What do you guys think about AIs imac roumors?

I think that AI better be right about this. After a 7 month haitus from incorrect information, their credibility can't take any more blows.

But what else do I think?

[quote] lacks the high-MHz processor and large screen necessary to compete in a marketplace <hr></blockquote>
and then... [quote] Based around a 15 TFT Flat-Panel display, running at a native resolution of 1024x768 <hr></blockquote>.

With no increase in screen size, that problem seems to still be wanting. Also, 32MB VRAM? I'd be suprised to see them willingly double the amount in the TiBook. Then again, it wouldn't be the first time the consumer offering outdid the professional (combo drive :mad: )

All in all, it sounds promising, if not predictable. I just hope it comes through, both for Apple and the Insider.

- Pook

Because, unlike me, you're not the man.

- Pook

Hey! Where'd it go? :confused: :confused:

- Pook

Well, as long as nobody posts about slimmer Titanium like iBooks due out... ;)

Seems the new rumor has been pulled already.

Weird. <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

This is bizarre :confused:

Michael, can you give us the lowdown on what the report said?

Anyone else read this care to give us details too?

Babelfish to the rescue:

[quote]The return of AppleInsider: After months of silence, AppleInsider comes out of its hibernation. Equipped with a new interface (very tempting), the site returns with an article that announces the arrival of the next iMac with a flat-panel screen. Equipped with a 15-inch flat-panel screen and a resolution of 1024x768, the computer should include a G3 flirting with one gigahertz and a GeForce2 MX with 32 MB of video memory. Just like the iBook, it seems that the various models will not be characterized by the speed of the processor, but by the optical drive, which could be either a DVD-ROM or a combo DVD/CD-RW. AppleInsider even conjures up the possibility of an iMac equipped with a SuperDrive. This iMac generation would be sold in configurations between $999 and $1299 and would function under Mac OS X by default. Update: AppleInsider has withdrawn its article without giving an explanation. <hr></blockquote>

[ 11-30-2001: Message edited by: CaseCom ]</p>

Any form factor guesses? Kind of hard for me to get past a cpu-strapped-to-the-back-of-a-flat panel-type scenerio.

I see they're working hard on their credibility. Nice.

[quote]Originally posted by Caler:
<strong>Any form factor guesses? Kind of hard for me to get past a cpu-strapped-to-the-back-of-a-flat panel-type scenerio.</strong><hr></blockquote>That's essentially what the AI article said. It said it would look like a display from some angles, but bulkier.

BRussell wrote:

[quote]That's essentially what the AI article said. It said it would look like a display from some angles, but bulkier.<hr></blockquote>

Slimmer Titanium-like iMac due next week! :p

If this thing is like the current model (completely un-upgradeable) then it better be cheap: ie. 1299 with an LCD and Superdrive. Would it kill them to make a cheap cube and bundle it with an LCD? Come on Apple, just one friggin AGP and one PCI slot. That's all. I realize that even the cube didn't have that, but it would make the perfect computer.

They need to loose the all in one form factor. Why not 'big' and 'little' towers for the pro and the consumer? PowerMac gets something of the current size with the current number of slots and drive bays. iMac gets a much smaller case of similar design with room for only one HDD and only one PCI and one AGP slot. To make it narrow, the optical drive is a vertically oriented slot loader , making the whole thing about as big as a dictionary with letter (or slightly smaller) size pages. ADC solves most of the 'simplicity' concerns, and the limit on slots gives just enough room for graphics and sound card upgrades without stomping all over the pro market models.
I pick my Apple display to connect to the ADC video. The 15" is included as the base for between 999-1499 depending on HDD, RAM, and Optical drive, or alternatively I can spend more on a 17" (or even 22") if I want to. I'd buy one with a 17" LCD in a second.

But friggin Apple won't make a computer I want. Damn it! Thankfully I'm looking at laptops and not desktops. Why would anyone buy a desktop with scarcely more expandability/power than a laptop? The prices are even in the ballpark between iMacs and iBooks. Come Apple, just a modicum of well thought-out expansion, that's all we're asking for. That, or $1299 towers.

Okay. The next time AI posts something be sure to copy it into the thread. That way when the reverse we'll still have a copy.

Case Com (I think that was it) has pretty much everything the article said that you would need to know.

Also, I don't think I would give up on the all-in-one design. It's way to easy to show to new users and the middle machine they had died in the water. I still think if they cut the costs on the Cube they could sell it though.

Finally, who, other than maybe Apple, says you need a G4 to use the combo drive? Is this an actual requirement or can a fast G3 take care of it.

