New 27" iMac designed to also work as a display

16791112

Comments

  • Reply 161 of 222
    bdblackbdblack Posts: 146member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by success View Post


    The 720p and 1080p files have in the past mostly been mkv files [VLC]. Finally people are ripping the Blu striaght to Mac [Perian] compatible AVI files.



    I should add that the 1080p files are especially stingy when I've connected my MB to my Aquos via mini DVI/VGA.



    I see... No way to decode MKV with a quicktime plugin? I mean, VLC is great, but its reeeeaaalllyyy slow. I have been using it on my media center and under windows 7 its too slow to decode HD. VLC was fast enough when I was running OSX on it (hackintosh :P 1.8ghz C2D) but Quicktime or Windows Media Player both work much better in terms of speed.



    OSX really just murders Windows in the graphics department...
  • Reply 162 of 222
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    First of all, don’t encourage him? Secondly, he’s comparing Blu-ray appliances to IMacs, but not all Macs, just 1/6 of all Macs. Third, iSuppli states that B-R sales in PCs are lackluster and will account for as much as 3.6% this year while speculating that by 2013 16.3% will all that will be had by B-R in PCs. That is over 4 years before the end of 2013 and over a year after the Mayan calendar ends.



    With Apple already 10% of the market in the US that is pretty awful for B-R. Finally, I’ve read that half the number of B-R sales are for PS3s, which may or may not be even using the B-R player for movies as the primary focus.



    B-R sales are way up, but they coming from pretty low numbers so it’s nothing but marketing spin at this point. When YoY the price of a player cuts in half but the increase in customers is only a fraction of that YoY then you can’t help but think there is a problem. We’ll have to see many quarters of severe upward trend to see that it’s a viable AND desirable optical drive for PCs. Even for home theater it’ll likely be bought as prices fall, but the convenience of digital downloads, streaming and cable/sat on demand services will cut into the optical media rental and purchase business that DVD was master of.



    So says the genius who's said in the past that the iPhone doesn't need a better camera, video, cut and paste, MMs, UniBody MacBooks didn't need FireWire, MacBokPros didn't need matte, etc, etc. Dude please give it up - you really spew a lot o data but very little of any consequence.



    PP.S.-He also thinks the iPhone does not need a flash for the camera.
  • Reply 163 of 222
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sennen View Post


    yes, and they are all clamouring for blue-ray drives to be included in apple's imac - in addition to the player that they have already purchased.



    ?? Don'y know - did people clamor for DVD drives when they already had them and before that CD drives when they already had them???
  • Reply 164 of 222
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BDBLACK View Post


    Ok, I don't know why this is so difficult to understand....



    There is a type of video signal, called DISPLAYPORT. This is a physical/electrical standard AND a standard by which information travels, out of a device and into a display. Then, you have DVI/HDMI which is another totally different standard by which information is sent to a display. They are like english and french. They are similar in some ways but not the same. If your display ONLY accepts DisplayPort as input then it wont understand DVI/HDMI signals.



    DisplayPort was never designed to understand DVI signals. It was designed to pass them through so that you can connect device with a displayport connector, to a DVI display. When you connect a PC with displayport to a DVI display, the computer is sending a DVI signal though the displayport connector. This is because the connector was designed to do this, but only as a passthrough. DisplayPort was designed to passthrough all kinds of signals, but that doesn't make those signals part of the standard.



    The source device, regardless of its physical connections, determines what type of signal it sends because its generating the signal. The device on the receiving end has to be able to support whatever type of signal you are sending to it. If the receiving device ONLY accepts displayport (like the 24 inch apple cinema display, and most likely the new iMac), then it does not accept HDMI, DVI, or VGA.



    This is why you cant connect a DVI source to a displayport display. A device won't accept DVI signals, just because it supports displayport. They are completely different standards, both physically and electrically. The only reason that HDMI and DVI are cross compatible is because they use the same basic standard to send information, and they are electrically compatible.



    Now, of course you could build a display that accepts DVI and DisplayPort, but it would require hardware to decode each different standard, just like displays with DVI and VGA plugs on them. TV's require even more hardware to convert all the different signal standards its expected to understand.



    Apple displays, as far as I know have never had hardware like this in them.



    Does the transfer work with the sound signal, forget the video signal. Will the iMac's speakers work with this confabulated connection?
  • Reply 165 of 222
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Heads up! He's about to appear live on the Today Show with his touchscreens and 7. I hope I can keep my breakfast down.
  • Reply 166 of 222
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,698member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    The primary advantage of what I'm talking about is the ability to disconnect the computer from the monitor/keyboard and take it with you.



    Its true it costs more but with the MBP + ACD you get to have it both ways.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    Given the costs you're better off with the uber iMac and a MBP than the 30" ACD. $1800 for the ACD vs $2200 for the iMac? For $400 that's a no brainer.



