If Apple can make an iMac 2 inches thick...

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 64
    banchobancho Posts: 1,517member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by blacky

    i dont know about the rest of you....but when i first saw the new imac what came to mind was a tablet....i mean, it looks like a tablet on a stand....is it inevitable?



    As much as any other flat panel looks like a tablet
  • Reply 42 of 64
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Bancho

    As much as any other flat panel looks like a tablet



    No, this iMac looks 53% more like a tablet than the other flat panels.



    To me it really looks like you should be able to detach it and have it become a large, large tablet. That wouldn't make sense unless the screen is touch sensitive, though.
  • Reply 43 of 64
    banchobancho Posts: 1,517member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by monkeyastronaut

    No, this iMac looks 53% more like a tablet than the other flat panels.



    To me it really looks like you should be able to detach it and have it become a large, large tablet. That wouldn't make sense unless the screen is touch sensitive, though.




    And perhaps if you added a large battery to increase weight further.



    Once you've detached the thing and have the large, large tablet, what is the use-case for it? You can't rightly cradle a 20 - 25lb device in your arm and it would even be heavy sitting in your lap. If it had a touch screen it would be fine as a kiosk type device but a kiosk type device would not need to be detachable.
  • Reply 44 of 64
    Your answer lies in the power systems Apple has decided/not decided to use ... See all those capacitors in the box, there are power supply solutions available (chk Volterra.com) that could eliminate the need for those big puppies, and reduce size and weight by 1/2 pound burger.



    Small, integrated power conversion is where the next big leap in cost reduction and size reduction lies for Apple ... someone should get that message to them.



















    Quote:

    Originally posted by Placebo

    ...how far away is a 1 inch thick Powerbook?





    They managed to cram in a G5, speakers, and a desktop quality display into that package, in addition to optical audio and a bunch of miscellaneous connectivity options. So if you stripped a couple components off, added more compact speakers and a more compact display, and you might be in business.





    Cheers, now rip my analysis apart limb from limb.




  • Reply 45 of 64
    Quote:

    Originally posted by mello

    Maybe Apple will incorporate that new cooling tech from Cooligy into the

    new powerbook. A 7200rpm hardrive & an upgradeable graphics card would

    be nice too!






    You dont need an exotic thermal cooling solution if you use an advanced power system architecture. I know these things.
  • Reply 46 of 64
    More to the point if they can release a 2" iMac then why not make an attractive G5 Tower that doesn't look like a gargantuan kitchen accessory?
  • Reply 47 of 64
    maccrazymaccrazy Posts: 2,657member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by womblingfree

    More to the point if they can release a 2" iMac then why not make an attractive G5 Tower that doesn't look like a gargantuan kitchen accessory?



    The iMac hasn't got the expansion of the PowerMac, hence the size difference.
  • Reply 48 of 64
    A former senior material science engineer from IBM (who is currently consulting with a government agency on matters that cannot be openly discussed) has indicated that Apple apparently wanted to bring a sub $1000 iMAC G5 to the market.



    The computer would be monitor-less yet have very similar features, size, weight and dimension attributes of the current low-end iMAC G5 (selling for $1299) but only with the LCD screen removed, a video port added, and a computer stand and carrying-handle offered as options. The carrying-handle would allow transporting the computer like a briefcase or small suitcase.



    Since purchasers would have to supply their own monitors, total costs could be reduced by approximately $400, thus a projected price of approximately $899 for the slim, portable, and monitor-less iMAC G5.



    The engineer added that this information was accidentally disclosed by a manufacturer representative that receives G5 PowerPCs from IBM in order to manufacture the new iMAC.



    Apparently, the Asian company (in order to project needed resources, both staffing and materials) was inquiring about IBM?s ability to meet demand for a potentially hot-selling, monitor-less, sub $1000, iMAC G5 computer from Apple.



    BTW, how can I post an image (of how a monitor-less iMac G5 would look) if I don't have access to a web server? Thanks.
  • Reply 49 of 64
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Rhumgod

    Well the 17" PowerBook is 15.4" wide by 10.2" deep x 1" high. Volume=157.08 cubic inches.



    iMac G5 is 16.8" wide by 12.9" high (guesstimate of 4" clearance underneath) by 2" deep. Volume=433.44 cubic inches.



    So yeah, the volume is ~3x that of the 17" PowerBook. But the components are a LOT bigger in the iMac than the PowerBook versions.




