Wow, do I LOVE that new wireless keyboard. For anybody who has read my past rants on other threads know that this new keyboard is close to what I wanted. I still don't like two tone and the lack of backlit keys but I still am pretty happy. I still thought ground effect lighting would rock too. Oh well, maybe next time.
Jonathan Ive has clearly missed the mark with the latest iMacs. "Hides the iSight" is rotten excuse to justify that ugly black bezel around the screen -- and to think Apple is renown for its "beauty" in industrial design! What happened here?
Did they say it was for that?
I think it might be for wireless communications too. If it were aluminum, the signal might not be able to penetrate the front face so well, and I don't think you'd want to have the circuits and material in the LCD screen absorbing some of the signal, it probably penetrates glass better.
I was thinking it would have been nice to have most of the face be black, and have an aluminum perimeter. That would break the only golden ratio (~1.6:1) I can tell is on the iMac though, that being the screen.
Without having any idea about the structure of the company itself or the recent dedication of its resources to various divisions, I'll point out the obvious by suggesting that the Apple brain trust of late has been directed toward the wizardry of the iPhone and the related logistics of a highly efficient and successful downloadable music/video/media enterprise.
In this light, Jonathan Ive's latest offering feels like something of an event made for the sideline. In fact, the new iMac may be a minor misstep — or simply an interesting sidestep during a very busy time. The proof will come from users who have worked and played with the machine over a decent span. And for those who initially discount it, this "modified" look may grow on them. Some are even calling it "fetching." In terms of its specs, it seems like a creditable upgrade.
Whether we're talking about the new iMac or the latest iWork and iLife updates, Apple finds itself in a difficult position — ironically by dint of the company's past successes. Sometimes it's hard to make very fine products even better. But as long the company's culture is such that ease of use, elegance, and mind-blowing innovation remain working goals — day in and day out — great products will continue to emerge.
Unlike Microsoft, Apple is sufficiently dissatisfied with mediocrity that its designers, engineers, and management are willing to own up to errors and make key improvements (remember the round mouse ... or the fan noise on the G4 towers ... or the slow pace of PPC development?). The list goes on. If a product is shitty (or the pace of development lagging), Apple tends to act decisively.
Finally, without actually having used the new offerings, we can't exactly be sure of their worth, but today's announcements feel much more evolutionary than revolutionary — products updated by a company that has been stretched to the point of fatigue by its own excellence. Rest and distance may be needed to reignite the tinder sticks and rediscover the Muse, but she has already brought great things to the table and I'm sure will continue to do so.
I'm sure it looks OK in person, though the dark logo will always be too distracting.
I write a lot, so I use split ergonomic keyboards. The keyboard issue is moot to me. On the other hand, an ergonomic split keyboard with this exact style (aluminum, flat keys), could be interesting. It could be elegant and ergonomic, particularly if functionally similar to Goldtouch split keyboards, which are adjustable and have no physical keypad.
Overall, I'll pass on this iMac iteration. I'd rather, on aesthetic grounds, have a Mini and a brutally thin 24" screen. The Mini would have to have decent graphics though. Still waiting for that.
I was wondering what happened to the usb ports on the sides f the keyboards? I use those everyday. That's how I update my iPhone, and load my pictures into iPhoto.
They aren't there on the Bluetooth model. That would not be practical because of power consumption. It looks like there is one USB port on each end of the wired keyboard.
Anyway, I think it's an interesting choice to make the wired model a full keyboard and wireless sans keypad and sans a few other keys. At my desktops, I almost must have a number pad, but I might some day decide to get the wireless model for my HTPC, it's so much less intrusive than my Logitech Bluetooth keyboard.
Maybe the open apple on the command key was dropped because Macs do windows now, and the command key might also evoke commands when using the keyboard with windows?
Maybe the open apple on the command key was dropped because Macs do windows now, and the command key might also evoke commands when using the keyboard with windows?
Command seems more generic and thus clear.
shrug
You guys really are nerds. All that Apple LOGO did was confuse people, the key had three different names. Anyway it's just a bloody LOGO. OS X rocks, end discussion.