Sounds like a cool machine to me.

[ 11-30-2001: Message edited by: Tomahawk ]</p>

Not sure if any of you have seen my flat panel iMac renderings. I showed these when we last thought a flat iMac would be announced, instead we got the "Quicksilver". So here they are. It's based on an iBook, but with no hinge for a display. Everything would be in one enclosure thus reducing the cost. Let me know what you think.

here's the link
<a href="http://homepage.mac.com/macslash/" target="_blank">http://homepage.mac.com/macslash/</a>

derrick

[quote]Originally posted by Tomahawk:

<strong>Finally, who, other than maybe Apple, says you need a G4 to use the combo drive? Is this an actual requirement or can a fast G3 take care of it.

Sounds like a cool machine to me.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Apple said a G4 (maybe its just AltiVec though) is needed to do the encoding and since they make the iMac... well, you get the point. Other companies use hardware encoding like in the Sony MX. Yes, it sounds like a cool machine but I think its time to move on to the G4, especially if iDVD is to be used on the machine it was originally designed for. If Sahara is a G3 with AltiVec (I have no idea) and is to be used then that does not bode well for a PowerMac G5 introduction.

Where's the frelling report? Repost it already!

apple_otaku

[ 11-30-2001: Message edited by: apple_otaku ]</p>

it'll be back... we forgot to clear it properly. :rolleyes:

Here is a translation of an article from the <a href="http://www.mygarage.fr.st" target="_blank">www.mygarage.fr.st</a> website:

iMac LCD in January
28/11/2001

All our sources seem to confirm it, iMac LCD will be presented at Macworld of San Francisco next January.
Moreover, the name of this new machine will not be any more iMac. Well cavity, this name is preciously hidden and only one handle of people are well-informed, just like the design ultra-signal-secrecy.
Concerning the design features:
- the processor should be G3 with 1 Ghz, coming from IBM
- the screen would be one 14.1 inches, equivalent to one 16 inches cathodic or CRT
- the memory would be 128 Mo on the version of input of range and 256 Mo on the other configurations
- the hard disk should be 40, 60 and 80 Go - engraver Cd-rw, combo Dvd-cdrw and Superdrive would owe equipped the 3 configurations - and as usual modem 56k, Ethernet 10/100 Mbits, loan for AirPort, USB and FireWire Concerning the prices, information is rather vague. Steve Jobs would wish a machine with $899 (8100 francs including all taxes), but it will be probably $999 (9000 francs including all taxes) for reasons of relatively high costs of screens LCD. The most expensive configuration (256 Mode RAM, HD of 80 Go, SuperDrive, AirPort card) couterait $1599 (15000 francs including all taxes). Waiting should not be very long any more, then patience...

If the screen is really 14.1" there is no way I am going to buy it.

I hope you are listening Apple Ti book screen or larger please.
<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />

[quote]Originally posted by JW Pepper:
<strong>If the screen is really 14.1" there is no way I am going to buy it.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

14.1 is bigger then the current screen. So it IS an improvement. You can't expect them to put in a 15.2 inch widescreen and have the price come in at $999.

I think 14.1 is perfect for the market that they're going for. If its true that it will be 1Ghz, DVD and 14.1 for 999...wow

Clear it properly? Come on, you're making my head hurt ... anything that has to be "cleared properly" better be written well or its just gonna get torn up, especially if it gets posted then yanked then posted.

Welll so far from what I've seen from the article I hope it's true.

So Jonathan, who do you have to clear it up with? And when is it gunna be put back on AI?

Didn't some of the Sahara rumors discuss an IBM vector unit that wasn't altivec? If so, maybe the new iMac won't be as deficient as we think.

[quote]Originally posted by Bogie:
<strong>Clear it properly? Come on, you're making my head hurt ... anything that has to be "cleared properly" better be written well or its just gonna get torn up, especially if it gets posted then yanked then posted.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Oh come on. AI is a part of MacNN. Any "news site" has a chain of command that ends with the head editor. MacNN catches the legal hell when AI publishes "trade secrets". So give 'im a break if they need to "clear" something before it's on the AI site.

[quote]Originally posted by apple_otaku:
<strong>

Yeah but how would you market that when the previous iMac had a 15" screen? We know that it was only 13.8" viewable and a 14" LCD would be about a quarter inch bigger but joe consumer won't.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Good point but the same could be said about the MHZ myth. Do you think that Joe Sixpack is going to look at an ad for the new iMac and say "but the old one had a 15 inch screen"? Hopefully he'll be so wow'd by the Superdrive, Ghz, 32meg video card and teleportation system that he'll forget about the monitor size. Oh yeah, throw in a G4 too, now thats a spicey meatball!

