I just tested it and the photos show up just fine... I'd post the link but first it has my last name in it and second I can't afford to have my .mac account go bad (or get taken down)...
I'm not lying... .mac isn't doing any photo scanning for CRCs or any such nonsense.
Dave
we need one of the rumor sites to post the pic claiming it is the new iMac... then see what happens.
I think this thing is a fake. Why wouldn't you take more pictures instead of teasing us with just these two taken at almost the exact same angle - which are not really all that revealing in terms of the details of the product? Why not take a picture of the front of the box?
Come on, the guy was under heavy pressure. You never know where exactly those Apple spies sneak from .
Date Time: 2004:08:23 14:38:17 (last saved I presume)
Second Photo: DCP_1764.JPG
Date Time Original: 2004:08:26 12:19:57
Date Time Digitized: 2004:08:26 12:19:57
Date Time: 2004:08:26 17:45:17 (last saved I presume)
So the photo (first photo) was taken at 12:18:52 on the 23rd and saved in photoshop also on the 23rd but at 14:38:17 and it took 3 days to make it public...
and then the second photo was taken 3 days later???
Sorry but I too have to claim HOAX now... unless philbots buddy STOLE the box **or** have been unloading them for the past 3 days in a row...
And while he/she took the time to take a single photo of the thing on the 23rd and then a followup single photo on the 26th didn't think to take a photo of the box that would have a GOOD photo of proof (an Apple marketing shot) and the NAME of the product nor did the person think to take a picture of the 'connector side' of the unit.
The aging pessimist in me has to say bzzzt!
Dave
Either way, why would Apple be shipping large quantities of the iMac G5 to Paris that it would take 3 days to unload. I don't think they need that many, I mean, they are just going to unveil it and have a few to demo. I think this guy that modified these pictures is full of it. And I don't think that Apple is going to let just anyone handle the iMac. I think these must be shipped in a very secure manner. I really think these are FAKE!
whos to say this is a insider, why not an apple employe that has been to told to do this, be it fake or not. Is it not rumur sites likle this that get people like us exsited about possible products like it. What wonderfull publisty, can i ask how many more people are going to watch the keynote just to see what it loks like now.
Come on, the guy was under heavy pressure. You never know where exactly those Apple spies sneak from .
If he was under pressure, I don't think he would have taken his sweet time in an elevator to open the box and arrange the "iMac" to take a picture of it. He's full of s***.
Looks like a quick couple of photos inside an elevator away from prying eyes. Im sure the last thing on this dudes mind was to take multi-angled photos and literature on the box. Wham bam thankyou mam!
Looks like a quick couple of photos inside an elevator away from prying eyes. Im sure the last thing on this dudes mind was to take multi-angled photos and literature on the box. Wham bam thankyou mam!
Wild guess, you're a Prince fan, no?
As for the pictures, the dates DaveGee came up with are contradicted by the position of the box on the floor. When you compare the rounds on the floor, the box is in exactly the same position in both pictures. Also, in the first picture the top of the 'screen' is strangely deep. Anyway, this is either legit, or someone went to extreme lengths to give us a good time here, so it's all good.
As for the pictures, the dates DaveGee came up with are contradicted by the position of the box on the floor. When you compare the rounds on the floor, the box is in exactly the same position in both pictures.
To get the date info, last app modified and tons of other info such as shutter speed etc just open the files in photoshop and then go File ---> "File Info..." (a dialog will appear) and then from the pull down select the last option EXIF...
Or here is some freeware that will show you the info
If he was under pressure, I don't think he would have taken his sweet time in an elevator to open the box and arrange the "iMac" to take a picture of it. He's full of s***.
Ok... let's just play along. We will probably look like jackasses for wasting our time... but what the hell.
Let's pretend THIS IS REAL. Let's pretend someone sent this to Appleinsider and it was from the most trusted source imaginable. But they sent no information as to WHAT it is...
So what is it?
Is it the new Imac?
Or is it somekind of tablet?
Is this thing big enough to be a fully functional Imac?
It doesn't look like it to me. I couldn't see it being this slim. I am leaning towards somekind of wireless device.
EDIT! Okay my bad I **MUST** have been looking at something else when I reported that the first photo was taken on the 23rd - either that or Adobe Photoshop had some sorta bug... cause now using that freeware program I found everything seems to be dated today again...
Comments
Originally posted by DaveGee
They are doing nothing of the kind...
