[Brave Ulysses]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 Actually, 709 nailed it. It was Eyegonomic. Not sure where I got the "G" from...but it's been 12+ years. And my Googling tells me they were Danish, so I was kinda in that general region. From Engadget in 2004. Yeah, like I said... I remember those Formac ones as well, but the other one was the one ones I was talking about. I'd visit Eyegonomic's website about twice a week, wishing Apple's displays looked so cool. The Eyegonomic ones caught my eye because they weren't clear acrylic like Apple's (and Formac's) were. Those Formac ones were just variations on the pre-aluminum Cinema Displays, and still didn't go with the aluminum PowerBook G4 and G5 towers (all released throughout 2003; Apple released their redesigned aluminum Cinema Display a full year later, in June 2004). Anyway, I've derailed the crap out of this thread long enough. Carry on...

Figured you had gotten the G from the Gallery model name.

Surprised you were referring to the eyegonomic displays. I always thought those were incredibly ugly and now seeing them again they look even worse than I remember

[psmith2.0]

Those ones in the Engadget article look boxy and TV-ish. But the ones in the PDF 709 linked to were more what I was remembering. They had arms or stands that were kinda cool. I thought it was neat that someone was doing iMac G4-type mobility/positioning to standalone displays (because Apple themselves never did, even after touting all the coolness and benefits of the iMac G4's "display-on-a-movable-arm" design).

I just remember thinking it was odd that Apple - so big on design and things "looking right" - kept that acrylic Cinema Display around for another whole year. I thought they would've introduced a new aluminum-clad display alongside the new G5 tower in June 2003. So I think Eyegonomic enjoyed about one year of "we're filling a space!" relevance, until Apple finally re-did their displays.

They're not around anymore, so...

Then again, so are about 80 gazillion other 90's-mid-2000's outfits that enjoyed a brief time in the sun upon Jobs' return to Apple and the dawn (and early years) of the iEra. Remember walking into CompUSA in 2000-2001 and you couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting hundreds of fruit-colored, translucent accessories/peripherals? I sure do!

[Capella]

I miss all of those fruit-colored translucent accessories and colors... I really wish that the iPhone 5C instead of being the candy-shell plastic was instead the 5 classic iMac translucent plastic backing so we could see into it. I'm just saying it would have looked awesome.

[psmith2.0]

It would've. My silly ass would've surely bought a tangerine one (well, provided that the faceplate was white/ice and not the clashing, heavy-looking black they paired with those bright colors on the 5c).

Ignore my corner slop, but you get the idea. More light, "fun" and clean-looking, IMO. The black would've been okay on more muted, earthy colors, but not on those Fisher-Price hues they went with on the 5c.

[kscherer]

Oh, goody. Scates is back to mocking up iThings.

Do it!

[psmith2.0]

That's from 2013. I'm out of that racket... I just remembered that I did that and it was still in my Dropbox public folder, so I re-linked it.

[kscherer]

[Frank777]

So now there's a rumour of a new 5K standalone display, but absolutely no rumours of a new Mac Pro?

Apple released the Mac Pro in 2013 without a matching screen, and now they're going to release a screen without a new Mac Pro?

They're messing with us on purpose, right?

[Eugene]

I'm a broken record at this point. The desktop CPU market is basically dead. I traditionally upgrade my hardware every 2-3years. It's been almost 6 years since my last update. The biggest upgrade for the Mac Pro would be new GPUs.

If I upgrade my desktop hardware it will be entirely for I/O and not CPU power.

[kscherer]

I don't think there is a desktop computer in Apple's labs that they could sell to millennials. The long-term desktop computer market is waning—rapidly. As the baby-boomers and gen X crowd age, the demand for desktops will age with them.

Smartphones and ultra portables are the future, and Apple knows that. While they still have some desktop cards up their sleeve, their focus is on portable computing. My guess is that the next wave of laptops will be just as fast—if not faster—than the next wave of desktops.

While I cannot prove it, I will bet all my marbles that the focus in Apple's labs is on the advancement of Ax processors as they relate to laptop computers. That is where the revolution will take place. Maybe not this year, maybe not even next, but it is coming.

[Dr. Bobsky]

I run two desktop environments, a laptop (if it hadn't died and the mac replacements looking long in the tooth), a tablet, and at some point a smartphone, maybe.

The desktops are for work or play. The laptop for work. The tablet for play. The phone for well phoney things. This is not substantially different than the set up of the millennials that I work with, though many of them seem substantially interested in retro-game playing mini-computers like arduinos that they themselves can build. Move away from gaming rigs or work prescribed computers (or hobbiest devices like the arduino), and these folks would have a tablet, a proper working laptop, and a smartphone. They are not their parents (desktops all the way), but they are not so different than the younger Gen Xers...

