or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Updated iMac line expected to boost Apple's share of PC market
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Updated iMac line expected to boost Apple's share of PC market

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 
Though desktop computers play a smaller role than notebook sales, the newly updated all-in-one iMac is expected to help push Mac sales even higher and give Apple a greater share of the PC market.

Following last year's iMac refresh, Apple saw 23.7 percent sequential growth. Analyst Maynard Um with UBS expects to see a similar bump in sales this year from the newly updated iMac line.

"Apple continues to provide more value," he said, noting that the four basic iMac configurations held their same prices with improved internal hardware, "and we expect it to continue to gain share in the PC market."

As noted last week by AppleInsider, Tuesday's iMac update comes at a crucial time for the all-in-one desktop. Desktop Macs have fallen from more than 50 percent of the company's Mac shipments in 2006 to just 26 percent of total units in the second fiscal quarter of 2011.

But Mac desktop sales have also seen a significant boost when Apple issues an update for its flagship product in that category, the iMac. In Apple's first fiscal quarter of 2010, when the iMac hardware was completely redesigned with an edge-to-edge glass display, desktop sales increased by 70 percent year over year. For comparison, portable sales were up just 18 percent year over year.

Um noted that the 2011 iMac refresh comes three months before the hardware arrived in 2010. He said the earlier arrival could provide upside to his third-quarter estimate of 1.15 million units sold.



Unveiled on Tuesday, the new quad-core iMacs include the new Thunderbolt high-speed input/output port. They are also powered by Intel's latest-generation Sandy Bridge processors, and have a new high-definition FaceTime camera for video chat.

The new iMac starts at $1,199 and is up to 70 percent faster, with graphics performance up to three times that of the previous generation. It retains the same all-in-one design of its predecessor.

With a strong lineup of products, Apple has continued to gain market share in the heavily competitive PC industry. Just last week, research firm Canalys
post #2 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4miler View Post

No matte antiglare screens on the new iMacs. If you need matte screens, there's something you can do - add your voice to 1,300+ petitions at http://macmatte.wordpress.com Unlike personal emails to Apple - which Apple just ignore, asserting everyone loves glossy screens - make it count by adding to the online petition where your voice will remain visible on the net until Apple listens. Remember, adding your comment to transient news articles on the net is fine, but those articles go out of date in a few weeks, and also there is no long-term accumulation and consolidation of numbers, like there is at a petition site.

If you don't like a gloss screen then don't buy the device. Don't post the exact same message on every single mac forum. Or - learn to position your monitor correctly to eradicate any reflection, replace the glass or get a coating for it. The on-line petition ignores any posts in favour of the gloss screen - that is hardly a free and fair debate.

Graphics professionals used glossy CRT screens for many years before the dreaded matte imac of doom was released - any sunlight hits the screen of one of these matte displays and you can't see a thing on them.
post #3 of 22
Newer product to sell better than older version of same product. News at 5.


Seriously, complete non-news. Where do I get one of these analyst jobs?
post #4 of 22
Next iMac will need 8GB Ram as standard, we have gone past 4GB Ram, especially for 1K+ price range computers.
post #5 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

The on-line petition ignores any posts in favour of the gloss screen - that is hardly a free and fair debate.

That's retarded. The glare (gloss) screen already exists as the default (only) option. Why would a petition site need to support an extant form?

Anyone who defends less choice as "good" is drunk on kool-aid.
post #6 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

If you don't like a gloss screen then don't buy the device. Don't post the exact same message on every single mac forum. Or - learn to position your monitor correctly to eradicate any reflection, replace the glass or get a coating for it. The on-line petition ignores any posts in favour of the gloss screen - that is hardly a free and fair debate.

Graphics professionals used glossy CRT screens for many years before the dreaded matte imac of doom was released - any sunlight hits the screen of one of these matte displays and you can't see a thing on them.

I for one don't live in a cave. I had to change the desktop picture that I wanted to use because it was too dark, and all I saw was myself in it. Watching movies is very hard because there are always dark scenes.

The funny thing is, I've compared the MacBook Pros in the Apple store side by side, and I see no better colors with the glossy compared to the non-glossy.
post #7 of 22
Wow. Nice upgrade, now do i want the little one, or the BIG one?
post #8 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

If you don't like a gloss screen then don't buy the device. Don't post the exact same message on every single mac forum. Or - learn to position your monitor correctly to eradicate any reflection, replace the glass or get a coating for it. The on-line petition ignores any posts in favour of the gloss screen - that is hardly a free and fair debate.