    Which components? The drives, period. The difference between a desktop drive and a laptop drive is that the former is about 1" tall and the latter is about 3/4" tall. The LCD + backlight will be a bit thicker, but mostly they'll just use more power because they can. The two together cannot account for the difference in volume. Now, go to Apple's iMac page and look at the "open back" picture. Look at the cooling mechanism on top of the G5. Remember that the iMac uses convective cooling with assistance from fans, so there needs to be a good deal of unobstructed space if you want to move a lot of air quietly.



    Quote:

    I just don't see how we can come to any other conclusion than the PowerBook will see a G5 - soon....Apple has basically come out and said, a PowerBook G5 is in the making - the plugins are already in 10.3.5.



    They can't put it in before it's ready to go in. Why did IBM redact the prose in the 970fx marketing material that said it was a great chip for laptops? Because they can't run the 970fx at less than 1.0v due to a defect, and they based the suitability for laptops on the chip running at 0.8v (wattage is proportional to the square of the voltage, so this difference is significant). This probably means that Apple did work assuming a 970fx-based PowerBook, then delayed or scotched them when IBM came up short. In other words, the way things are going, we'll see a G5 PowerBook later than either IBM or Apple intended. The solution IBM has said they have for fabbing low-voltage 970fx's would lower the top and average clockspeeds, too. Meanwhile, Apple has to release something, and all of a sudden Freescale's roadmap looks pretty nice.





    Quote:

    With the iMac G5 bus frequency 1/3 of the CPU speed, Apple is showing that they can indeed modify this multiplier. Is this PowerTune? Apple hasn't stated anywhere I've read that 970fx-based systems utilize these modes; perhaps that technology is specifically designed for a laptop. Remember, PowerTune not only cuts CPU frequency, but also bus, I/O and memory controller frequency (plus voltage iterations) as well.



    It's never been in serious dispute that Apple could modify those ratios. According to IBM, the 970 supported 1:2, 1:3, 1:4, and 1:6 ratios right out of the starting gate. Nothing new there.



    As for PowerTune: Apple wasn't using PowerTune in the first 970fx-based PowerMacs because IBM couldn't get it to work. Now, apparently, the PowerMacs have undergone a revision and they're all shipping with 970fx CPUs, and they are using PowerTune. There are perfectly good reasons to use PowerTune in towers and servers: If you deploy them en masse, then even a few watts saved per CPU some of the time adds up to megawatts of savings in power consumption per month. And it also means the machines can run cooler and quieter, ramping up to full speed only when necessary.



    I'm expecting a PBG5 some time in 2H'05. The 12" will stick with its iBook parent for the first revision, and remain with a (>2GHz) G4.



    THT: Look at the PC laptops with desktop chips. How heavy are they? What's their battery life? Apple's answer to those is the iMac G5. If you actually want a portable rather than a schleptop then the included CPUs start making a similar set of tradeoffs to those made by the G4. Apple is not going to release a schleptop. They have a better idea.
  • Reply 50 of 64
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ShermX

    BTW, how can I post an image (of how a monitor-less iMac G5 would look) if I don't have access to a web server? Thanks.



    You should get offers from members who do have web space, but if not, send me a private message.
  • Reply 51 of 64
    ionyzionyz Posts: 491member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ShermX

    The computer would be monitor-less yet have very similar features, size, weight and dimension attributes of the current low-end iMAC G5 (selling for $1299) but only with the LCD screen removed, a video port added, and a computer stand and carrying-handle offered as options. The carrying-handle would allow transporting the computer like a briefcase or small suitcase.



    A handle eh? Like my Apple ][c? So a headless G5 machine at under a grand? Nah, still leaves too many things to complain about around here.



    "Look at that horrible bus speed! We demand a user-installable bus upgrade!"



  • Reply 52 of 64
    thttht Posts: 3,323member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Amorph

    Which components?



    The drives yes. Also, the power supply (which appears to be the thickest component in the iMac G5) which would be replaced by a thin form factor battery, the full size memory DIMMs, the speakers, the capacitors and resistors, the blowers, the heatsink, and probably the optical drives. Virtually everything.



    Quote:

    The difference between a desktop drive and a laptop drive is that the former is about 1" tall and the latter is about 3/4" tall.



    A 3.5 inch hard disk drive, which the iMac G5 obviously uses, is normally about 26 mm or 1.02 inches in height. A 2.5 inch mobile hard disk drive, which Apple uses in the iBooks and Powerbooks, is normally about 9.5 mm or 0.37 inches in height. There are not any SATA notebook drives I'm aware of though.



    Quote:

    Remember that the iMac uses convective cooling with assistance from fans, so there needs to be a good deal of unobstructed space if you want to move a lot of air quietly.



    Well, this is where it pays to have good heat transfer and acoustic engineers.