Saw the new iMac in person today at the Apple Store. Fugly. The keyboard sucks for touch typists - no feedback. Glare is bad off that glossy screen.
Think I'll pass on this "update", which appears to have been delayed for months by the iPhone. If the hardware were more impressive I might be able to overlook the fact that the new iMac looks like an attempt by HP to copy the beautiful white iMac with their craptastic brushed metal and glossy black plastic look. Unfortunately, the specs on the "new" iMac are straight outta last year's laptops - there's absolutely nothing impressive about an 800MHz bus or 600MHz RAM. Desktop PCs with those specs are shipping for $400. A gig of RAM is a joke on a Mac.
These things are making the Mac Mini look a lot more desirable. If only it came with FireWire 800 or an internal 3.5" hard drive . . .
Namely, that the "basic look" of the machine stands largely unchanged from the previous generation. I couldn't care less how much aluminum costs or weighs or looks. The basic "form factor" is the same. And I believe many of us expected a NEW FORM FACTOR. That was my point.
So, given that an AIO is basically a slim rectanguklar box, what major design breakthrough did you expect? Can you give us some idea?
Because I just see an evolution of the design. It won't please everyone, that's for sure. Many people gere hated the original design as well, now some of those same people are saying that the last one was better!
I can see the reasons for what was done, and I agree with it.
But, let's face it, even if Apple discovered the Platonic design for an AIO, and produced it, there would be the same bunch of people here who would hate it.
Quote:
Give me a break. LED backlights exist in other Apple machines (or have you not read the news over the past few months). LED backlights likely exist for even big 24" LCDs too. And in light of my above explanation that the highest end 24" model was actually intended to be a PROSUMER machine, such customers should have a BTO option of spending mega-bucks on an LED, non-glossy screen. I think people would pay extra for it, especially if they are like me, in the design industry and love the compact size of the iMac (and the lower cost) but need good color accuracy. This is especially true if Apple, renown for its cutting edge graphics hardware, could implement a wider gamut color palette with an LED backlit display. That would really boost sales.
"Don't you think Apple would have done that if it were economically possible?" Not necessarily. I suspect this may be one of the last (or perhaps the last of two) revisions of this form factor of iMac. Perhaps they will release the TRUE renewed design sometime next year. And in that new design they may make up for the "BAD."
Don't forget Job's statement about that. When the price for LED backlights come down in price enough for larger monitors, Apple will use them. That's why the 17" MBP didn't get the treatment either.
Your only solution, if it means that much to you, is to wait until it comes out. Perhaps by MacWorld.
I'm not mocking you here, because I'm looking to replace my Hp 65" with a newer display, or perhaps a front projector, and I won't buy it until one that I want comes with an LED lamp. But, that might not be until later this year, or next year.
1. There isn't just air behind that chin, you know.
2. What form factor did you want? The gumdrop, the lampshade, and the current design pretty much cover all the possibilities for an AIO.
3. Did you "swap out the video card" in your previous iMac? If so, what did you swap in? Did you have to disassemble the iMac to do it?
Could you tell a difference?
4. You want the chin removed, AND a second internal hard drive installed? What makes you think that is possible?
5. Many graphics pros disagree with you about the glossy display. Ask Melgross.
They think that Apple does this deliberately, just to outrage them. There couldn't possibly be an engineering reason for it.
Of course, if Apple were to make the computer a couple of inches thicker, they could possibly do away with much of it.
But then, the same people would complain about how thick it is.
And, yes, if the proper lighting is in effect, glossy displays are better. There is no question about that really.
The problem is that as equipment, and software, became cheaper over the years, more "semi-pros" came into the business, and started doing work at home, without a proper desk, chair, lighting, or wall color (the wife, or husband would scream if the wall behind the monitor was painted black).
Standards went down. Glossy screens were replaced by treated ones.
While in an office, or home, environment, glossy screens aren't always good, for high end color work, they are better. Some of Barco's most expensive units were glossy, right until the end. Now they don't make proper color correction models.
