If c|net news reports there is a 17" iMac in the wings, you can bet your bippy there will be a 17" iMac.
Not only are they a "real" news site, they have an excellent record on soon-to-be-released Apple products. They were correct on the original iPod (and noone could believe that Apple's new product would be "just" an MP3 player). They hit the nail on the head with the 14" iBook, etc. etc.
So, if Apple does come out with a 1GHz 17" iMac with better video card than what it has now, I will order one so fast it'll make Steve's head spin. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Reading c|net's article, I can't help but wondering how will they up the specs (beyond the LCD) of the iMac if there is no PowerMac update? Personally I think the PMac needs updating NOW.
Think about it, if the 17"iMac was still priced at $1900, and the 933 PMac is still $2300, what's the incentive to get a PMac? Sure, they are expandable, but at current pricing, you are paying $400 + $999 (17" LCD) for expandability. Unless expandability is an absolute must, it would be absurd to buy the PMac.
So, either the iMac is getting only an LCD update, or the PMacs will have to be updated at MWNY.
this is a huge draw for me. A truly usefull prosumer machine, and a great way to enter the Apple world.
I think as far as Apple is concerned, it should be super easy to retrofit the assembly line to add the 17" display, even with units half built today. They can clear inventory while increasing sales and market share.. good job.
So, if Apple does come out with a 1GHz 17" iMac with better video card than what it has now, I will order one so fast it'll make Steve's head spin. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Y'know, I may not be far behind you. If Apple can do it for less than $2K...
Looks like the iMac is moving to fill the vacancy left by the cube: stunningly-designed prosumer machine with limited expandability. I think it just might work this time, and I kind of wonder if Apple is deliberately allowing the PowerMacs to stagnate so that it's sure to work.
<strong>If c|net news reports there is a 17" iMac in the wings, you can bet your bippy there will be a 17" iMac.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay then. Time for a bet: If Jobs introduce a 17" iMac you win. If not I win. And since unautorisedgabling probably is illegal lets make the price a postcard. I send you one from sunny Copenhagen if I loose. If you loose you send me one from whereever you live.
On further reflection I think what might work with the 17" and 19" iMac story is the eMac takes over the bottom spot and the there are just two iMac models (taking the place of the top two slots) Apple can lose the cheapest iMac price point and have a 17" and 19" iMac with Superdrive in the top two price slots.
I have the 17" Apple LCD and its the one computer related purchase that has had a dramatic, positive contribution to my computer experience. Its the only LCD I'vd had, but I'd never go back to CRTs. I can thank these boards for helping me decide, BTW. I didnt know what the big deal with LCDs was but it seems all you guys drooled over them.
Anyway, when I first heard about the new LCD iMac, I was hoping it would have a 16" screen. Why? For one, comsumers could say that the screen size is physically equal to a 17" CRT. So the naive consumer, like I was, would not think that a 17" CRT is bigger and better than a 15" LCD. Resolution advantages are not so apparent. Also, I just think its an optimum compromise among nimbleness, functionality, and price. And that is kinda the role for the iMAC. But it is an odd size these days so that would be its own problem. (Isn't Sony coming out with a 16" LCD?)
In any case, I hope they do come out with the larger screen at MWNY--least as an option. Forget the apparent backlog of current iMacs. Apple has a greater problem of just not having enough desirable hardware choices period. It might not sell well til the holidays but it would provide them with some needed respect.
Okay then. Time for a bet: If Jobs introduce a 17" iMac you win. If not I win. And since unautorisedgabling probably is illegal lets make the price a postcard. I send you one from sunny Copenhagen if I loose. If you loose you send me one from whereever you live.
Deal?</strong><hr></blockquote>
OK, I'm game!
If there is no 17" iMac, I will gladly mail you a postcard from my little rectangle of the USA.
I don't have to work next week, so I might just hump down to the local Apple Store for the keynote, if they are showing it there.
[edit]
Woohoo!!
Just called the local Apple Store and they ARE carrying the keynote! Sweet! <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
I kinda want a Powermac, but I'd buy that machine in a heartbeat. "
Amen. Get the cheque book out...
Lemon Bon Bon </strong><hr></blockquote>
I hope you guys are quick with the clicker. Hmm, maybe I'd better go ahead and enable "one-click" now...
...
Here's a question. The specs are clearly very reasonable. There isn't a part there that Apple doesn't have somewhere in its product line. But -- what about the price? Can we hope that the current iMac malaise, plus forecasts of a slow back-to-school buying season, plus the need to capitalize on the Switch campaign now while it's still fresh -- will all these things really compel Apple to keep the current top-of-the-line-iMac price point in spite of significant upgrades to the CPU, GPU and LCD?
At $1899 I'd put all your heads to spinnin'. I've been waiting three and a half years!
I HIGHLY doubt there will be anything done to the iMac line. It is new, and the prices of LCDs are still to high. Why don't you guys just get an eMac? really? It has the resolution of the iMac you're imagining, a larger viewible area than the current iMacs, better color reproduction, better in non-native resolutions, longer life span, no dead pixel problems, it costs much less, and doesn't really take up much more desk space. Why is there a need for LCDs on a desktop? especially when it's attatched to a computer that is non-upgradible? When you're iMac doesn't suit your needs any more, your expensive LCD will be permanently connected to it. eMacs or powermacs make much more sense.