    Quote:

    This probably means that Apple did work assuming a 970fx-based PowerBook, then delayed or scotched them when IBM came up short. In other words, the way things are going, we'll see a G5 PowerBook later than either IBM or Apple intended.



    Heh, I would have been fine with a low voltage 130 nm 970.



    Quote:

    THT: Look at the PC laptops with desktop chips. How heavy are they? What's their battery life? Apple's answer to those is the iMac G5.



    The market exists. And I would have to disagree with you that Apple's answer is the iMac G5. I've seen too many people lugging and using around 1.5+ inch thick notebooks in airports. I've done it myself. Apple Powerbook buyers used to do it themselves with a 2 inch thick Powerbook. Apple merely chooses not to do so.
  • Reply 53 of 64
    Forget trying to make a tablet out of the new G5 iMac, it's a stupid proposition. A tablet or thin-client should be smaller, thin, light and Apple will introduce one if they feel or research shows that they can make money at one. Concerning the new G5 iMac, though, if I had enough money and a large house I would get many and mount them on the walls, along with iSights, for intranet videoconferencing as well as other purposes. I would also get a company like Troll (http://www.trolltouch.com/) to install a touch-screen on them, they're already working on it, in fact.
  • Reply 54 of 64
    Quote:

    Originally posted by the cool gut

    Well, I don't know about a powerbook, but I hope this means they'll be able to make a smaller Powermac.



    This might be a stupid question, but why do you need a smaller powermac? Mine sits under my desk...
  • Reply 55 of 64
    synpsynp Posts: 248member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by djfern

    This might be a stupid question, but why do you need a smaller powermac? Mine sits under my desk...



    It also sits under my desk. And it's big, and it's noisy, and it doesn't fit the space for a computer in many desks, so you either have to put it on the floor, or buy a different desk.



    The PM is much bigger than most PCs.
  • Reply 56 of 64
    Not only is the PM bigger than pretty much all PCs, it doesn't have a lot of expansion capacity for all that volume. Only one optical drive? Only two hard disks? Then what IS all of that space for, anyway? The trend in PCs is to Shuttle-style SFF machines, with two HDDs, one optical, and a 64-bit CPU in a machine less than a quarter the size of the Power Mac.



    I like my single 1.6... but I don't like how much space it takes... especially when a large portion of its interior is permanently unusable.
  • Reply 57 of 64
    maccrazymaccrazy Posts: 2,657member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by synp

    It also sits under my desk. And it's big, and it's noisy, and it doesn't fit the space for a computer in many desks, so you either have to put it on the floor, or buy a different desk.



    The PM is much bigger than most PCs.




    I thought it was supposed to be silent? It is big I saw one in my John Lewis the other day. The one optical thing is silly. There must be a reason though?
  • Reply 58 of 64
    ionyzionyz Posts: 491member
    I'd like to own a PMG5 if they are as quiet as I've heard. My current Power Mac is just the same volume constantly... now that I think about it I'm not sure that is a good or bad thing.



    The PMG5 is huge, for the sake of having large heat sinks for quietness. If its loud there is absolutely NO reason for it to be that size while a iMac G5 exists. "Heat zones" don't need to be that big, the iMac G5 proves that.



    While they are at it, move the AGP slot downward. They have tons of space to play with. Now that the majority of (high-end) GPU options block the first PCI slot why not design around it? Not like they have to worry about making proprietary hardware right?
  • Reply 59 of 64
    After seeing the Power Mac G5 again this weekend, and then comparing it to the new iMac G5 (much better in person), I would love to see a smaller enclosure for the Power Mac G5.
  • Reply 60 of 64
    synpsynp Posts: 248member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by MacCrazy

    I thought it was supposed to be silent? It is big I saw one in my John Lewis the other day. The one optical thing is silly. There must be a reason though?



    I forgot to mention it, but my PM is an older version, an MDD 2x867, and while not as loud as some PCs, it makes a lot more noise than I would like, especially when compared to my iBook.



    I went to one of the Mac developers at work (I work on Unix/Windows) and listened to their G5 PM. It is less noisy than mine, but still way more than a new iMac or any laptop, or even my previous PM (a B&W 300Mhz).



    So still, the PM is way too big and somewhat too noisy. I don't need all that expandability, but I don't need the iMac's integrated screen either. So which computer is right for me? Obviously none that Apple makes. I think next time around I will buy an iMac, but it's a compromise. It's not the computer I need. The computer I need has no integrated screen, small form factor and only one CPU. Too bad Apple doesn't make one.
Sign In or Register to comment.