[kieran]

I've got a iMac as a media server, a MacBook paired with a Dell display for work, and iPad Pro & iPhone 6S+. I think I cover nearly all gamuts of what Apple sells, except for the Mac Pro.

I'd love for there to be a new external display from Apple. This Dell is fine, but it's not retina and you can clearly tell when sitting next to the MacBook.

The iMac will stick around as long as it continues to function, but I'll probably update the MacBook in another year or two, even if it's still working.

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by kscherer While I cannot prove it, I will bet all my marbles that the focus in Apple's labs is on the advancement of Ax processors as they relate to laptop computers. That is where the revolution will take place. Maybe not this year, maybe not even next, but it is coming.

I think the MacBook gets one more Intel update in early 2017, and then an A-series model comes out in 2018. If the spring update doesn't come, the A-series version might come out late 2017.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by kscherer I don't think there is a desktop computer in Apple's labs that they could sell to millennials. The long-term desktop computer market is waning—rapidly. As the baby-boomers and gen X crowd age, the demand for desktops will age with them.

I find your viewpoint rather amusing, as a millennial, albeit from the earlier part of that generation. As things stand in 2016 I cannot think of a single reason to own a notebook computer, not even one. For mobile use a iPhone or iPad is far more useful and portable, and for anything else my iMac does the heavy lifting at home.

[kscherer]

Originally Posted by PB PM I find your viewpoint rather amusing, as a millennial …

After I read this, I went to the old Googles and looked up "millennial". Turns out, my math is wrong. I thought millennials were those born after the turn of the century.

Apparently, it's gen Z (which means we're out of "gens" ) I was thinking of. People roughly 20 years old or younger.

That said, my statement might sound a bit strong, but I make it in regards to my personal experience selling Macs. I cannot remember the last time a sub-20 buyer bought a desktop in our shop. It's like selling minivans to people without kids. In other words, good luck with that.

Keep in mind that what I said is a generalization. Generally speaking, desktops are unattractive to the younger generations, who then make their own recommendations to their parents, who then make those recommendations to their parents. I have a steady stream of 70-somethings buying laptops on the recommendation of their children/grandchildren. This for people whose computer never leaves the desk.

Either way, better than 75% of computers we sell are laptops, and better than 50% of those go to desks, never to be moved. Desktops should represent 75% of all computer sales, but don't because the American consumer is moved more by trends than needs.

[Frank777]

Speaking of desktops, the latest modular PC has a stackable Bang & Olufsen speaker.

Never seen one of those for the Mini...

[kscherer]

That's actually very clever. Somebody is thinking.

I think I could get on board with the idea of a stackable Mac solution in the Mac Mini's packaging. All components sharing the same footprint, with a little port that mates to the ports of the thing either above or below it (or both). CD drive, external HDD, speaker, GPU, etc.

From Apple, I suspect the base would be $699, the CD drive $499, the speaker $999, gaming GPU $2499, USB hub $3799, etc.

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by PB PM I find your viewpoint rather amusing, as a millennial, albeit from the earlier part of that generation. As things stand in 2016 I cannot think of a single reason to own a notebook computer, not even one. For mobile use a iPhone or iPad is far more useful and portable, and for anything else my iMac does the heavy lifting at home.

I can't think of a good reason to distinguish something like an iMac and laptop besides screen size. They are both very limited in terms of internal expansion and powerful enough to function as the sole macOS computing device in my life. It has nothing to do with which cultural generation we align ourselves to. Old people aren't clinging to desktop computers. In fact, their needs have always been less driven by raw processing power and I/O...older generations were among the first to ditch desktop PCs altogether.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by Eugene I can't think of a good reason to distinguish something like an iMac and laptop besides screen size. They are both very limited in terms of internal expansion and powerful enough to function as the sole macOS computing device in my life. It has nothing to do with which cultural generation we align ourselves to. Old people aren't clinging to desktop computers. In fact, their needs have always been less driven by raw processing power and I/O...older generations were among the first to ditch desktop PCs altogether.

For one thing the iMac uses desktop CPU's (at least some of the older ones anyway), rather than the lower power notebook chipsets (GPU aside), which does have advantages. Let's put it this way, just about everyone I know still has a modern desktop computer (Windows PC or a Mac less than 8 years old), regardless of the generation they are from. Bucking the trend? I doubt it. Don't mix a lack of sales of new units for a lack of use, which may simply come down to the fact that the desktop that most people have today is good enough for what they do on them. Since the first generation Core i5-i7 there haven't been many compelling reasons to upgrade unless you push your machine to the limit on a daily basis for work/gaming.