... and they didn't say whom they were clearing it with or for what. A second source? Spelling mistakes? What? Clearing it with MacNN didn't even come to mind.

Matsu,

I would agree that it should be easier to REPLACE your HDD, or your sound card or video card, but to leave room for mulitple HDDs and extra slots isn't needed in an iMac.

The people who are buying BTO PCs are buying either high-end PCs (and would buy a PowerMac on our side) or are buying the cheap PCs (and would opt for the iMac on our side).

But everyone who knows anything about PCs knows that it's better to build your own system than to buy one from Gateway or worse, eMachines.

THey will buy their ocmputer, and it will be expandable. But they will probably never expand it.

The iMac is made for those who don't ever need to expand their computer. Replace bits here and there, that's fine. It's made for schools who just need it for kids to do research and homework on. For paretns who want to send movies (and hopefully soon DVDs) of their kids to the grandparents.

It's not for anyone who is really using the computer (like you and I).

Most people NEVER use their comptuers potential. They just want Morpheus to load fast, and they want their MP3s to sound good. They want to burn a CD. They want their internet connection to be fast.

They want their games to run smoothly.

They dont' care about advanced graphics acceleration unless the new game they bought needs it.

They don't care about extra HDDs cause they'll probably enver fill up 60GBs anyway.

If they do, they can buy an external one.

Andrew

Keep in mind that my 13.3" Wallstreet powerbook screen has the exact same viewable area as an iMac's 15" Cathode ray screen. Also keep in mind Apple is aiming for a certain price point.

They hit the nail right on the head:

"Now, there are two likely scenarios to explain why AI might have pulled this story quickly enough to give its server whiplash. The first is that it's so close to the truth that Apple, who's been monitoring AppleInsider 24-7 for the past seven months just waiting for something like this to happen, immediately leaped in with a cease-and-desist, thus preventing the site from spoiling the surprise. The second is that, immediately after posting, AppleInsider realized just how unlikely a $1299 gigahertz iMac with a 15-inch LCD display and a SuperDrive really sounds, and decided that its comeback should probably lean slightly more towards the credible side. "

[quote]Originally posted by imacSE:
<strong>

Which nail? ;) My guess is they saw how unlikely the specs were, or perhaps they found out their source was bad.</strong><hr></blockquote>

That's what I'm starting to think too.

I see your point, but I'm afraid I must disagree.

Apple is the proud owner of the ONLY all-in-one system, the iMac. There are PC all in ones, but they tend to die out very quickly.

If the rumors are true and the only difference between the new iMacs is the optical drive, then Apple will have made the smartest decision ever.

Apple wants to sell iMacs to those who don't want to have to think about computers. they know that they don't want to burn DVDs, so they'll get the iMac with the CD-RW/DVD, but then their grandma just wants to check email from the kids, so she'll get the base level with a CD-ROM.

But the kids want to burn DVDs, so they'll get the one with the CD-R/DVD-R. Dad just wants to watch movies, so he'll ge tthe CD-ROM/DVD one.

Then the other kid, who's a college student, wants a larger display. If he's keen enough on computers to want a larger display, then I'd venture to say he might want a second hard drive. Maybe a zip drive in his machine as well to make it more compatible to PCs...so he'll wnat the Tower.

Basically, Apple has what you're talking about. It's the base level G4.

It's just a bit faster than what you're suggesting.

Anyone who knows what a PCI slot is will not want the iMac.

And I bet Apple makes more money on the G4 towers than the imacs, so they're happy when peole are "forced" or "compelled" to buy a base level G4 rather than a top of the line iMac.

Andrew

[quote]Originally posted by amidala:
<strong>I see your point, but I'm afraid I must disagree.

Apple is the proud owner of the ONLY all-in-one system, the iMac. There are PC all in ones, but they tend to die out very quickly.

If the rumors are true and the only difference between the new iMacs is the optical drive, then Apple will have made the smartest decision ever.

Apple wants to sell iMacs to those who don't want to have to think about computers. they know that they don't want to burn DVDs, so they'll get the iMac with the CD-RW/DVD, but then their grandma just wants to check email from the kids, so she'll get the base level with a CD-ROM.

But the kids want to burn DVDs, so they'll get the one with the CD-R/DVD-R. Dad just wants to watch movies, so he'll ge tthe CD-ROM/DVD one.