    The only thing that argues against a slate tablet killing notebooks is the lack of a keyboard when mobile. Hard to work on a document at the local Starbucks with just your finger for input on the display surface.



    Does anyone really do serious work at *$? I mean, really? At *$?



    OK, maybe 1 or 2 people out of a thousand is actually doing serious work at *$, but most of them either have their MacBook out so people will look at them and think, "Cool, MacBook," to do a little mindless web surfing while they ingest sugary stimulants, because they are hauling the [email protected]# ^#$# thing around all day so they feel obligated to pull it out and type on it, and a few in the corners looking at porn.



    I think over the next few years, once the current wave of laptop buyers has lived with their laptops for 3-4 years and has also had some time to live with smartphones, esp. iPhones, and maybe tablets, the trend of switching to laptops from desktops may very well reverse. Most of these people just aren't using these laptops for anything while mobile that they couldn't very easily do on an iPhone just as well, and the iPhone is entirely trivial to carry around, so the laptop will spend more time sitting home alone.



    Yes, there will always be people who will need laptops -- because they need to work when traveling, or because it's easier to take work home with them, students, ... -- but a lot of people may decide they'd be happier with a desktop with a larger screen and an iPhone (or tablet) than with a laptop.



    I think it's very possible that smartphones (and maybe tablets) will shake up the personal computer market over the next several years, and we may well see a resurgence of desktop sales, and a corresponding decline in laptops.



    (But I don't see the need to display your tablet screen on an iMac screen as some have posited. Just syncing it or accessing it like a USB drive so you can use your Mac apps on its data would be much more efficient.)
  • Reply 167 of 222
    bdblackbdblack Posts: 146member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    Does the transfer work with the sound signal, forget the video signal. Will the iMac's speakers work with this confabulated connection?



    I'd guess, if OSX can run in the backround you would have to input sound though the input jack or USB. Does the ACD carry sound over displayport? If it does I'd guess apple would want the iMac working the same way.



    In any case, as long as OSX can run in the background you can have sound through the speakers even if it doesn't work with displayport. Any RCA to Jack adapter would do it.



    If OSX can't run when using it as a display, then I don't know.
  • Reply 168 of 222
    I'm happy to see them switching to IPS displays, with the prices they charge there is almost no excuse for it not to be a standard. This will seriously make me consider an iMac for graphic design work. Now if they could just make the Mac Pro more reasonable in price, we'd have a full line up and macs at a decent price.
  • Reply 169 of 222
    bdblackbdblack Posts: 146member
    I just read a CNET review of the new iMac. It DOES NOT accept HDMI/DVI or VGA signals. Only DisplayPort. Apparently some vendors are planning on releasing adapters for this soon.
  • Reply 170 of 222
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    That 30" price is the old price from years ago, Apple has never changed it. Today that monitor would be $1499 tops.



    and the new iMac is already available for $1549 on this site.



    And part of the difference in price between the 27" iMac and the 30 inch cinema display is the difference between having a product that will sell in the millions vs a product that will sell in the 10 thousands.
  • Reply 171 of 222
    emveeemvee Posts: 27member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BDBLACK View Post


    I just read a CNET review of the new iMac. It DOES NOT accept HDMI/DVI or VGA signals. Only DisplayPort. Apparently some vendors are planning on releasing adapters for this soon.



    Interesting, let's see what Belkin can come up with!
  • Reply 172 of 222
    brucepbrucep Posts: 2,823member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BDBLACK View Post


    I just read a CNET review of the new iMac. It DOES NOT accept HDMI/DVI or VGA signals. Only DisplayPort. Apparently some vendors are planning on releasing adapters for this soon.



    adapters are already on sale for months



    any mac can slave the new imac

    or even double the workspce witha large screen config
  • Reply 173 of 222
    bucetabuceta Posts: 141member
    Countdown for Lenovo and Dell to copy this format.
  • Reply 174 of 222
    sequitursequitur Posts: 1,910member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    I'm thinking that the display port in bypasses the computer and treats the screen like a dumb monitor. That way, it can still be HDCP compliant without OS level "trusted computing" and copy protection hassles.



    From - A look inside Apple's new 27-inch iMac (teardown photos):



    "The new hardware is also designed to work as an external display. However, the Mini DisplayPort connector signal goes through the hardware's logic board, so the iMac must be powered on to play video from an external source."



    Would I be correct in assuming that if the computer died, there would be no way to use the iMac as a monitor?
  • Reply 175 of 222
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BDBLACK View Post


    I see... No way to decode MKV with a quicktime plugin? I mean, VLC is great, but its reeeeaaalllyyy slow. I have been using it on my media center and under windows 7 its too slow to decode HD. VLC was fast enough when I was running OSX on it (hackintosh :P 1.8ghz C2D) but Quicktime or Windows Media Player both work much better in terms of speed.



