TimeCanada was “kind enough” (someone could say that they have screwed up, and they now link their index page to Time.com – but we know a few tricks of our own to link to the ‘right page’ which they try to hide) to write a story about Apple’s new iMac, that is supposed to be revealed tomorrow during Steve Jobs’ keynote speech at MacWorld SF. At this writing, the article is still up but hidden from the front page of TimeCanada, and the date on the article is January 14, 2002. If the article will be taken down, visit Slashdot for details and lots of comments. Our Take: I am personally very dissapointed, if this is indeed the “big secret” that Apple was keeping and was hyping enormously all week. Firstly, I was waiting for something else as the “secret weapon” than an iMac update (no matter if this update may be big), and as I read in the article, while it does not give any hardware specs except the fact that the new iMac will have DVD burning capabilities, the prices start at $1300 up to $1800 USD for the highest model, and that $1300 is $300 more than the previous low-end iMac model. I do not care about DVD burning (I only want playback) and even if the new iMac can do.. coffee, simply put, this is just too expensive for me, as I was expecting to buy a new G4-based iMac for $999 as I wrote recently. Plus, the new iMac looks like an egg (that’s not necessarily bad though :). Update: Updated link and many pictures of the new iMac.
Apple’s “Secret Weapon” is a New iMac, Thanks to TimeCanada
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Oh, pulleeeease! I’ve never seriously entertained the thought of burning dvds because the current (and probably soon to be different) powermacs were well out of my range–the lowest dvd-r model at $2500 not including a monitor. If this story is correct and the price will be $1800 for a top end imac with dvd-r capability including a flat screen monitor, then hell, count me in. I want to get mine before the peecee folk recover from their whiplash and get furiously to work on breaking away from the typical tower + monitor configuration we’ve all grown blasse about.
Whatever my potential flamers may think, this is an amazing piece of hardware and software. And I am altogether looking forward to whatever other “stuff” will be revealed.
>If this story is correct and the price will be $1800 for a top end imac with dvd-r capability including a flat screen monitor, then hell, count me in.
But, personally, I do not want or care about dvd burning. What I want, is an affordable iMac that is actually “a bit” modern in hardware measures (G4 600 Mhz, RadeonVE 32 MB, 256+ MB RAM for example) and can run MacOSX a bit faster than its predessesors G3 iMacs could. That’s all I ask. Why is it SO hard for Apple to create a machine for people like me?
My post above is not a flame. I WANT to buy Apple hardware and run MacOSX for some time now (my husband is tired of my blah-blah to buy one). But we just can’t afford these new prices. I almost had him sold that if the new iMacs were G4s and around or less $1000 we would buy one. But now…
I am not saying that the new iMac is not good, all I say is that it is expensive for what I really want to do with it.
15″?? Ugh, skip it. Out of all of the reasons I avoided recommending the iMac to anyone, the small screen topped the list. OSX requires a TON of screen real estate and 15″ just doesn’t cut it. Sure it’s cool to have a small footprint but who the heck cares when it looks like that and has a screen you can’t upgrade? Am I missing something?
I certainly hope there’s something to talk about other than this design and iPhoto tomorrow. Neither interest me, neither bring me any closer to the platform.
Regarding the 15″ screen.
Depending on the quality of the LCD, you can have 1600×1200 on a 15″ screens. In fact, IBM and DELL already sell notebooks with 15.1″ at 1600×1200! So, it all depends in the quality and sharpness of the LCD, not on the size (size is much more important for CRTs, less important for LCDs). Judging from the picture with the iMac on TimeCanada, I would say that the resolution is AT LEAST 1280×1024, not 1024×768, which is a very good resolution for today’s standards.
So, I don’t have a problem with their hardware. I do have a problem with their prices.
(nope, PowerMacs are not a solution for me, I need a more modern machine than the previous G3 iMacs, for $1000)
I thought i’d be the first poster… eheh. Hrmm, its not quite as cool as the tablet the guy had envisioned, but it surely does turn my crank. Its sleek, something you could put in a living room and make it blend in. IT with OSX…yum, i just hope the price is right, cause it think with Apple behind it we are garanteed that the hardware is right.
And BTW, LMAO@timecanada
I actually agree with you about having to pay a premium for hardware in general. It can be frustrating when what was once top-of-the-line when you bought it, get pushed out of the spotlight a mere 4-6 months later. Upon second look, however, I imagine that this new imac with a g4 processor will probably be quicker at running osX than its predecessors. I’m running osX on a g3 myself and although 10.1 made it more bearable–I think of a poky giant when running osX–I’d no doubt see more improvement with a g4. The g4 in the imac was a bit of a surprise for me as I figured the new iteration to bear one of the faster 1GHz g3s by IBM.
