why couldn't the imac screen detach? my thinking...

koffedrnkrkoffedrnkr
Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
think about the powerbook for a moment. less than 1'' thick in total...including slot loading optical drive, airport card, etc. now look at the time cover and check the profile of the imac2's LCD display. looks kinda chunky, doesn't it??



imagine this... the flat screen display would house a lithium polymer battery (just like the ipod...which can be made into any shape and is extremely light), an airport card and a stylus recessed on the side. the overall design lends itself to be taken off the arm. it's practically begging to fly off (where no PC has gone before?) add inkwell handwriting recognition sofware for OSX and wouldn't that be it? any commands would simply be relayed to the base, processed and sent back. if you can already surf wirelessly with airport on existing systems, why would this be too difficult or costly to implement?



[ 01-07-2002: Message edited by: koffedrnkr ]</p>
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 31
    jeremiah richjeremiah rich Posts: 853member
    Hmm... The thing is, that it would have to have the motherboard integrated into it as well.. The only thing that could be in the base would be the power supply, and the drive...
  • Reply 2 of 31
    koffedrnkrkoffedrnkr Posts: 170member
    why would the motherboard need to be where the screen is if an airport card inside the screen unit is doing the receiving? plus...for star trek fans...remember the enterprise can detach, the saucer section from the base.
  • Reply 3 of 31
    admactaniumadmactanium Posts: 812member
    [quote]Originally posted by koffedrnkr:

    <strong>why would the motherboard need to be where the screen is if an airport card inside the screen unit is doing the receiving? plus...for star trek fans...remember the enterprise can detach, the saucer section from the base.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    heh, that's probably one of the best speculations regarding all the star trek teasers. but i suspect it's too late now for that to be true.
  • Reply 4 of 31
    bandalaybandalay Posts: 116member
    There are two screen sizes available.
  • Reply 5 of 31
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    [quote]Originally posted by bandalay:

    <strong>There are two screen sizes available.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    You know?
  • Reply 5 of 31
    david rdavid r Posts: 135member
    I think it's too thin to add an airport card and a battery. Unless you have a wire attached to it, in which case, what's the point.
  • Reply 7 of 31
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    It simply requires too much power for the monitor. It's DVI and need a cord.



    If this thing does have 2 monitor sizes, then we know what happened to the 17" iMac rumors of days past. But I doubt that.
  • Reply 8 of 31
    ferroferro Posts: 453member
    the only thing it would need to do was uncode the compressed video being sent to it and send back orders/actions to the base computer... and this cycle repeats over and over...



    E PLURIBUS UNIX

    -----------------------------

  • Reply 9 of 31
    koffedrnkrkoffedrnkr Posts: 170member
    [quote]Originally posted by BuonRotto:

    <strong>It simply requires too much power for the monitor. It's DVI and need a cord.



    If this thing does have 2 monitor sizes, then we know what happened to the 17" iMac rumors of days past. But I doubt that.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    okay...but a powerbook has a 15.2'' LCD screen, can use airport to surf wirelessly and only uses a battery for power. how is this different? am i fundamentally missing something??
  • Reply 10 of 31
    tltl Posts: 33member
    Youre fundamentally missing that a lot of data is processed for every refresh of the screen, so either airport must be able to send an incredible amount of data, or it would have to be processed on the screen itself
  • Reply 10 of 31
    paulpaul Posts: 5,278member
    [quote]Originally posted by koffedrnkr:

    <strong>



    okay...but a powerbook has a 15.2'' LCD screen, can use airport to surf wirelessly and only uses a battery for power. how is this different? am i fundamentally missing something??</strong><hr></blockquote>



    yes, the video. where would the image on the screen come from? The PB has the computer right there. the screen would need to do it wirelesslee, very hard and expensive...
  • Reply 12 of 31
    koffedrnkrkoffedrnkr Posts: 170member
    so then the real technological hurdle is basically sending data fast enough to redraw the screen remotely...how much bandwidth are we talking about here? if 11mbps airport is too slow, what about, er, gigawire? we know it's a telecommunications standard..what if it's 54mbps wireless like 802.11g???
  • Reply 12 of 31
    nebrienebrie Posts: 483member
    [quote]Originally posted by BuonRotto:

    <strong>It simply requires too much power for the monitor. It's DVI and need a cord.



    If this thing does have 2 monitor sizes, then we know what happened to the 17" iMac rumors of days past. But I doubt that.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    It's a 15" lcd, a titanium powerbook battery in Lithium polymer flattened out to a huge sheet like the ipod's should do.
  • Reply 14 of 31
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    Good point. I forgot you could use a battery and require charge-ups. Duh. I was thinking it somehow pushed that much voltage across the room.
  • Reply 15 of 31
    nebrienebrie Posts: 483member
    [quote]Originally posted by psantora:

    <strong>



    yes, the video. where would the image on the screen come from? The PB has the computer right there. the screen would need to do it wirelesslee, very hard and expensive...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I can see the screen as 3 flat layers. Top layer, lcd. Middle layer, integrated motherboard, bottom layer, lithium polymer battery. Battery would be swappable. Remove the battery to get to the ram. The ports and the cd drive would be in the base of the unit and only accessible when unit is docked. Dunno where hd would go...
  • Reply 15 of 31
    ferroferro Posts: 453member
    what DATA???????????



    Allmost "All of the time", Most of my screen is "static"...



    all you need to do is send what changes...



    and you can loop anything like gifs, etc...



    If it is detachable... what are you going to play a game with a tablet pen???



    the only time you would need to send alot of DATA is for a movie or something like that... and for that you might as well hook it up anyway...



    E PLURIBUS UNIX

    -----------------------------

  • Reply 17 of 31
    dalidali Posts: 32member
    See now...



    Now I will be bummed if it is not a tablet, it makes too much sense.

    - Gigawire

    - Thick bulky new screen

    - Unused inkwell software



    TOOO much sense!

    As I said in my "Sleepless" thread, the timing for this article leak was known AND there is more to this beauty than meets the eye
  • Reply 18 of 31
    nebrienebrie Posts: 483member
    I just remembered, way back in 96 or something, I had a program on my peecee laptop where it would transmit my screen (800x600) complete with full control over the system (sans desktop background) to someone else ... over a 33.6k modem. Given the advance in technology today and with Airport/Gigawire/Firewireless/Whatever, I bet they just may be able to do it...
  • Reply 19 of 31
    sizzle chestsizzle chest Posts: 1,133member
    If Time Magazine did a front-page story featuring the amazing design that is the new iMac, don't you think they MIGHT have mentioned if the screen could be detached and function as a remote tablet? Please, people! This kind of functionality MIGHT be added later but is certainly not part of the story yet.
  • Reply 20 of 31
    dalidali Posts: 32member
    As posted else where....



    As for Apple not wanted to disclose before the Keynote....

    This goes right to the heart of the point, there is more here than meets the eye. Apple says, "Say whatever you want but no mention of this SPECIAL FEATURE" (the feature we possibly dont know about yet). We get a scoop, and Apple still keeps its OMFGod wow factor.



    Just what I believe based on the amount of marketing effort that went into sculpting the headlines on Apple.com over the last week. They thought long and hard about this one.
Sign In or Register to comment.