    OSX really just murders Windows in the graphics department...



    VLC doesn't access any of the hardware acceleration for decoding, iirc. It does it all in software. As for MKV files, they are simply a container (like .mov). They can contain any combination of video and audio codecs. The problem is that most programs don't know how to read the files to access the codecs.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BDBLACK View Post


    jeezzz dude... get some anti-glare film... or a life.



    I think a few places sell anti-glare film for iMacs now.

    http://www.photodon.com/c/LCD-Protective-Films.html



    I mean, everybody is freaking out about this when we have been staring into glass CRT's for the past 50 f**king years with no problem.







    I could not have said it better myself.
  • Reply 176 of 222
    benroethigbenroethig Posts: 2,782member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BDBLACK View Post


    I just read a CNET review of the new iMac. It DOES NOT accept HDMI/DVI or VGA signals. Only DisplayPort. Apparently some vendors are planning on releasing adapters for this soon.



    So, for all intents and purposes, all this does is allow you to use the iMac as a display for you Macbook assuming a double sided cable ever shows.
  • Reply 177 of 222
    bdblackbdblack Posts: 146member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sequitur View Post


    From - A look inside Apple's new 27-inch iMac (teardown photos):



    "The new hardware is also designed to work as an external display. However, the Mini DisplayPort connector signal goes through the hardware's logic board, so the iMac must be powered on to play video from an external source."



    Would I be correct in assuming that if the computer died, there would be no way to use the iMac as a monitor?



    Depends on why it dies and how that relates to the video path. Maybe it works without the video card? Maybe not. Who knows until someone is brave enough to ripp off those warranty stickers.
  • Reply 178 of 222
    bdblackbdblack Posts: 146member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post


    So, for all intents and purposes, all this does is allow you to use the iMac as a display for you Macbook assuming a double sided cable ever shows.



    Belkin



    http://catalog.belkin.com/IWCatProdu...duct_Id=405348



    Wayyyy overpriced, but there will be more soon.



    As for connecting other devices to the 27 inch iMac, like a PS3 or other DVI source, its possible with conversion. This is proven to work well with the 24 inch ACD, however its expensive at this point. I expect there will be a rush to get cheaper, better versions of these to market soon.



    Basically, these boxes do what the hardware inside your HDTV does, just externally without screwing with HDCP. Some TV's are not so careful and you can extract the unencrypted HDMI signal. I'm guessing apple doesn't want to include this hardware because of the cost and complexity of it.



    http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=801855
  • Reply 179 of 222
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BDBLACK View Post


    jeezzz dude... get some anti-glare film... or a life.



    I think a few places sell anti-glare film for iMacs now.

    http://www.photodon.com/c/LCD-Protective-Films.html



    I mean, everybody is freaking out about this when we have been staring into glass CRT's for the past 50 f**king years with no problem.



    Films cannot be applied without embedding dust particles and bubbles. Think cheap, peeling, bubbly tint job on your car windows except you HAVE to stare at it all the time because that's the point of a computer display.



    Re: glass CRT's

    ... and people stopped using them in part for this. Now flat panels are being reverted to mimic the deficiency for no coherent reason at all ... other than it reminds micro-brained, minimal users of their iPhone.



    An iMac is not an iPhone. Forcing uniform design across disparate products for no other reason than some detached concept of making a product styling "statement" is a sign of degenerate design.
  • Reply 180 of 222
    just had a look on the belkin website and found this:



    Belkin HDMI to Mini Display Port Adaptor

    http://catalog.belkin.com/IWCatProdu...duct_Id=508267



    I think its new, couldn't seem to find it anywhere else except Belkin's website.



    Quote:

    Belkin?s new HDMI to Mini DisplayPort Adapter allows you to view HD content from your Blu-ray player, PS3, or cable box on your Apple LED-backlit widescreen monitor.



    The adapter takes High Definition Multimedia Interface (HDMI) content and converts it to the Mini DisplayPort format needed for the new MacBook Pro, MacBook Air, and new Mac desktops.



    Because it enables high definition AV performance on your Apple LED-backlit Display, the Belkin HDMI to Mini DisplayPort Adapter provides you the option to use it like a digital TV.



    This part of the product description doesn't specify the new iMac specifically, however under the features tab it mentions:

    Quote:

    Belkin?s Mini DisplayPort to Mini DisplayPort cable can also be used independent of the Adapter to extend the video from your MacBook to your iMac LED-backlit display for an expanded desktop.



    Which is at least recognizing that the 27" imac exists. It would be good to see what price this ends up on the shelves at (I'd say over $100 if its an active converter), and hopefully someone can pick one up and try it out.



    Dying to see some youtube videos of people getting their xbox/ps3s going on their imac display! Its the deciding factor on me purchasing one! get to it people!
Sign In or Register to comment.