[Eugene]

I had plenty of reason to upgrade from the first Core i-Series processors. Nehalem was a bit of a dog. You are probably thinking of Sandy Bridge, the second microarchitecture to carry the i-Series name.

The fastest Skylake desktop processor TurboBoosts up to 4.2 GHz. The fastest mobile processor TurboBoosts up to 3.7 GHz. I don't know about you, but considering I haven't updated in nearly 6 years, CPU clock speeds are not that important to me anymore. On the other hand the Iris Pro graphics in the mobile CPUs and lower power consumption have more of an impact.

These CPU cores are physically identical, so to me there is pretty much no functional difference as long as the laptop is plugged in and running at its full TDP.

[PB PM]

Yes, I was thinking of Sandy Bridge, which happens to be in my 2011 iMac. I've yet to run into anything that really slows down the 2.7Ghz 2500S Core i5 in my machine, even rendering and encoding video is good enough for my use. If I was really feeling adventurous I could swap in a Core i7 2600 (since this generation of iMac use a standard desktop socket), but I see no need for it. Other than maybe needing a newer GPU and native USB3.1 it's fine.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by PB PM I find your viewpoint rather amusing, as a millennial, albeit from the earlier part of that generation. As things stand in 2016 I cannot think of a single reason to own a notebook computer, not even one. For mobile use a iPhone or iPad is far more useful and portable, and for anything else my iMac does the heavy lifting at home.

I'm pretty sure saying you just use your iMac for heavy lifting disqualifies you from being at all representative of The Modern Millennial. Almost nobody I know has a desktop computer, and the few that do use it exclusively for gaming. Even people who don't plan on ever using their computer when out and about buy a notebook "because it's what's cheap" or "just in case" or whatever.

If Apple wants to keep the iMac name relevant, they should have called the new MacBook that.

[GSpotter]

Originally Posted by kscherer Desktops should represent 75% of all computer sales, but don't because the American consumer is moved more by trends than needs.

Personally, I would love to buy a desktop from Apple, if they would build an appealing one. I dislike iMacs (I prefer of having to match a screen and a computer myself. I have my PC notebook for work also connected to the screen when I'm working from home, I hate Apples trend for un(self-)serviceable machines, esp. where there is no need. Why does a desktop have to be so thin? If coolness hinders useability, I'm out).

My preffered solution would be something like a new interpretation of the PowerBook Duo with its Dock. A portable notebook combined with the ports and e.g. a graphics card for stationary use...

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by Robo If Apple wants to keep the iMac name relevant, they should have called the new MacBook that.

The way Apple treats Mac's I doubt it will matter in a few years. The only thing that could save the Mac platform from stagnation and death is if the iPhone/iPad fell into a hole and Mac's were all that people were buying.

Originally Posted by GSpotter Personally, I would love to buy a desktop from Apple, if they would build an appealing one.

Yup, that statement alone just about covers it, which is why I'm still using a 2011 iMac and 2012 Mini. When I do feel like upgrading it will be likely be a custom Linux or Windows PC for getting the machine I want, not what Apple thinks I should want. And no a iMac or Mac Pro is not what I really want, and as noted I see absolutely no need for a notebook computer in 2016 and beyond. I had several Apple notebooks while I was in college, and after that the silly underpowered things, which were always hot with fans blasting for the simplest tasks, just sat on my desk and never left. After that I got a much more powerful desktop for less than a notebook with the same CPU/GPU.

[Frank777]

Thunderbolt 3 will likely bring the ability to upgrade your GPU. I have my doubts that Apple will stomach the customer complaints that will envelope the internet if they restrict the main selling point of their new preferred interface. That alone changes the product matrix, and increases the general appeal of the iMac.

Too bad we lost RAM and HD upgrades. Being able to upgrade all three would have been cool (although at that point, the Mac Pro has a serious problem.)

[kscherer]

The Mac Pro has a serious problem no matter how you stack it. A very powerful computer in a very pretty case, at a very high price, that is outclassed (for most pro needs) by a 5k iMac that costs less money.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by kscherer The Mac Pro has a serious problem no matter how you stack it. A very powerful computer in a very pretty case, at a very high price, that is outclassed (for most pro needs) by a 5k iMac that costs less money.

And comes with a really nice monitor... Oh, I already have a monitor! So why am I paying for another one?

Edit: For such an environmentally-aware company, I'm surprised that Apple seems to think it best that people throw away perfectly good monitors just because the computer attached to them has gotten old.