So, given that an AIO is basically a slim rectanguklar box, what major design breakthrough did you expect? Can you give us some idea?
Because I just see an evolution of the design. It won't please everyone, that's for sure. Many people gere hated the original design as well, now some of those same people are saying that the last one was better!
I can see the reasons for what was done, and I agree with it.
First of all, calm down. Those first few lines in your post were formed to be verbal hammers, not friendly questions seeking an answer. But in looking past the emotion behind those questions, I will say this: I expected a more radical departure in design. Something along the difference between the original CRT iMac and the suspeded LCD iMac, or the difference between the suspended LCD iMac and the current form factor.
As to the "it won't please everyone" comment, I can only say that has been used as a cop out for bad design for many, many years. It is not a good excuse, nor does it address all the "BAD" points I mentioned in my original post. True, what seems bad to me may not be bad to another, but I am speaking about my feelings, here, not yours or anyone else's. Indeed, how can one speak except from his or her own feelings? And whether I am right or wrong will be proven in time. We will see how many iMacs Apple sells versus its previous design. I'm hoping fewer, as such would prompt Ive to return to the design table for me!
I can see reasons for the current design too, but unlike you, I do NOT agree with it. That doesn't make us enemies though. It simply shows how diverse a community of Mac lovers we are. And I am by no means a pessimist by pointing out the BAD points. I simply mention what my eyes see. And I wish my eyes could see something a bit better. I don't expect the world. If I did, I would have spoke about the absence of a FLASH hard drive or the absence of a QUAD CPU BTO option. I didn't mention those things because I am a realist. I only mentioned what I felt could have been mass produced by Apple at a reasonable price at this point in time.
UPDATE:
As to melgross's opinion on glossy LCD displays, I suppose that I would just need to buy one myself and sit down with it for a while to see for myself if indeed it is a suitable replacement for a non-glossy LCD. But it's difficult to control lighting in my office. I have overhead flourescents like most offices, and it casts a glare on my G4 Cube, my Cube speakers, my telephone and the frame around my ADC LCD display. I can imagine how much glare I would have to put up with if I had a glossy LCD iMac! I wish moving my desk was an option, but it is not. Hence, all my words about "glossy" and "pro" in my posts above.
First of all, calm down. Those first few lines in your post were formed to be verbal hammers, not friendly questions seeking an answer. But in looking past the emotion behind those questions, I will say this...
Only if you chose to read it as such. I thought they were concise questions that called for a clear, concise answer. I don't see any vitriol whatsoever.
I must apologize, Tinkerer. I now see that it was melgross who authored that. I'm getting everyone mixed up.
Well the words are still the same, and my response to them is the same. (I tend to read a bit behind the lines, which is why I spotted the emotion; hence, my "hammers" response.)
It's not like it matters now anyway. I answered those questions on my post above!
I must apologize, Tinkerer. I now see that it was melgross who authored that. I'm getting everyone mixed up.
Well the words are still the same, and my response to them is the same. (I tend to read a bit behind the lines, which is why I spotted the emotion; hence, my "hammers" response.)
It's not like it matters now anyway. I answered those questions on my post above!
Thanks.
What number post was that? I don't know which questions you're talking about.
And yes, sometimes my statements, or questions, are pointed.
Never mind, melgross. Tinkerer, with currently 6 posts, was merely "tinkering around" with one of your old posts in this thread. The way he was defending one small point in that post led me to believe he authored it. But he later informed me that he was merely defending YOUR point!
LOL!
Gotta love it! Well, at least you can rest easy now knowing you have a staunch advocate in this thread!
Never mind, melgross. Tinkerer, with currently 6 posts, was merely "tinkering around" with one of your old posts in this thread. The way he was defending one small point in that post led me to believe he authored it. But he later informed me that he was merely defending YOUR point!
LOL!
Gotta love it! Well, at least you can rest easy now knowing you have a staunch advocate in this thread!