Then the other kid, who's a college student, wants a larger display. If he's keen enough on computers to want a larger display, then I'd venture to say he might want a second hard drive. Maybe a zip drive in his machine as well to make it more compatible to PCs...so he'll wnat the Tower.

Basically, Apple has what you're talking about. It's the base level G4.

It's just a bit faster than what you're suggesting.

Anyone who knows what a PCI slot is will not want the iMac.

And I bet Apple makes more money on the G4 towers than the imacs, so they're happy when peole are "forced" or "compelled" to buy a base level G4 rather than a top of the line iMac.

Andrew</strong><hr></blockquote>
Very good post amidala. I entirely agree with you, the next i mac, will be still in the concept of the all in one, and he will still be very simple, nothing to change excepting a RAM slot.
Every other thing is open, concerning the technology and the design.

You know I agree with you, right? Well at least about what Apple will do, if not what they should do, or the implications of consumer reactions to the product. I contend that the market (both mac and PC) would respond better to a very slightly more PC-like iMac.

It's all academic. It won't happen, I know. But a lot more sales than anyone cares to admit are lost in the process. Perhaps the micro-tower iMac isn't the solution, but rather a cheaper low end tower. We'll see what they come up with, I guess. The current Display bundle promos basically show us that there is quite a lot of leeway on price, and that apple could afford to make all-in-one LCD iMacs that still come in cheaper then the current CRT models and that they can make 10-15% cheaper towers and displays, all. Let's see if 2002 brings not only performance but also price improvements to the desktop lines.

[quote]Originally posted by Bodhi:
<strong>Well if he is waiting for an answer from Monish we may be here a LONG time before that story gets posted again.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Got that right. I'm sure he's already on Christmas vacation. Maybe they'll catch him next year...

[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>If Apple releases a new iMac with a 14.1 inch screen they will be laughed out of the consumer market.

what a joke, at least I hope it was</strong><hr></blockquote>

But knowing Apple that's what they'll do.

15.1 inch LCD
733 Mhz G4
133 Mhz Bus
Geforce 2 MX or Radeon graphics (32MB)
56K modem
256 MB RAM
60 GB HD
Superdrive
$1299

As long as we're speculating on the next iMac's features...
Do the current iMacs support dual monitors? If not, Apple really needs to fix that. I'm pretty sure the port's already there so they can mirror displays, so switching it to a real dual monitor setup shouldn't be hard.

[quote]Originally posted by Jonathan:
<strong>guys, we forgot to clear the story with monish :rolleyes:

it will be back. we had never been told that everything we do with the front page has to go through him... till we did something :mad:

anyway, look for it back, and some new stuff, too ;) </strong><hr></blockquote>

Don't hold your breath everyone...just ask Gorgonzola about waiting for a reply from Monish.

If Apple uses an LCD any smaller than a 15 inch it'll be dead in the water. Why bother using a 14 inch LCD when they could just use a 14 in viewable trinitron tube?

My niece has an iMac and while the feature set has improved to the point that it is acceptable to me, the small screen simply is not. Its not only that its a 15 in monitor, its that is a small 15 in monitor and its not a flat screen like a trinitron . And do you see how much black empty space surrounds the viewable image-its ridiculous. Much more than my monitor has-which is almost nothing.

The iMac is simply unacceptable in its current form, unless Apple wants to keep a similar $499 model around strictly billed as an internet appliance. Personally I would prefer Apple use a 17 inch CRT-they are sturdier, more reliable, and more consistent than LCDs not to mention cheaper................................. .....

[quote]Originally posted by Jonathan:
<strong>guys, we forgot to clear the story with monish :rolleyes:

it will be back. we had never been told that everything we do with the front page has to go through him... till we did something :mad:

anyway, look for it back, and some new stuff, too ;)

I sincerely apologize to everyone for this little snafu. It makes me mad that we couldn't come back in force and not **** up.

Sorry guys- forgive us.

[ 12-01-2001: Message edited by: Jonathan ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah, it'll be back up. Afert MWSF :rolleyes:

errrr?

please don't lie.

From <a href="http://www.bite.org" target="_blank">Bite.org</a>

[quote]
heh
Posted Saturday, December 1, 2001 by General Lee
*
AI pulled their article on flat panel iMacs. So the top news story is again "slimmer, titanium-like iBook due next week." From April.

:p erhaps we'll see another news story in another six months.