I just tested it and the photos show up just fine... I'd post the link but first it has my last name in it and second I can't afford to have my .mac account go bad (or get taken down)...
I'm not lying... .mac isn't doing any photo scanning for CRCs or any such nonsense.
Dave
we need one of the rumor sites to post the pic claiming it is the new iMac... then see what happens.
Originally posted by 7E7
I think this thing is a fake. Why wouldn't you take more pictures instead of teasing us with just these two taken at almost the exact same angle - which are not really all that revealing in terms of the details of the product? Why not take a picture of the front of the box?
Come on, the guy was under heavy pressure. You never know where exactly those Apple spies sneak from
Originally posted by DaveGee
More to add to the summary:
Camera: Eastman Kodak DC4800 ZOOM Digital Camera
First Photo: DCP_1763.JPG
Date Time Original: 2004:08:23 12:18:52
Date Time Digitized: 2004:08:23 12:18:52
Date Time: 2004:08:23 14:38:17 (last saved I presume)
Second Photo: DCP_1764.JPG
Date Time Original: 2004:08:26 12:19:57
Date Time Digitized: 2004:08:26 12:19:57
Date Time: 2004:08:26 17:45:17 (last saved I presume)
So the photo (first photo) was taken at 12:18:52 on the 23rd and saved in photoshop also on the 23rd but at 14:38:17 and it took 3 days to make it public...
and then the second photo was taken 3 days later???
Sorry but I too have to claim HOAX now... unless philbots buddy STOLE the box **or** have been unloading them for the past 3 days in a row...
And while he/she took the time to take a single photo of the thing on the 23rd and then a followup single photo on the 26th didn't think to take a photo of the box that would have a GOOD photo of proof (an Apple marketing shot) and the NAME of the product nor did the person think to take a picture of the 'connector side' of the unit.
The aging pessimist in me has to say bzzzt!
Dave
Either way, why would Apple be shipping large quantities of the iMac G5 to Paris that it would take 3 days to unload. I don't think they need that many, I mean, they are just going to unveil it and have a few to demo. I think this guy that modified these pictures is full of it. And I don't think that Apple is going to let just anyone handle the iMac. I think these must be shipped in a very secure manner. I really think these are FAKE!
Originally posted by PB
Come on, the guy was under heavy pressure. You never know where exactly those Apple spies sneak from
If he was under pressure, I don't think he would have taken his sweet time in an elevator to open the box and arrange the "iMac" to take a picture of it. He's full of s***.
but I happen to know that all incoming cargo is opened and checked.
Originally posted by ronnie_brassic
Looks like a quick couple of photos inside an elevator away from prying eyes. Im sure the last thing on this dudes mind was to take multi-angled photos and literature on the box. Wham bam thankyou mam!
Wild guess, you're a Prince fan, no?
As for the pictures, the dates DaveGee came up with are contradicted by the position of the box on the floor. When you compare the rounds on the floor, the box is in exactly the same position in both pictures. Also, in the first picture the top of the 'screen' is strangely deep. Anyway, this is either legit, or someone went to extreme lengths to give us a good time here, so it's all good.
Originally posted by stangmatt66
Didn't most spy reports state that the new iMac would have integrated speakers like the original? I don't see any speakers here at all.
I noticed that too.
Originally posted by s_sarinana
Either way, why would Apple be shipping large quantities of the iMac G5 to Paris that it would take 3 days to unload.
Why would they have to be shipped all at once, couldn't it be two separate (perhaps small) shipments?
Originally posted by SpcMs
As for the pictures, the dates DaveGee came up with are contradicted by the position of the box on the floor. When you compare the rounds on the floor, the box is in exactly the same position in both pictures.
To get the date info, last app modified and tons of other info such as shutter speed etc just open the files in photoshop and then go File ---> "File Info..." (a dialog will appear) and then from the pull down select the last option EXIF...
Or here is some freeware that will show you the info
http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/17041
Dave
1. left it there for three days untouched
b. messed around with the dates (is that even possible?)
III. took extreme care to put the box back in exactly the same position as three days earlier.
Now you tell me which is least unlikely
Btw, thnx for the info
Originally posted by s_sarinana
If he was under pressure, I don't think he would have taken his sweet time in an elevator to open the box and arrange the "iMac" to take a picture of it. He's full of s***.
I was kidding, of course
Let's pretend THIS IS REAL. Let's pretend someone sent this to Appleinsider and it was from the most trusted source imaginable. But they sent no information as to WHAT it is...
