<strong> Steve Jobs thinks consumers without the money to blow on a Powermac all like tiny displays. He will never offer a low end Mac with a reasonable sized display.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't think the issue is preference more than economics. Apple doesn't make the profit margin it does with powermacs on the imacs. So I think if 17" LCDs were barely more expensive than 15" ones, it would be a no brainer. But that's not the case. To get a higher resolution LCD, which is really the issue more than physical size, would cost a WHOLE lot more and would affect the video card's performance etc. If you're stuck at 1024X768, 15" to 17" isn't much of a difference and has the same desktop space.
[ 12-19-2001: Message edited by: The Mactivist ]</p>
When Apple released the iMac it was a new concept in computing (well at least an up to date rendition of the original Mac concept), this is the biggest release for them in the past 4 years, I dont think I would worry about what shape the screen is, rather how do they intend to change our lives with this product, and what new features will it have that you lot haven't even begun to conceptualise.
Apple are innovators and will not release a product that is just a faster iMac with a skinny screen. That is not Industrial Design - Apple are world leaders in inovation. I think you are all going to get a shock when they release the iMac replacement. You just need to have a look at some of the concepts being produced by design agencies and manufacturers to know, that in the next few years, our products will change the way we live our lives. The mobile phone has already begun the process (in Europe and Asia anyway). Believe me, if Apple are going to release an iMac replacement it is going to pack some pretty cool features. (and I dont mean faster chips and an extra firewire port).
Let me remind you of some of Apples inovations:
GUI,
Mouse (pointing device),
Laser Printer,
Digital Camera,
Computer as a fully rounded product (not an inustrial box, PC)
Palm PC,
Wireless Networking,
iPod (even though lots of people have bought one they still dont understand its full potential) - this is not an MP3 player, but it has the ability to play them, just like your Mac. Apple will get such a buzz when the unveil the full potential of the iPod, and all those people who have already bought one realise that they bought a much better product than what they thought.
These products seem very normal to you now, but were huge innovations at the time of there release
I could ramble on for days but I dont want to bore you too much. I appologise for my long winded post, I only read the short ones myself. <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Sorry it has taken me so long to get respond to all the replies...
For all of you critics, YES I DO have an iMac and have changed mine a few times since the original came out. I love the iMac and am looking forward to the new model. I am also lucky enough to have a G4 Powerbook so can therefore speak from first hand experience of the two machines. I also have a widescreen TV and a DVD player, and I agree that obviously that is where I watch most of my films. However, as my iMac is in my bedroom I would love (on the odd occasion) when I'm really tired to be able to watch a DVD in my room. Also, I have never used iMovie but if the iMac has a BTO Superdrive model then I can see myself burning my own DVDs, in which case the widescreen feature would again come in handy. Finally, having used my Powerbook G4 with OS X I think that a widescreen suits the new OS much better than a standard sized screen. (Oh, and if any of you wonder why I don't just use my Powerbook at home, I like a stationary, sizeable computer on my desk. To those of you who criticised me for my comment - get a life, this is a DISCUSSION group. I wasn't 'bitching' about the new iMac product before it even launched, as I've said I'm looking forward to seeing it and (probably) getting one - however, a widescreen system is one of the features I'd really ike to see - so shoot me.
Still doesn't make sense. Screen area is what you need. The 16:9 ratio (or anything thereabouts) is probably the ideal form, but only if the display is larger. With a screen as small as 15" you really need to maximize surface area -- 4:3 is just better to work with in that case.
Also, the panel in the 15" studio display gives a better quality image than the panel in the TiBook, which seems a little less consistent from edge to edge, and a bit washed out compared to Apple's other displays. Still very good, great for a laptop, but not in the same league as Apple's desktop panels.
[quote]Also, the panel in the 15" studio display gives a better quality image than the panel in the TiBook, which seems a little less consistent from edge to edge, and a bit washed out compared to Apple's other displays. Still very good, great for a laptop, but not in the same league as Apple's desktop panels.<hr></blockquote>
I think my PowerBook's screen is pretty gorgeous... until I sit it next to an iBook that is. I'm sitting here right now with a PowerBook and a new iBook, and the difference is astonishing!