Dip us in sh*t and roll us in breadcrumbs! AI updated
Posted Thursday, November 29, 2001 by General Lee
*
That's right kids. If you've read AppleInsider between April 28th and yesterday, you've been quite bored.

No more! AI has updated. Flat panel iMac article. Maybe this was s'posed to be published back in April but they forgot about it and decided it wasn't too stale. <hr></blockquote>

[ 12-01-2001: Message edited by: Bodhi ]</p>

MOSR hasn't made one interesting report (credibility aside) that you could not have found on forums such as these... Anyone who reads at least a rumor forum or two regularly could have written their past few reports (except the one written by their "register mole") If anything it's entertaining to read and speculate what apple will release and MOSR has failed to give me any decent entertainment... of course AI isn't any better but it's better to keep your mouth shut if you don't have anything good to say than to pull an MOSR and write crap. (sorry if i'm so critical)

Jon - that was a very respectable post as far as why it was taken down. Just wanted to reinforce that.

[quote]Originally posted by amidala:
<strong>

Yeah right.

That same machine right now costs...$2500, and the drive has to be external. And yo ualso get it in a tower, not an imac, and the monitor is External.

Andrew</strong><hr></blockquote>

1.) that mac does not cost 2500 right now. Apple would likely charge that much but it doesn't cost that much.

15 inch LCD- 200-300 dollars
733 Mhz G4- 150-200 dollars I would imagine
256 MB RAM- 20 dollars
60 GB HD- 80 dollars
Motherboard with nVidia graphics- 75 dollars
Superdrive- 300-350 dollars
$at the lowend of the price range that would cost $825 high end estimate $1025

now my estimate means pretty much next to nothing but you get an idea that it is very possible for a 1299 and definitely possible for a 1499 machine

Well, they did cut the 733 G4 from 3500 to 1500 in one swipe, but they also cut the amount of RAM and the drive and other stuff too.

Andrew

[quote]Originally posted by discstickers:
<strong>
Except for one little thing... those prices were set in July when the quicksilver was introduced. that and don't forget about the g5. g4's outta be cheap with its intro. :D </strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah, maybe the processor but why would everything else's price decrease so much?

[quote]Originally posted by tl:
<strong>

And that is without the superdrive, which would be 250$ more if available, making the total a whopping 2898$

so even if you are correct and Apple can build it for about 100$ total, they would not sell it at that price because it would be too much of a price cut way to quickly. they like to milk things, so yesterday's 2900$ powermac will not be tomorrows 1300$ imac.

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: tl ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

you can't base anything on the PowerMac's price. it is inflated way too much has more high end things, etc..

look at my reasoning for the price and then tell me its not possible. do you agree with the price I listed. if so then what's your point?

[quote] The problem is foor people who don't know much about computers is that if they see the old iMacs with a 15" display then the new ones with a 14.1 they won't understand the difference. <hr></blockquote>

Oh please...all a person has to do is look at a 15" LCD and they can see that it's bigger than the current iMac's viewable area.

[quote]it will be back. we had never been told that everything we do with the front page has to go through him... till we did something <hr></blockquote>

Actually, this is not true. I had explained before (not to you, but to Nick, and more than once) that the first several articles had to be cleared. The article will be back up this week; it's really not a very interesting story regarding the whole pulling thing.

As for Bite.org, my suggestion would be to ignore them. They're just a bunch of amateurs scrambling for traffic by keeping a log of people's mistakes. :rolleyes:

And regarding the validity of the article, we always check them to the best of our ability, but as AI veterans know, the rumors are always wrong just as often as they're right.

Check back on the main page in a few days; it'll be back soon.

A nice iMac for MWSF would be this:

1.0 Ghz G3 14.x or 15.x LCD 32MB GeForce 2mx / or Ti-200 variant Combo Drive (CD-RW/DVD) 133Mhz Bus all the other usual trimmings Total = $1,499 or less

We would finally have an affordable 'gamer's' Mac.

I don't think it is too much to ask. It's a perfectly reasonable product to expect from Apple. Maybe they don't have the 1Ghz G3 yet, but we can hope IBM has it ready then.

I'd buy that in a blink-of-an-eye.

Peace. :cool:

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: NeoMac ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by JW Pepper:
<strong>Lets assume that your costs are correct. You will note that Apple make an AVERAGE margin of over 30% on sales, add to that a distributor profit and reseller profit and based on your costs the iMac should hit the streets at $1599-$1799.

Hmm.</strong><hr></blockquote>

that average is due to the huge margin on the pro products. no that the consumer products.

you don't think a PowerMac G4/DP 800 really costs 3499 in its current congfig do you? cost for that is 2699 I believe. and that was on its release!