<strong>Why don't you guys just get an eMac? really? It has the resolution of the iMac you're imagining, a larger viewible area than the current iMacs, better color reproduction, better in non-native resolutions, longer life span, no dead pixel problems, it costs much less, and doesn't really take up much more desk space. Why is there a need for LCDs on a desktop?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Because CRTs basically suck. Once you've used a LCD it's hard to go back. And the convenience of an all-in-one, not having wires strung around beats a PowerMac with separate display.
<strong>Why don't you guys just get an eMac? really?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Allow me to clarify further.
I have considered an eMac. I understand they're kind of noisy. If it weren't for that and the fact that I really like the brightness and sharpness of LCDs I'd probably buy one. I've never been one to switch resolutions much when I've used CRTs, so that's not an issue for me.
Your point about the LCD being tied to the CPU when it's time to upgrade is a good one, but I've had a PowerMac with a separate LCD display. I always had a hard time finding a place to put the tower. If I put it out of reach so I don't have to put up with the noisy fan right next to me, I can't get to the CD drive. It's very hard to get to the ports if it's under the desk. So I sold my tower and bought a PowerBook for home use. What a blessing!
For my office, the new iMac appeals to me because everything is right there (although it seems some of the ports and the power switch should be on the front or side). And, the infinitely adjustable display is a BIG PLUS.
Well, the only way Apple can add a '17 inch' LCD to the iMac and keep costs down is with a widescreen. with a 3:2 17" widescreen, if that exists, you get about 25 square inches more physical real estate and about a half inch taller screen. But the only monitors I could find were 16:10, or what the 22 inch ACD's aspect ratio is. The first one looks like a likely choice, maybe, but that's a lot of pixels...almost the same number of pixels as the 17" ASD's
Comments
<strong>TIN17INCHiMac</strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
If c|net news reports there is a 17" iMac in the wings, you can bet your bippy there will be a 17" iMac.
Not only are they a "real" news site, they have an excellent record on soon-to-be-released Apple products. They were correct on the original iPod (and noone could believe that Apple's new product would be "just" an MP3 player). They hit the nail on the head with the 14" iBook, etc. etc.
So, if Apple does come out with a 1GHz 17" iMac with better video card than what it has now, I will order one so fast it'll make Steve's head spin.
Think about it, if the 17"iMac was still priced at $1900, and the 933 PMac is still $2300, what's the incentive to get a PMac? Sure, they are expandable, but at current pricing, you are paying $400 + $999 (17" LCD) for expandability. Unless expandability is an absolute must, it would be absurd to buy the PMac.
So, either the iMac is getting only an LCD update, or the PMacs will have to be updated at MWNY.
What do you guys / gals think?
1280x1024
this is a huge draw for me. A truly usefull prosumer machine, and a great way to enter the Apple world.
I think as far as Apple is concerned, it should be super easy to retrofit the assembly line to add the 17" display, even with units half built today. They can clear inventory while increasing sales and market share.. good job.
Now only if they made a digital camera ...
[ 07-10-2002: Message edited by: JasonPP ]</p>
<strong>17" should be the same as the desktop model, so
1280x1024
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I hope not! I hate that resolution, I HATE IT!!!, it's ugly, unaestetic and just plain unpleasing for the eyes!
5:4 is so wrong, if it's not widescreen then at least make it 4:3
Did I mention that I hate it?
[QB]Reading c|net's article.......<hr></blockquote>
C|Net is quoting Nick de Plume.
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
<strong>
So, if Apple does come out with a 1GHz 17" iMac with better video card than what it has now, I will order one so fast it'll make Steve's head spin. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Y'know, I may not be far behind you. If Apple can do it for less than $2K...
Looks like the iMac is moving to fill the vacancy left by the cube: stunningly-designed prosumer machine with limited expandability. I think it just might work this time, and I kind of wonder if Apple is deliberately allowing the PowerMacs to stagnate so that it's sure to work.
<strong>If c|net news reports there is a 17" iMac in the wings, you can bet your bippy there will be a 17" iMac.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay then. Time for a bet: If Jobs introduce a 17" iMac you win. If not I win. And since unautorisedgabling probably is illegal lets make the price a postcard. I send you one from sunny Copenhagen if I loose. If you loose you send me one from whereever you live.
Deal?
1 GHz G4
133 MHz bus
256 MB RAM
60 GB HD
SuperDrive
17" LCD (widescreen, 1280 x 854)
GForce 4MX
1899$
I kinda want a Powermac, but I'd buy that machine in a heartbeat. "
Amen. Get the cheque book out...
Lemon Bon Bon
Wouldn't 1280x1024 be preferrable to 1280x960 (4:3), as it's more pixels left to right?
I think 1280x1024 on the 17" Apple LCD looks spectacular.