But with software for video making, dvd creation, dvd burning, cd burning, and photo manipulation among others on top of my preferred os of choice, I’m already making space (seems not much will be needed) “on the desk.”
Yep, i agree with eugenia :
Apple still play hype for nothing. I would love to buy a mac one day and code some games for it
but i think i’ll have to wait many years before that to happen…. Apple act like if they have royal blood and sell us hardware at high price 
Are they nuts ??
They look nice and slick but the screen is bit small. A 17″ or 19″ panel would be much nicer. I am also not crazy about OS X.
I am not willing to pay $1300-$1900 for an IA. I would pay more like $500-$600.
I can buy a faster and portable IBM ThinkPad T21 or T22 with a slightly bigger flatscreen and 802.11B wireless networking for about the same price range.
It’s a nice looking device but I think the Jury is still out on it’s fate.
ciao
yc
Or, at least, an iMac isn’t the same as an IA in the way most of the people pushing IAs, including Be and the late lamented “lefman,” seem to think of them. Back in my days of arguing with lefman, we went ’round on this point over and over, but my basic stance remains unchanged: the internet is a “killer app,” but devices whose only purpose is internet connectivity aren’t going to succeed, no matter how cool they may be.
As for the size of the new iMac’s screen… eh. OS X should be acceptable on a 1024×768 display. You might need to shrink the dock a little, but unless you’re in kindergarten, you want to do that anyway.
So if the iMac is using the G4’s, will the powermacs be using the G5’s?
I think so…
– Mark
Hey Apple, nice desklamp …. er, computer .. LMAO! How pathetic
a 15″ screen at 1600×1200 would be more than adequate for running OS X. Hell, a 15″ screen at 1280×1024 would be adequate. 17″ would be a max. I don’t see how you could sell a computer for $1200 and have an LCD screen bigger than 17″. I don’t know why they didn’t just stuff the iMac hardware into a 19″ monitor case. Could have kept the cost really low.
And btw, those systems we see advertized by Compaq and Dell at $900 on TV have 15″ not 17″ monitors.
I can agree with you on this one, I love my Mac (or Macs… I own 3 and a BeBox)… what in the helk are they thinking?! I guess it will just have to grow on ya, or will it be like the ‘G4-Cube’ just hype and no sale. At least the G4-Cube looked really cool, and it would be nice to see something similar in the future like that. Well I will be tuning into the Macworld Expo webcast on Quicktime TV, so we’ll get to see what else they might have mucked up.
I thought those Tablet PCs were funny looking, this one takes the cake!!!
Oh yeah… as for those who think the original iMac is just some sort of expensive IA, think again… it has more power than your average PC! Of course when I first saw the iMac, I thought the same thing!!
..
I like the current iMacs but hate this thing. Am I in the majority?
I’ve read that the current Mac DVD creation software is excellent, easy to use and that it Just Works. I’ve also heard that it forces copy protection on EVERYTHING that it burns so that if you crank out copies of Junior’s birthday or your naughty festivities, it will be copy protected and you cannot access the files directly any longer.
Of course I’m sure that Linux or BeOS would allow such a thing, but damn it if I create it I should be able to do whatever I want with it. Especially if I’m paying a premium to get the hardware!
It’s not portable but it has a small footprint. So, although the screen is tiny by my standards, I wouldn’t mind using it as an internet appliance for quickly browsing the internet. It could also be used for email and basic word processing, playing music etc…
I would not use it for software development or extensive internet research.
I would much rather buy an IBM ThinkPad T20, T21, T22 or T23 for about the same price.
ciao
yc
This is the ugliest looking computer I have ever laid eyes upon. Well, besides that one korean-designed green egg-shaped minitower case.
It smacks of redesign of the existing platform to solely favor aesthetics vs offering new value i.e. a BIGGER SCREEN.
How many repairs will happen for clueless customers breaking its chicken neck?
I, for one, think the new iMac is quite cool. While I won’t be buying one for myself (I’m still holding out for a G5 mac), I think it shows real creativity in design, and the specs seem more than adequate for the typical Mac user. I’m glad that Apple puts out novel designs like this, otherwise the legions of PC clone makers would have no fresh ideas to steal, and we’d be stuck with grey beige boxes for the rest of our lives.