Hmm..

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: applenut ]</p>

We are currently reworking the article in light of new information that we have recieved. sit tight.

see :)

now if Apple could take a margin hit on the high end model and slip in a superdrive it would be perfect

[quote]Originally posted by lsderrick:
<strong>here's a link to a previous posting

<a href="http://www.lowendmac.com/rumormill/01/0709.html" target="_blank">http://www.lowendmac.com/rumormill/01/0709.html</a>

derrick</strong><hr></blockquote>

In this article, it talked about a square iMac. Makes sense, except it would probably be 15" x 15" x 3". Think of the possible marketing:

"It's hip to be square" :cool:

Additionally, we don't know for sure if this is an iMac or not. Another post said that it had a "secret code name" which was known only to those close to the project. Could Apple be tring to introduce another product in between the current iMac and the G4? <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />

Screen size seems too small to market it above an iMac. Maybe Apple is going to make the iMac scrictly a low-end computer for the education market or a network machine like it was originally supposed to be. I just don't see how they could have a base-line $1000 machine and expect schools to buy them in bulk.

Food for thought.

-THSPottsie

Friend : (n) - Person who asks you how you are doing and then sticks around for the answer.

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: thspottsie ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by Bodhi:
<strong>

In other words: Monish is nowhere to be found and has not replied to anyone who has sent him an email regarding this.

<Not directed at you Jonathan, I just have a sore spot for Monish and how he conducts himself></strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah, that sounds like good old Monish.

[quote]Originally posted by amidala:
<strong>As to that nice, hella cheap iMac. Still not going to happen.

You're first of all assuming that the G5 will be out.

If the G5 is out, and they upgraded the iMac to the G4, then they wouldn't use the G3, which they will be using, since IBM continues to build and make faster ones, even though Apple is the largest user of them.

Andrew</strong><hr></blockquote>

hmmm...

1GHz G3

or

G4 which would cost more, and have a slower clock rate than the G3 (probably 800MHz because the current iMac models top out at 700MHz). The G4 would have more processing power along with a Velocity Engie, but what consumer needs the processing power of a G4 every single day?

Using a G3 in the new iMac looks to be one way Apple can cut the cost of the machine and get away with it.

But then you throw OS X into the picture, and it's looking more like the G4.

Anyone got a quarter? Heads G3, tails G4. Best two out of three.

- THSPottsie

Actual Newspaper Headline: "Red Tape Holds Up New Bridge"

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: thspottsie ]</p>

That's heavily ironic Gorgonzola.

Of course I have no idea about the day-to-day workings of MacNN and AppleInsider. What I was commenting about was Monish's "repuation", you my friend were quite outspoken about the frustrations of dealing with Mr. Monish. Quite a few posts over at the Lounge by you expressing frustration at reaching Monish. If things are better with his communication and accessibility issues than that is great for you guys (Mods and Admin's) who were the people Monish tended to ignore in the past, which made your job quite frustrating. You as much as anyone else here who has been around quite a while know where my posts in this thread were coming from...for you to say I am resurrecting a rumor is quite false, just going based on past experiences with Monish.

I for one am greatly saddened by the aggressive and demeaning tone you have taken with me Gorgonzola. Who offered his time and contacts to try and ressurrect AI when it was down? Who was trying to get that girl at Reprahduce to get the info off of the Cube to you? I think you know me better than to post something like that aimed at me.

Again, if things are better than good for you. Being a Mod myself at another board the frustration that Monish caused you and the other Mods at MacNN was the only reason behind my comments. Perhaps you shouldn't forget so easily when someone makes a job you do for free so difficult at times.

Posted by Gorgonzola on August 10th 2001 at 8:44am at BadFlamingo:

[quote]What Bodhi said is indeed true, but getting AI back online permanently and in full force would take no more than a week if Monish put some elbow grease into it, which he clearly is not doing. *Lest you think that his powers of procrastination are concentrated fully and mercilessly on AppleInsider alone, note that:
(1) Our new publishing system is nowhere to be found.
(2) Parts of the MacNN Network that are now obsolete have not been removed or cleaned up. *games.macnn.com is still here even though it's been discontinued.
(3) Reviews.macnn.com is also extremely old. *We've in fact *published some new reviews* (on Snapz Pro X, for one), but I don't see that on reviews.macnn.com, do you?
(4) The new comments system is the most minimal possible incarnation of what we've been discussing.
(5) Monish has still not paid for the t-shirts that we ordered from a MacNN forum member for MWNY, despite repeated badgering from both myself and said member.
(6) The successor to our forum server has not arrived despite its scheduled installation about a month and a half ago, and as a result, there's no place to put AI.
These are just the things I remember off the top of my head. *Believe me, it's not a whole lot easier to get in touch with Monish even if you *do* work with him. :rolleyes:
I suggest you work on building up your community here. *I used to read AppleInsider myself, and try as I might to resurrect it, there are some things that Monish has to do, and those things have just not been done.
The information regarding MacNN or Monish that I've shared with you here is strictly off-forum; I hope you understand.
HTH,
-gorgonzola. <hr></blockquote>