Graphics professionals used glossy CRT screens for many years before the dreaded matte imac of doom was released - any sunlight hits the screen of one of these matte displays and you can't see a thing on them.

What kind of silly argument is this?

1.You could not like the device.... and not the gloss!
2.Positioning a glossy monitor correctly.... as you say... does not eradicate reflections. That is a promotional argument that has nothing to do with reality in different lighting conditions.
3. The online petition is to show apple some professionals want matte screens. Why would anyone want trolls like you saying we dont' know how to position are screens.
4.It's not a debate you silly person. It's a PETITION
5.Graphics professional all stopped using glossy CRT screens the minute matte screens came out.
6.Graphics professionals dont sit in sunlight or with their backs to a window for the sun to hit their screens.

The reason everything is glossy, is an industry building these less costly screens has convinced the public that these are better because your images look like photographs.
post #9 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by See Flat View Post

What kind of silly argument is this?

1.You could not like the device.... and not the gloss!
2.Positioning a glossy monitor correctly.... as you say... does not eradicate reflections. That is a promotional argument that has nothing to do with reality in different lighting conditions.
3. The online petition is to show apple some professionals want matte screens. Why would anyone want trolls like you saying we dont' know how to position are screens.
4.It's not a debate you silly person. It's a PETITION
5.Graphics professional all stopped using glossy CRT screens the minute matte screens came out.
6.Graphics professionals dont sit in sunlight or with their backs to a window for the sun to hit their screens.

The reason everything is glossy, is an industry building these less costly screens has convinced the public that these are better because your images look like photographs.

The post was deleted. Let's nip this argument in the bud, shall we?

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #10 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

Graphics professionals used glossy CRT screens for many years

CRT's have a slight curve to the glass. Makes a difference on how bad reflections are. Just like you can always tell fake glasses on shows and movies from the reflection off the flat glass. Real glasses have curved glass. Much less reflection.

But I'm fine with the iMac having glossy screens. Because I don't like all in ones and won't buy one. What I want is a desktop between the mini and the Pro where I can use the monitor I already have.
post #11 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vandelay Industries View Post

That's retarded. The glare (gloss) screen already exists as the default (only) option. Why would a petition site need to support an extant form?

Anyone who defends less choice as "good" is drunk on kool-aid.

This is coming from someone with an early 2008 MBP with a matte screen. They simply aren't what they are cracked up to be and in fact offer little advantage in the real world while drastically reducing screen quality.

As to the sites behavior I don't know what they do but if the other post is true, that is they delete all posts with an opposing view, then the site has zero credibility. It would be like a communist state that runs election with only one candidate for each office. There is simply no way that the view of the populace is represented in such a vote.

In any event this whine about matte screens is coming from a bunch of propeller heads if you ask me. If there was any real demand at all for matte screens Apple would offer them. A hand full of children on a web site doesn't indicate demand at all. Even a web site that collects 1200 signatures indicates nothing as it isn't even a statistically sound number when seen against overall sales.
post #12 of 22
You are representing your self as a professional so you should grasp the economic side of the issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by See Flat View Post

What kind of silly argument is this?

1.You could not like the device.... and not the gloss!
2.Positioning a glossy monitor correctly.... as you say... does not eradicate reflections. That is a promotional argument that has nothing to do with reality in different lighting conditions.

OK what is different with a matte screen. You still have to position taking into account ambient light.
Quote:
3. The online petition is to show apple some professionals want matte screens. Why would anyone want trolls like you saying we dont' know how to position are screens.

There is no evidence that the poll represents only professionals. Besides it is pretty obvious you don't know how to work with your tools.
Quote:
4.It's not a debate you silly person. It's a PETITION

Like all petitions it is pretty easy to manipulate to the creaters needs. It is one of the evil things about petitions in general, you really never know how accurately they reflect the opinions of the populace as a whole. Believe me this is something that has taken me a long time to realize but petitions can be very ugly things if used in the wrong way.
Quote:
5.Graphics professional all stopped using glossy CRT screens the minute matte screens came out.

This is not true at all. Many have actually switched to glossy screens to get the results they need. A professional does not let the characteristics of his tools get into the way of selecting the best one for the job.
Quote:
6.Graphics professionals dont sit in sunlight or with their backs to a window for the sun to hit their screens.

The reason everything is glossy, is an industry building these less costly screens has convinced the public that these are better because your images look like photographs.

Not true entirely. Glossy screens are also sharper and less muddied. Frankly the hard glass is far easier to keep clean too.

