What some people are missing, what they are assuming, is that the iMac was designed with only a 15" LCD in mind.
I think that's bull. More likely, Apple designed the new iMac base and "arm" to support a variety of different LCD sizes, up to at least 17". The base is quite hefty and there is no reason to think that it could not counterbalance anything heavier than a 15" LCD. If that were true, then it would be a design oversight of monumental proportions.
I predict that at MWNY, Apple will drop the price on the iMac line, and slip in a 17" LCD model at the high end, at $1800 or so, sans superdrive. Much like the 14.1" iBook is being marketed to test the demand for a laptop in that price/configuration range, I can see Apple doing the same with the new iMac.
The number one complaint about the previous iMac was its display size, and Apple clearly was cognizant of this while designing the new iMac.
The real test is the weight of the base compared to the weight of the LCD.
Someone should do a test, when they get their new iMac.
Put the monitor in it lowest position, with the maximum outward tilt. That would be the most precarious position vis a vis leverage. Then attach a force meter (basically a spring attached to a scale; any reasonable high schjool physics department would have them) to the monitor, and pull downward. Adding the force meter to the weight of the monitor will give you the maximum weight that can be suspended from the base. If that weight is less than the weight of a 17" LCD similar to the design of the current one (which doesn't exist, so would have to be extrapolated), then the design will NOT support the 17" LCD. If not, then it will.
I'd be surprised if it would support a 17" LCD (within a tolerance to allow for movement and shifting by the user). If the arm design was driven to provide maximum mobility, then Apple may have created a machine where a 17" LCD is impractical, even if theoretically possible.
The theory that a 17" LCD won't balance on an iMac and therefore won't be offered also fits into their plan of driving non-consumers to Powermacs, just like the last iMac vs. Powermac, but saying so would be to ascribe certain negative, purposefully limiting charateristics to the iMac design that Apple built, but that couldn't POSSIBLY be true, could it? Apple would cosciously make a limited and limiting product just because it looked cool?
the reason the old imac didn't increase screen size because the size of the CRT was an integrated into the form factor of the imac. with the new imac, there's not much you'd need to change to increase the size of the screen
Comments
I think that's bull. More likely, Apple designed the new iMac base and "arm" to support a variety of different LCD sizes, up to at least 17". The base is quite hefty and there is no reason to think that it could not counterbalance anything heavier than a 15" LCD. If that were true, then it would be a design oversight of monumental proportions.
I predict that at MWNY, Apple will drop the price on the iMac line, and slip in a 17" LCD model at the high end, at $1800 or so, sans superdrive. Much like the 14.1" iBook is being marketed to test the demand for a laptop in that price/configuration range, I can see Apple doing the same with the new iMac.
The number one complaint about the previous iMac was its display size, and Apple clearly was cognizant of this while designing the new iMac.
Someone should do a test, when they get their new iMac.
Put the monitor in it lowest position, with the maximum outward tilt. That would be the most precarious position vis a vis leverage. Then attach a force meter (basically a spring attached to a scale; any reasonable high schjool physics department would have them) to the monitor, and pull downward. Adding the force meter to the weight of the monitor will give you the maximum weight that can be suspended from the base. If that weight is less than the weight of a 17" LCD similar to the design of the current one (which doesn't exist, so would have to be extrapolated), then the design will NOT support the 17" LCD. If not, then it will.
I'd be surprised if it would support a 17" LCD (within a tolerance to allow for movement and shifting by the user). If the arm design was driven to provide maximum mobility, then Apple may have created a machine where a 17" LCD is impractical, even if theoretically possible.
The theory that a 17" LCD won't balance on an iMac and therefore won't be offered also fits into their plan of driving non-consumers to Powermacs, just like the last iMac vs. Powermac, but saying so would be to ascribe certain negative, purposefully limiting charateristics to the iMac design that Apple built, but that couldn't POSSIBLY be true, could it?
SdC