Exciting, isn't it? And I don't even know what was said about what!
Comments
THE BAD
Jonathan Ive has clearly missed the mark with the latest iMacs.
1. There isn't just air behind that chin, you know.
2. What form factor did you want? The gumdrop, the lampshade, and the current design pretty much cover all the possibilities for an AIO.
3. Did you "swap out the video card" in your previous iMac? If so, what did you swap in? Did you have to disassemble the iMac to do it?
Could you tell a difference?
4. You want the chin removed, AND a second internal hard drive installed? What makes you think that is possible?
5. Many graphics pros disagree with you about the glossy display. Ask Melgross.
THE BAD
Jonathan Ive has clearly missed the mark with the latest iMacs. "Hides the iSight" is rotten excuse to justify that ugly black bezel around the screen -- and to think Apple is renown for its "beauty" in industrial design! What happened here?
Did they say it was for that?
I think it might be for wireless communications too. If it were aluminum, the signal might not be able to penetrate the front face so well, and I don't think you'd want to have the circuits and material in the LCD screen absorbing some of the signal, it probably penetrates glass better.
I was thinking it would have been nice to have most of the face be black, and have an aluminum perimeter. That would break the only golden ratio (~1.6:1) I can tell is on the iMac though, that being the screen.
In this light, Jonathan Ive's latest offering feels like something of an event made for the sideline. In fact, the new iMac may be a minor misstep — or simply an interesting sidestep during a very busy time. The proof will come from users who have worked and played with the machine over a decent span. And for those who initially discount it, this "modified" look may grow on them. Some are even calling it "fetching." In terms of its specs, it seems like a creditable upgrade.
Whether we're talking about the new iMac or the latest iWork and iLife updates, Apple finds itself in a difficult position — ironically by dint of the company's past successes. Sometimes it's hard to make very fine products even better. But as long the company's culture is such that ease of use, elegance, and mind-blowing innovation remain working goals — day in and day out — great products will continue to emerge.
Unlike Microsoft, Apple is sufficiently dissatisfied with mediocrity that its designers, engineers, and management are willing to own up to errors and make key improvements (remember the round mouse ... or the fan noise on the G4 towers ... or the slow pace of PPC development?). The list goes on. If a product is shitty (or the pace of development lagging), Apple tends to act decisively.
Finally, without actually having used the new offerings, we can't exactly be sure of their worth, but today's announcements feel much more evolutionary than revolutionary — products updated by a company that has been stretched to the point of fatigue by its own excellence. Rest and distance may be needed to reignite the tinder sticks and rediscover the Muse, but she has already brought great things to the table and I'm sure will continue to do so.
Or maybe the "Jay Leno Panda Mac"
I'm sure it looks OK in person, though the dark logo will always be too distracting.
I write a lot, so I use split ergonomic keyboards. The keyboard issue is moot to me. On the other hand, an ergonomic split keyboard with this exact style (aluminum, flat keys), could be interesting. It could be elegant and ergonomic, particularly if functionally similar to Goldtouch split keyboards, which are adjustable and have no physical keypad.
Overall, I'll pass on this iMac iteration. I'd rather, on aesthetic grounds, have a Mini and a brutally thin 24" screen. The Mini would have to have decent graphics though. Still waiting for that.
I was wondering what happened to the usb ports on the sides f the keyboards? I use those everyday. That's how I update my iPhone, and load my pictures into iPhoto.
They aren't there on the Bluetooth model. That would not be practical because of power consumption. It looks like there is one USB port on each end of the wired keyboard.
Anyway, I think it's an interesting choice to make the wired model a full keyboard and wireless sans keypad and sans a few other keys. At my desktops, I almost must have a number pad, but I might some day decide to get the wireless model for my HTPC, it's so much less intrusive than my Logitech Bluetooth keyboard.
Command seems more generic and thus clear.
shrug
Maybe the open apple on the command key was dropped because Macs do windows now, and the command key might also evoke commands when using the keyboard with windows?
