Multi-touch iMacs prepped in Cupertino?

Convertible all-in-ones rumored

By Rik Myslewski in San Francisco, 1st October 2010

Apple is reportedly sampling touch-panel displays for use in its iMac line of all-in-one desktops, in an expansion of the Jobsian desire to create a touchy-feely computing world.

This report comes by way of the Taiwanese market-watchers at DigiTimes, whose army of sources have touched off many a rumor flurry over the years. Some have proven to be accurate, some have not — so The Reg recommends taking this latest one with customary caution.

According to DigiTimes, the Taiwanese touch-panel and solar-panel manufacturer Sintek has sent samples of projected capacitive touch panels to Apple specifically for Cupertinian engineers to test them for use in touch-screen iMacs.

Projected capacitive touch panels, by the way, are used in Apple's iPhone, iPad, iPod touch, and other multi-touch devices, and are known for their premium optical quality, long life, and their ability to be integrated into thin, sturdy displays.

As DigiTimes notes, however, the production of large-size projected capacitive touch panels is limited — a probable reason for Apple's desire to develop a lock-in relationship with Sintek, if today's rumor is accurate.

Multi-touch iMacs have been rumored for some time. This January, for example, The Reg reported that the Chinese-language Commercial Times had written of a 22-inch touch-sensitive iMac to be released this year — not to replace Apple's current all-in-one desktop line, but to supplement it.

At the time, we thought the idea of pointing at an upright desktop display was a bit on the outlandish side — and so we were intrigued when a patent surfaced in late August that described an iMac-like desktop with an ingenious stand that allowed the display to both scoot forward and tilt to a nearly flat orientation.

Such a convertible stand might make a large-display multi-touch desktop computer quite workable, indeed. And just maybe it's being tested at this very moment in some secret vault at One Infinite Loop, with a Sintek projected capacitive touch-panel display.

Unfortunately, it's highly unlikely that some unfortunate Apple engineer will lose a multi-touch iMac prototype in a Silicon Valley watering hole. ®

Regcast training : Hyper-V 3.0, VM high availability and disaster recovery

COMMENTS

House Rules Send Corrections

All Reader Comments (26)

Highly Rated

Posted Sunday 3rd October 2010 01:44 GMT

Richard 81

Awww

Did your mummy not hug you enough?

It would explain the anger.

Posted Friday 1st October 2010 18:53 GMT

Oli 1

Not a rumour

I've used one, at a preview evening for the iPad a while back in London.

Not a Mac fan tho, so meh

Posted Monday 4th October 2010 15:12 GMT

Michael C

thanks troll

First off, I'm no fanboi, i run Win 7 and several different Linux OS on a custom PC at home...

That said, on a MBP, dual booting or using parallels to concurrently boot, the majority of Mac Specific hardware functions, including gestures and that lovely touch pad, are present when running Windows on mac hardware. Apple added the requisite drivers in boot camp thanks.

HDMI? no, Display Port thanks. It's a PC, not a TV. An adapter is $6 to convert to HDMI if you actually need to hook up to a TV, but DisplayPort supports higher color and resolutions and is superior to HDMI in most every comparison. We care about more than 1080p thanks. Having both DP and HDMI is redundant. Also, DP is both an input and output, without requiring separate connections, and I can hook a BR player right up to an iMac (directly). Note on the HTPCs apple makes, HDMI is standard, on computers DP is standard. This is the industry direction. HDMI is only for TVs and fully compatible with DP output. Most video cards sold have DP ports and VGA/DVI, very few continue to have HDMI. (they ship with an adapter)

As for BR, short of on my TV, I really don't want it. In fact, currently I don't have one at all and see no reason to get one anytime soon. Physical media is not worth it in most cases if digital copies are available. It's not worth exporting BR media to files for playback when i can get those files online anytime i want. Why waste the expense in hardware and complexity? BR media is virtually useless for backups, ridiculously expensive and not worth making copies (its cheaper to buy the media legally), and I can get digital versions of most movies online in HD (again legally) for less than I pay for the BR disk. Explain why exactly I need a player I have no use for that i can do the same thing with cheaper in other ways? Adding BR to a PC is a nightmare of complexity.

Look at how many Dells and HPs come with them, but CAN'T DECODE OR PLAY HDCP CONTENT! Its a media player for encoded formats only, pretty much useless since in 2011 most video will start coming out with the HDCP flag turned on... Some few PCs truly support BR media, but to do it, HDCP has to be preserved at every step, which means the player, SATA controller, chip-set, video card ,and TV/monitor ALL have to support it. That means name brand chipsets, dedicated GPUs, and certified HDCP pathways. 90% of the machines sold with BR players do NOT meet this guideline. Apple refuses to join that party, and doing it right is not only expensive in design, its expensive in royalties, and for the estimated 5% who will use it, all of who could get by doing the same thing without it.