Or Eskimo's post:

[quote]Here's my take on the whole thing. *Monish sucks. *Short and sweet. *During the short time that AI came back up before this last great blackout myself and the other moderators and administrators talked things over a bit. *We asked Monish for control over the AI server and offered to do the maintanance that was required to keep it running even if it meant hosting it ourselves. *We even considered building our own server to host the forums and such. *We contacted Mr. Scates about helping us out with some of the redesign work if we got control, which he kindly offered. *We also received support from another member of AI that is a co-owner of a hosting company and offered us a 50% discount off normal hosting fees at his company. *Many more members told us they were willing to donate some money to the cause. *I think we really could have done it and I was very impressed by the level of support from the members.
Now none of us really wanted the baggage time wise and legally of running the AI frontpage. *We are engineers, researchers, artists and such, not entrepreneurs. *Monish basically never answered our repeated inquiries into the matter. *We were stopped by his apathy on the subject which for a business leader I found pathetic. *The only response I ever got from him was that if we had a guy that would give us discounted hosting then he should offer MacNN cheap hosting and that we could build a server and send it to him. *What a f**cking joke! *
There is no way in hell I would ever offer money to anything that MacNN/Monish is in control of. *It's a waste of your money. *If he wants to be inept and run AI into the ground he's done a pretty good job enough of that already. *I'm not going to spend money to see him piss that away too. *Gorgonzola is a good guy and I know he was honestly trying to help us out but I feel he was as much held back as all the rest of us by the powers that be. *He offered to give us control of the new AI server if they ever got it up. *Now tell me what kind of business orders a new server and then allows it not to be delivered for 2-3 months? *Any real business worth its salt would be screaming down the neck of a vendor that screwed them like that and take their business elswhere. *So either Monish is sitting around on his ass and there never was a real server ordered, or he is being an idiot and should cancel the freaking order, and go to a vendor that will give him a real computer. *Hell go to fricking Dell, they will have it on your doorstep by the end of the next business day if you want.
Excuse my candor on the issue... Stuff like this just really bothers me. *We had a nice community going at AI until a few people screwed it up for all of us. <hr></blockquote>

Rumor? I think not Gorgonzola. Don't let the title go to your head. Don't forget the pain some has caused in the past just because they are nice now.

Link: <a href="http://www.xsorbit.com/users/flamingo/index.cgi?board=General_Discussion&action=display&num=995952432&start=45" target="_blank">Bad Flamingo thread</a>

Eskimo post: <a href="http://www.xsorbit.com/users/flamingo/index.cgi?board=General_Discussion&action=display&num=1001916395" target="_blank">BadFlamingo - Eskimo</a>

Now...about that Flat Panel iMac!

;)

[ 12-03-2001: Message edited by: Bodhi ]</p>

Apple's biggest challenge is going to be making the iMac better or a lot cheaper than the iBook.

Right now iBook costs $1699 with a great set of features. A bigger screen with the same resolution, a faster processor and video card might be enough but only if they can sell it for $200 less, at least. I'd still go for the laptop for $200 extra.

Now if they stick a PB screen or (even better) a 1280x1024 15.1" 4:3 LCD, Geforce 3 or Radeon card, and a superdrive for $1499 I'd be in line for one RIGHT AWAY!

And about the G3/G4 thing, As long as my programs (photoshop, dreamweaver, flash, etc) run smoothly and I can burn a DVD without aging too much, I really don't care what chip's in there.

[quote]Originally posted by Amorph:
<strong>

Do you want 1280 x 1024 or 4:3? 1280 x 1024 is a 5:4 ratio (5*256 x 4*256). A 4:3 ratio would come out to 1280 x 960 (4*320 x 3*320).</strong><hr></blockquote>

While you are correct... 1280x1024 is still a valid option (using a standard Apple 17" CRT).