So what is it?
Is it the new Imac?
Or is it somekind of tablet?
Is this thing big enough to be a fully functional Imac?
It doesn't look like it to me. I couldn't see it being this slim. I am leaning towards somekind of wireless device.
EDIT! Okay my bad I **MUST** have been looking at something else when I reported that the first photo was taken on the 23rd - either that or Adobe Photoshop had some sorta bug... cause now using that freeware program I found everything seems to be dated today again...
Sorry about that and WEIRD! I know what I saw...
===============================================
DC_1763.jpg - EXIF Information
- Exif
Make\tEASTMAN KODAK COMPANY
Model\tKODAK DC4800 ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERA
Orientation\ttop, left side
X Resolution\t1/72 inches
Y Resolution\t1/72 inches
Resolution Unit\tInches
Software\tAdobe Photoshop 7.0
Date/Time\t2004:08:26 14:38:17
YCbCr Positioning\tCenter of pixel array
Exposure Time\t1/30 sec
F-Number\tF2.8
Exposure Program\tProgram normal
Exif Version\t2.10
Date/Time Original\t2004:08:26 12:18:52
Date/Time Digitized\t2004:08:26 12:18:52
Components Configuration\tYCbCr
Shutter Speed Value\t1/32 sec
Aperture Value\tF2.8
Exposure Bias Value\t0
Max Aperture Value\tF2.6
Subject Distance\t3.24 metres
Metering Mode\tCenter weighted average
Light Source\tUnknown
Flash\tFlash fired
Focal Length\t5.9 mm
FlashPix Version\t1.00
Color Space\tUndefined
Exif Image Width\t1080 pixels
Exif Image Height\t720 pixels
Exposure Index\t100
Sensing Method\tOne-chip color area sensor
File Source\tDigital Still Camera (DSC)
Scene Type\tDirectly photographed image
Compression\tJPEG compression
Thumbnail Offset\t750 bytes
Thumbnail Length\t4142 bytes
Thumbnail Data\t[4142 bytes of thumbnail data]
- Iptc
================================================== ===================
DC_1764.jpg - EXIF Information
- Exif
Make\tEASTMAN KODAK COMPANY
Model\tKODAK DC4800 ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERA
Orientation\ttop, left side
X Resolution\t1/72 inches
Y Resolution\t1/72 inches
Resolution Unit\tInches
Software\tAdobe Photoshop CS Macintosh
Date/Time\t2004:08:26 17:45:17
YCbCr Positioning\tCenter of pixel array
Exposure Time\t0.1 sec
F-Number\tF2.8
Exposure Program\tProgram normal
Exif Version\t2.10
Date/Time Original\t2004:08:26 12:19:57
Date/Time Digitized\t2004:08:26 12:19:57
Components Configuration\tYCbCr
Shutter Speed Value\t1/8 sec
Aperture Value\tF2.8
Exposure Bias Value\t0
Max Aperture Value\tF2.6
Subject Distance\t0.63 metres
Metering Mode\tCenter weighted average
Light Source\tUnknown
Flash\tNo flash fired
Focal Length\t5.9 mm
FlashPix Version\t1.00
Color Space\tUndefined
Exif Image Width\t1080 pixels
Exif Image Height\t720 pixels
Exposure Index\t400
Sensing Method\tOne-chip color area sensor
File Source\tDigital Still Camera (DSC)
Scene Type\tDirectly photographed image
Compression\tJPEG compression
Thumbnail Offset\t758 bytes
Thumbnail Length\t4202 bytes
Thumbnail Data\t[4202 bytes of thumbnail data]
- Iptc
Directory Version\t2
===============================================
Originally posted by ArticulatedArm
Is this thing big enough to be a fully functional Imac?
It doesn't look like it to me. I couldn't see it being this slim. I am leaning towards somekind of wireless device.
It's WAY too big, thick and heavy to be a wireless anything.
Originally posted by DaveGee
All the details...
DC_1763.jpg - EXIF Information
Date/Time Original 2004:08:26 12:18:52
DC_1764.jpg - EXIF Information
Date/Time Original 2004:08:26 12:19:57
Uhm, i'm probably missing something, but these details give for both pictures identical dates for the original, no?
Edit: You noticed it yourself also, apparently
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
It's WAY too big, thick and heavy to be a wireless anything.
But is it too small to be an Imac?
Could you fit the contents of the old Imac base in the case of this device?