people loved the extras

    d. Seamless branching. Some dvds have the Directors Cut and orignal theatrical release on one disc. The DVD spec automatically branches the video parts according to the version you watch. More flexibility.



    3. Portability. Very difficult unless you can burn a DVD but the MPAA isn't going to want that so you will likely have the download locked to the computer that downloaded it or you will have to authorize another computer.



    Don't get me wrong. I think the idea of Movie downloads is inevitable. However I don't think it's going to compare to music downloads in potential. Video on Demand is great for rash choices but then that's only $3-4. Asking for someone to pay $12.99 for a digital download movie is quite another obstacle to surmount. People are happy about DVDs right now and you just don't hear as many complaints about them be overpriced as you do with music CDs.



    In conclusion we must look at thinks objectively and when we do we will realize one fact. Audio is King! You want proof?



    Go count the amount of GarageBand sites versus iMovie sites. It becomes obvious that people are more excited about making and listening to music than they are about doing the same with video. It's always been that way.
  • Reply 8 of 17
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,416member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    It becomes obvious that people are more excited about making and listening to music than they are about doing the same with video. It's always been that way.



    I find that extremely interesting. As mindless as our culture is today I would have thought that movies would have more attention.... but you're right, there is a lot of attention around making personal music.



    You had extremely good points about the music downloads versus movie downloads. Especially the one that there are a lot more compaints about music than movies.
  • Reply 9 of 17
    banchobancho Posts: 1,517member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by emig647

    I find that extremely interesting. As mindless as our culture is today I would have thought that movies would have more attention.... but you're right, there is a lot of attention around making personal music.



    You had extremely good points about the music downloads versus movie downloads. Especially the one that there are a lot more compaints about music than movies.




    I never really mind to just buy the movie because it is always so much cheaper than if I had gone and seen it at the theatre. Movies are easy to get for less than $20 with all the extras so they represent a decent value. If it is something I wanted to see but not own I can rent for 3 or 4 dollars. I think most of the attention movie downloaders get is when they share movies that are just hitting or haven't even hit the theatres yet.
  • Reply 10 of 17
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,416member
    Here's an interesting thought...



    If Quicktimes new codec takes off... why not stream brand new movies only? I absolutely despise going to the theatre and having to pay their outrageous prices for food / drink. If you take 2 other people it comes out to be around 40 dollars... to see a freakin movie!!



    It would be cool to "rent" the brand new movie... I know it won't happen any time soon or perhaps at all... but I would much rather do that than go to the theatre.
  • Reply 11 of 17
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,294member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by emig647

    Here's an interesting thought...



    If Quicktimes new codec takes off... why not stream brand new movies only? I absolutely despise going to the theatre and having to pay their outrageous prices for food / drink. If you take 2 other people it comes out to be around 40 dollars... to see a freakin movie!!



    It would be cool to "rent" the brand new movie... I know it won't happen any time soon or perhaps at all... but I would much rather do that than go to the theatre.




    I've always thought about that emig647. I know people who have 30k Home Theaters that would love to be able to watch movies in their homes while they are still in the local theaters. However let me put myself into the paranoid Hollywood Execs shoes for a minute.



    "How do we know that this person buying this movie isn't showing half the block or even charging for the privledge?"



    I then realized this will never happen because some people would indeed charge for this and that would cause huge problems. The technology is here. Digital Movie theaters can receive movies via hardcopy over download from satellite. High End home systems could do the same if the piracy or reselling fear wasn't omnipresent.
  • Reply 12 of 17
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,416member
    iSight will prevent this
  • Reply 13 of 17
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    However let me put myself into the paranoid Hollywood Execs shoes for a minute.



    "How do we know that this person buying this movie isn't showing half the block or even charging for the privledge?"





    As an aside, for the last two decades (give or take) any showing of a movie to an audience of more than eight people has legally counted as a "public performance." So if you've ever huddled around your TV and popped in a film with more than seven buddies, you owe royalties regardless of which medium the film was recorded on (VHS, Beta, DVD, etc.). Pay up, slackers!
  • Reply 14 of 17
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,416member
    Are you f'n serious aMorph!? Thats just like the entertainment industry... wouldn't be suprised if the record industry tried the same thing.
  • Reply 15 of 17
    kenaustuskenaustus Posts: 911member
    The main reason why my mind keeps going back to movies is that Steve J is in the business and it has to be on his mind - if not in the labs.



    The one think I know for sure is than when it comes to Apple Pixar will be the first to sign up . . .
  • Reply 16 of 17
    @homenow@homenow Posts: 998member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by kenaustus

    The main reason why my mind keeps going back to movies is that Steve J is in the business and it has to be on his mind - if not in the labs.



    The one think I know for sure is than when it comes to Apple Pixar will be the first to sign up . . .




    The problem with that is to date Disney has distibution of all of Pixar's movies, including the yet to be released Increadalbes, so Pixar doesn't have any movies to distribute through the hypothetical iMovie Store.
  • Reply 17 of 17
    lotharsnllotharsnl Posts: 113member
    Perhaps "The Movie Store" should be named "The Video Store"? As in, you use your vision... hehe.. Seriously, if it started off as an option next to the songs that would allow for the purchase of a song's video. A concert. TV shows.. That would get them into the video/online realm, and leave the (long) movie issues for another day. They might become an alternative to ppv, and Tivo like services. Just a thought.



    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Your common sense is shining through emig647. Let's contrast Music downloads with Movies.



    Music



    1. CDs are individual songs grouped on polycarbonate discs. Users are free to bounce around the disck listening to their favorite songs.



    2. Downloading is natural because we are accustomed to listening to singles and there is nothing that we miss besides maybe liner notes. The audio remains pure enough so to speak.

    3. Portability. We have umpteen players for home, auto and portables.



    Movies



    1. DVDs are generally feature length movies on polycarbonate discs. They are generally watched in their entirety but users have the ability to skip to favorite parts.



    2. Downloading would be unatural IMO. While downloads would allow for watching movies in their entirety you run into issues that most people don't see.

    a. Which codec? AVC, MPEG2 or WM9???

    b. Audio. AC3 and DTS are the standards. what do dls use?

    c. Extras? DVDs sold well because people loved the extras

    d. Seamless branching. Some dvds have the Directors Cut and orignal theatrical release on one disc. The DVD spec automatically branches the video parts according to the version you watch. More flexibility.



    3. Portability. Very difficult unless you can burn a DVD but the MPAA isn't going to want that so you will likely have the download locked to the computer that downloaded it or you will have to authorize another computer.




Sign In or Register to comment.