Command seems more generic and thus clear.
shrug
You guys really are nerds. All that Apple LOGO did was confuse people, the key had three different names. Anyway it's just a bloody LOGO. OS X rocks, end discussion.
Think I'll pass on this "update", which appears to have been delayed for months by the iPhone. If the hardware were more impressive I might be able to overlook the fact that the new iMac looks like an attempt by HP to copy the beautiful white iMac with their craptastic brushed metal and glossy black plastic look. Unfortunately, the specs on the "new" iMac are straight outta last year's laptops - there's absolutely nothing impressive about an 800MHz bus or 600MHz RAM. Desktop PCs with those specs are shipping for $400. A gig of RAM is a joke on a Mac.
These things are making the Mac Mini look a lot more desirable. If only it came with FireWire 800 or an internal 3.5" hard drive . . .
Namely, that the "basic look" of the machine stands largely unchanged from the previous generation. I couldn't care less how much aluminum costs or weighs or looks. The basic "form factor" is the same. And I believe many of us expected a NEW FORM FACTOR. That was my point.
So, given that an AIO is basically a slim rectanguklar box, what major design breakthrough did you expect? Can you give us some idea?
Because I just see an evolution of the design. It won't please everyone, that's for sure. Many people gere hated the original design as well, now some of those same people are saying that the last one was better!
I can see the reasons for what was done, and I agree with it.
But, let's face it, even if Apple discovered the Platonic design for an AIO, and produced it, there would be the same bunch of people here who would hate it.
Give me a break. LED backlights exist in other Apple machines (or have you not read the news over the past few months). LED backlights likely exist for even big 24" LCDs too. And in light of my above explanation that the highest end 24" model was actually intended to be a PROSUMER machine, such customers should have a BTO option of spending mega-bucks on an LED, non-glossy screen. I think people would pay extra for it, especially if they are like me, in the design industry and love the compact size of the iMac (and the lower cost) but need good color accuracy. This is especially true if Apple, renown for its cutting edge graphics hardware, could implement a wider gamut color palette with an LED backlit display. That would really boost sales.
"Don't you think Apple would have done that if it were economically possible?" Not necessarily. I suspect this may be one of the last (or perhaps the last of two) revisions of this form factor of iMac. Perhaps they will release the TRUE renewed design sometime next year. And in that new design they may make up for the "BAD."
Don't forget Job's statement about that. When the price for LED backlights come down in price enough for larger monitors, Apple will use them. That's why the 17" MBP didn't get the treatment either.
Your only solution, if it means that much to you, is to wait until it comes out. Perhaps by MacWorld.
I'm not mocking you here, because I'm looking to replace my Hp 65" with a newer display, or perhaps a front projector, and I won't buy it until one that I want comes with an LED lamp. But, that might not be until later this year, or next year.
1. There isn't just air behind that chin, you know.
2. What form factor did you want? The gumdrop, the lampshade, and the current design pretty much cover all the possibilities for an AIO.
3. Did you "swap out the video card" in your previous iMac? If so, what did you swap in? Did you have to disassemble the iMac to do it?
Could you tell a difference?
4. You want the chin removed, AND a second internal hard drive installed? What makes you think that is possible?
5. Many graphics pros disagree with you about the glossy display. Ask Melgross.
They think that Apple does this deliberately, just to outrage them. There couldn't possibly be an engineering reason for it.
Of course, if Apple were to make the computer a couple of inches thicker, they could possibly do away with much of it.
But then, the same people would complain about how thick it is.
And, yes, if the proper lighting is in effect, glossy displays are better. There is no question about that really.
The problem is that as equipment, and software, became cheaper over the years, more "semi-pros" came into the business, and started doing work at home, without a proper desk, chair, lighting, or wall color (the wife, or husband would scream if the wall behind the monitor was painted black).
Standards went down. Glossy screens were replaced by treated ones.
While in an office, or home, environment, glossy screens aren't always good, for high end color work, they are better. Some of Barco's most expensive units were glossy, right until the end. Now they don't make proper color correction models.