Man, if the PowerBook had the iBook's pixel density and screen brightness, it would RULE.
As ussual Murbot, I'm in total awe of the number of macs you can go through in such a short time. You've probably owned more computers in the last 3 years than many will own in 30. :eek: :cool: <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
Comments
<strong> Steve Jobs thinks consumers without the money to blow on a Powermac all like tiny displays. He will never offer a low end Mac with a reasonable sized display.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't think the issue is preference more than economics. Apple doesn't make the profit margin it does with powermacs on the imacs. So I think if 17" LCDs were barely more expensive than 15" ones, it would be a no brainer. But that's not the case. To get a higher resolution LCD, which is really the issue more than physical size, would cost a WHOLE lot more and would affect the video card's performance etc. If you're stuck at 1024X768, 15" to 17" isn't much of a difference and has the same desktop space.
[ 12-19-2001: Message edited by: The Mactivist ]</p>
Apple are innovators and will not release a product that is just a faster iMac with a skinny screen. That is not Industrial Design - Apple are world leaders in inovation. I think you are all going to get a shock when they release the iMac replacement. You just need to have a look at some of the concepts being produced by design agencies and manufacturers to know, that in the next few years, our products will change the way we live our lives. The mobile phone has already begun the process (in Europe and Asia anyway). Believe me, if Apple are going to release an iMac replacement it is going to pack some pretty cool features. (and I dont mean faster chips and an extra firewire port).
Let me remind you of some of Apples inovations:
GUI,
Mouse (pointing device),
Laser Printer,
Digital Camera,
Computer as a fully rounded product (not an inustrial box, PC)
Palm PC,
Wireless Networking,
iPod (even though lots of people have bought one they still dont understand its full potential) - this is not an MP3 player, but it has the ability to play them, just like your Mac. Apple will get such a buzz when the unveil the full potential of the iPod, and all those people who have already bought one realise that they bought a much better product than what they thought.
These products seem very normal to you now, but were huge innovations at the time of there release
I could ramble on for days but I dont want to bore you too much. I appologise for my long winded post, I only read the short ones myself. <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
For all of you critics, YES I DO have an iMac and have changed mine a few times since the original came out. I love the iMac and am looking forward to the new model. I am also lucky enough to have a G4 Powerbook so can therefore speak from first hand experience of the two machines. I also have a widescreen TV and a DVD player, and I agree that obviously that is where I watch most of my films. However, as my iMac is in my bedroom I would love (on the odd occasion) when I'm really tired to be able to watch a DVD in my room. Also, I have never used iMovie but if the iMac has a BTO Superdrive model then I can see myself burning my own DVDs, in which case the widescreen feature would again come in handy. Finally, having used my Powerbook G4 with OS X I think that a widescreen suits the new OS much better than a standard sized screen. (Oh, and if any of you wonder why I don't just use my Powerbook at home, I like a stationary, sizeable computer on my desk. To those of you who criticised me for my comment - get a life, this is a DISCUSSION group. I wasn't 'bitching' about the new iMac product before it even launched, as I've said I'm looking forward to seeing it and (probably) getting one - however, a widescreen system is one of the features I'd really ike to see - so shoot me.
Mike
Also, the panel in the 15" studio display gives a better quality image than the panel in the TiBook, which seems a little less consistent from edge to edge, and a bit washed out compared to Apple's other displays. Still very good, great for a laptop, but not in the same league as Apple's desktop panels.
I think my PowerBook's screen is pretty gorgeous... until I sit it next to an iBook that is. I'm sitting here right now with a PowerBook and a new iBook, and the difference is astonishing!
Man, if the PowerBook had the iBook's pixel density and screen brightness, it would RULE.
[ 12-19-2001: Message edited by: murbot ]</p>