Dave

[quote]Rumor? I think not Gorgonzola. Don't let the title go to your head. Don't forget the pain some has caused in the past just because they are nice now.<hr></blockquote>

I'm well aware of what I posted that day, and I still remember well, and better than everyone else here, that getting a new server (which was really all that was needed to get AI back up) was complete and utter hell.

However, as I posted, not everything has to do with Monish. When it does, I'm the first to point fingers, but he's not the one that needs to clear this article, so he's really irrelevant in this discussion. The only reason I took a harsh tone (in retrospect, an overly harsh tone, and I apologize) is because you were helpful, and I wouldn't want anyone to get the wrong idea regarding the situation here because they thought you knew something -- because you did indeed know what was going on with AI before. I know because I emailed you all of it. :)

In short, Monish isn't involved with 99% of the day-to-day at AppleInsider, and most delays have almost nothing to do with him. There were definitely problems before, but as I said, he's become far more accessible in recent months, and I'm all for forgive-and-forget rather than hold-the-grudge-until-you-die.

Repeating again: I am well aware of what I posted before, however, my other post in this thread was about a change for the better in that regard.

In fact, let's take a look at the points I posted around four months ago:

[quote](1) Our new publishing system is nowhere to be found.
(2) Parts of the MacNN Network that are now obsolete have not been removed or cleaned up. *games.macnn.com is still here even though it's been discontinued.
(3) Reviews.macnn.com is also extremely old. *We've in fact *published some new reviews* (on Snapz Pro X, for one), but I don't see that on reviews.macnn.com, do you?
(4) The new comments system is the most minimal possible incarnation of what we've been discussing.
(5) Monish has still not paid for the t-shirts that we ordered from a MacNN forum member for MWNY, despite repeated badgering from both myself and said member.
(6) The successor to our forum server has not arrived despite its scheduled installation about a month and a half ago, and as a result, there's no place to put AI.<hr></blockquote>

(1) We've postponed our new publisher system, as we've redesigned parts of the network in ways that make it generally unnecessary.

(2) The network has been cleaned up, and games.macnn.com is no more, and is no longer linked to.

(3) Reviews.macnn.com is in the process of being redesigned; it's almost done.

(4) The news comments system was updated for some time, as you recall (when usernames showed up), but unfortunately that updated code was overwritten somehow -- we don't know how it happened -- when we were transitioning to our new main page design.

(5) We paid for the t-shirts. :)

(6) As you know, the forum server is here, and AI Forums and Rumors are back online. Publication will resume soon, which is where we are right now.

Also, two things that weren't on that list:

(7) MacNN.com was completely redesigned.

(8) OSX.MacNN.com was completely redesigned.

Holding grudges gets you nowhere. Don't throw that post of mine back at me out of context; I posted it, I haven't forgotten. But frankly, the situation is very different now, and although I remember what happened very well, I just don't want to keep harping on it, and I don't see why you need to either.

You have it all back now. What more do you need?

Whoa, I agree. I have no idea where Gorgonzola'a anger derives from. I am not going to even bother answering that. Glad things are better here for you..whoa, relax. :confused:

Anyway. The whole "Apollo may be called the G5" debate that is going on may be because the "real" G5 isn't ready and Apple needs to move the consumer line to the G4. Intel has killed the Pentium III, moving on to the Pentium4 and Itanium full time. Apple needs to answer this by killing the G3. Therefore I think the next iMac will have a G4. But what will Apple do as far as speeds? They cannot take a step back by saying that even though it's slower it's a G4 so therefore it's faster. That would go over as well as the "Two brains are better than one" campaign.

<a href=" http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1006-200-8065180.html?tag=mn_hd" target="_blank">CNET HAS JOINED THE IMAC BANDWAGON</a>

Originally posted by applenut:
[quote]
1.) that mac does not cost 2500 right now. [..]
15 inch LCD- 200-300 dollars
733 Mhz G4- 150-200 dollars I would imagine
256 MB RAM- 20 dollars
60 GB HD- 80 dollars
Motherboard with nVidia graphics- 75 dollars
Superdrive- 300-350 dollars
$at the lowend of the price range that would cost $825 high end estimate $1025<hr></blockquote>
- what about R&D
- what about the Casing?
- what about keyboard, mouse etc.?
- what about the OS? Development of Software costs money. It has to be earned by hardware-sales.
- what about a profit?

Forget about anything cheaper than $999

If they introduce an LCD iMac of any configuration for under $999 I'll stop trading Macs for 6 months.

Won't happen.

(please prove me wrong Steve)

[quote]Origina