So, given that an AIO is basically a slim rectanguklar box, what major design breakthrough did you expect? Can you give us some idea?
Because I just see an evolution of the design. It won't please everyone, that's for sure. Many people gere hated the original design as well, now some of those same people are saying that the last one was better!
I can see the reasons for what was done, and I agree with it.
First of all, calm down. Those first few lines in your post were formed to be verbal hammers, not friendly questions seeking an answer. But in looking past the emotion behind those questions, I will say this: I expected a more radical departure in design. Something along the difference between the original CRT iMac and the suspeded LCD iMac, or the difference between the suspended LCD iMac and the current form factor.
As to the "it won't please everyone" comment, I can only say that has been used as a cop out for bad design for many, many years. It is not a good excuse, nor does it address all the "BAD" points I mentioned in my original post. True, what seems bad to me may not be bad to another, but I am speaking about my feelings, here, not yours or anyone else's. Indeed, how can one speak except from his or her own feelings? And whether I am right or wrong will be proven in time. We will see how many iMacs Apple sells versus its previous design. I'm hoping fewer, as such would prompt Ive to return to the design table for me!
I can see reasons for the current design too, but unlike you, I do NOT agree with it. That doesn't make us enemies though. It simply shows how diverse a community of Mac lovers we are. And I am by no means a pessimist by pointing out the BAD points. I simply mention what my eyes see. And I wish my eyes could see something a bit better. I don't expect the world. If I did, I would have spoke about the absence of a FLASH hard drive or the absence of a QUAD CPU BTO option. I didn't mention those things because I am a realist. I only mentioned what I felt could have been mass produced by Apple at a reasonable price at this point in time.
UPDATE:
As to melgross's opinion on glossy LCD displays, I suppose that I would just need to buy one myself and sit down with it for a while to see for myself if indeed it is a suitable replacement for a non-glossy LCD. But it's difficult to control lighting in my office. I have overhead flourescents like most offices, and it casts a glare on my G4 Cube, my Cube speakers, my telephone and the frame around my ADC LCD display. I can imagine how much glare I would have to put up with if I had a glossy LCD iMac! I wish moving my desk was an option, but it is not. Hence, all my words about "glossy" and "pro" in my posts above.
First of all, calm down. Those first few lines in your post were formed to be verbal hammers, not friendly questions seeking an answer. But in looking past the emotion behind those questions, I will say this...
Only if you chose to read it as such. I thought they were concise questions that called for a clear, concise answer. I don't see any vitriol whatsoever.
I thought they were concise questions that called for a clear, concise answer. I don't see any vitriol whatsoever.
Well, seeing that was only your 2nd post on this site, I suppose I was perhaps reading too much into it.
Well, seeing that was only your 2nd post on this site, I suppose I was perhaps reading too much into it.
That wasn't my post, and I'm more seasoned here than current post count should lead you to believe :-P
Well the words are still the same, and my response to them is the same. (I tend to read a bit behind the lines, which is why I spotted the emotion; hence, my "hammers" response.)
It's not like it matters now anyway. I answered those questions on my post above!
Thanks.
I must apologize, Tinkerer. I now see that it was melgross who authored that. I'm getting everyone mixed up.
Well the words are still the same, and my response to them is the same. (I tend to read a bit behind the lines, which is why I spotted the emotion; hence, my "hammers" response.)
It's not like it matters now anyway. I answered those questions on my post above!
Thanks.
What number post was that? I don't know which questions you're talking about.
And yes, sometimes my statements, or questions, are pointed.
LOL!
Gotta love it! Well, at least you can rest easy now knowing you have a staunch advocate in this thread!
Never mind, melgross. Tinkerer, with currently 6 posts, was merely "tinkering around" with one of your old posts in this thread. The way he was defending one small point in that post led me to believe he authored it. But he later informed me that he was merely defending YOUR point!
LOL!
Gotta love it! Well, at least you can rest easy now knowing you have a staunch advocate in this thread!
Exciting, isn't it? And I don't even know what was said about what!