-'pert
Anyway, when I first heard about the new LCD iMac, I was hoping it would have a 16" screen. Why? For one, comsumers could say that the screen size is physically equal to a 17" CRT. So the naive consumer, like I was, would not think that a 17" CRT is bigger and better than a 15" LCD. Resolution advantages are not so apparent. Also, I just think its an optimum compromise among nimbleness, functionality, and price. And that is kinda the role for the iMAC. But it is an odd size these days so that would be its own problem. (Isn't Sony coming out with a 16" LCD?)
In any case, I hope they do come out with the larger screen at MWNY--least as an option. Forget the apparent backlog of current iMacs. Apple has a greater problem of just not having enough desirable hardware choices period. It might not sell well til the holidays but it would provide them with some needed respect.
<strong>
Oxymoron?
ps.. dePlume is fulllllllll of it. 100% of everything he posted in that article was pulled directly out of his dung-hole.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I wouldn't be so sure considering that AtAT seems to be backing up Thinksecret somewhat.
<strong>
Okay then. Time for a bet: If Jobs introduce a 17" iMac you win. If not I win. And since unautorisedgabling probably is illegal lets make the price a postcard. I send you one from sunny Copenhagen if I loose. If you loose you send me one from whereever you live.
Deal?</strong><hr></blockquote>
OK, I'm game!
If there is no 17" iMac, I will gladly mail you a postcard from my little rectangle of the USA.
I don't have to work next week, so I might just hump down to the local Apple Store for the keynote, if they are showing it there.
[edit]
Woohoo!!
Just called the local Apple Store and they ARE carrying the keynote! Sweet! <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
[ 07-10-2002: Message edited by: PBG4 Dude ]</p>
<strong>"quote:
1 GHz G4
133 MHz bus
256 MB RAM
60 GB HD
SuperDrive
17" LCD (widescreen, 1280 x 854)
GForce 4MX
1899$
I kinda want a Powermac, but I'd buy that machine in a heartbeat. "
Amen. Get the cheque book out...
Lemon Bon Bon
I hope you guys are quick with the clicker.
...
Here's a question. The specs are clearly very reasonable. There isn't a part there that Apple doesn't have somewhere in its product line. But -- what about the price? Can we hope that the current iMac malaise, plus forecasts of a slow back-to-school buying season, plus the need to capitalize on the Switch campaign now while it's still fresh -- will all these things really compel Apple to keep the current top-of-the-line-iMac price point in spite of significant upgrades to the CPU, GPU and LCD?
At $1899 I'd put all your heads to spinnin'. I've been waiting three and a half years!
[ 07-10-2002: Message edited by: iconmaster ]</p>
<strong>
800 MHz G4
133 MHz bus
256 MB RAM
40 GB HD
DVD/CD-RW
17" LCD (widescreen, 1280 x 854)
GForce 2MX
1599$
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sound perfect to me. I'll place my order right away. I doubt though, that Apple can/will offer an iMac with those specs for that price.
So how could new 17" iMacs be on the way? I don't see it.
<strong>Why don't you guys just get an eMac? really? It has the resolution of the iMac you're imagining, a larger viewible area than the current iMacs, better color reproduction, better in non-native resolutions, longer life span, no dead pixel problems, it costs much less, and doesn't really take up much more desk space. Why is there a need for LCDs on a desktop?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Because CRTs basically suck. Once you've used a LCD it's hard to go back. And the convenience of an all-in-one, not having wires strung around beats a PowerMac with separate display.
<strong>Why don't you guys just get an eMac? really?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Allow me to clarify further.
I have considered an eMac. I understand they're kind of noisy. If it weren't for that and the fact that I really like the brightness and sharpness of LCDs I'd probably buy one. I've never been one to switch resolutions much when I've used CRTs, so that's not an issue for me.
Your point about the LCD being tied to the CPU when it's time to upgrade is a good one, but I've had a PowerMac with a separate LCD display. I always had a hard time finding a place to put the tower. If I put it out of reach so I don't have to put up with the noisy fan right next to me, I can't get to the CD drive. It's very hard to get to the ports if it's under the desk. So I sold my tower and bought a PowerBook for home use. What a blessing!
For my office, the new iMac appeals to me because everything is right there (although it seems some of the ports and the power switch should be on the front or side). And, the infinitely adjustable display is a BIG PLUS.
Sorry for my previous curt response.
Dave
<a href="http://www.lgphilips-lcd.com:8888/English/view/monitordetail.php3?idx=126&offset=0&pkinds=monitor &pname=products" target="_blank">http://www.lgphilips-lcd.com:8888/English/view/monitordetail.php3?idx=126&offset=0&pkinds=monitor &pname=products</a>
or
<a href="http://www.lgphilips-lcd.com:8888/English/view/monitordetail.php3?idx=123&offset=0&pkinds=monitor &pname=products" target="_blank">http://www.lgphilips-lcd.com:8888/English/view/monitordetail.php3?idx=123&offset=0&pkinds=monitor &pname=products</a>
[ 07-11-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]
[ 07-11-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]</p>