Still I come back to the thought I started with, Apple would need for any such offering to be profitable. That isn't going to happen with 1200 customers. You see evil in Apples line up where the rest of us really just wish you would shut up and get over your sense of entitlement.
post #13 of 22
The whole mate screen thing is destroying any other conversation we could be having on these upgrades. Which are pretty amazing,
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #14 of 22
These new iMacs are certainly nice and if Apple's share price gets to around $400, maybe I'll pick up one of the 27" models. It's funny though, on the comments of a few of the sites I've visited telling about the new iMacs, there are users that claim they can build a much more powerful Windows PC for about one-third the price of the high-end iMacs. They still say that Apple is using underpowered graphics chips (due to the allin-one design) and that Apple isn't offering Intel's high-end Core i7 processor. I'm sure very few consumers will be building their own PCs. I know my older 2009 iMac is rock-solid running 24/7/365 for a couple of years so I definitely think it's worth the extra cost to be rid of hardware headaches. I only know that these new iMacs approach MacPro level and that's pretty darn powerful for a consumer desktop computer.
post #15 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

These new iMacs are certainly nice and if Apple's share price gets to around $400, maybe I'll pick up one of the 27" models. It's funny though, on the comments of a few of the sites I've visited telling about the new iMacs, there are users that claim they can build a much more powerful Windows PC for about one-third the price of the high-end iMacs. They still say that Apple is using underpowered graphics chips (due to the allin-one design) and that Apple isn't offering Intel's high-end Core i7 processor. I'm sure very few consumers will be building their own PCs. I know my older 2009 iMac is rock-solid running 24/7/365 for a couple of years so I definitely think it's worth the extra cost to be rid of hardware headaches. I only know that these new iMacs approach MacPro level and that's pretty darn powerful for a consumer desktop computer.

I always reply to these lunatics with stories about how I can build a much better cooker or stove than Rangemaster, and my latest pet project is building both a car, and a toaster. Won't catch me spending too much. When they call me nuts, I call them nuts.

The top level is always going to be more expensive, of course. Thats how Apple maintains it's margins. The charge is for the incremental upgrades is subsidising the lower entry level machines and maintaining margins.

I see the high end iMac as a pro machine these days - what else do they have?
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #16 of 22
matte screens are so sucky
finger prints never get clean
and glossy really shines

high end users buy one of kind CRT any way

so every topic gets this troll work now .

glass reflects as in most macs and most tv's

glass is clean and green

glossy looks so good

over and out


9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #17 of 22
Um, dare I ask? Who is this Um guy anyway? And why does he lobby against glossy screens?

I really want my car's windshield to be matte but nobody pays attention to my desire, so I'll go whine and mope about and start a lame petition - kee-rist, if Apple made its decisions based on petitions we'd still be using the 6502 Apple ][ boxes.

I want a VGA port on my next Mac Mini, so I'll start a petition and get a few hundred unknowns down at the library to log in and sign it.

bottom line: If you don't like glossy, nobody's twisting your arm to buy it. Go pout somewhere else.
post #18 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo
These new iMacs are certainly nice and if Apple's share price gets to around $400, maybe I'll pick up one of the 27" models. It's funny though, on the comments of a few of the sites I've visited telling about the new iMacs, there are users that claim they can build a much more powerful Windows PC for about one-third the price of the high-end iMacs. They still say that Apple is using underpowered graphics chips (due to the allin-one design) and that Apple isn't offering Intel's high-end Core i7 processor. I'm sure very few consumers will be building their own PCs. I know my older 2009 iMac is rock-solid running 24/7/365 for a couple of years so I definitely think it's worth the extra cost to be rid of hardware headaches. I only know that these new iMacs approach MacPro level and that's pretty darn powerful for a consumer desktop computer.

If you don't like a gloss screen then don't buy the device. Don't post the exact same message on every single mac forum. Or - learn to position your monitor correctly to eradicate any reflection, replace the glass or get a coating for it. The on-line petition ignores any posts in favour of the gloss screen - that is hardly a free and fair debate.

Graphics professionals used glossy CRT screens for many years before the dreaded matte imac of doom was released - any sunlight hits the screen of one of these matte displays and you can't see a thing on them.

I absolutely agree with nkhm.... Stop trying to convince everyone YOU are right on matte screens. It's your opinion but it has been totally rejected by the overwhelming majority on Mac users. I DON'T WANT MATTE SCREENS. I want the glossy screen. They are superior. Apple doesn't listen to you guys because your numbers are miniscule to those of us that love it.
post #19 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by ljocampo View Post

I absolutely agree with nkhm.... Stop trying to convince everyone YOU are right on matte screens.

yet...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ljocampo View Post

I want the glossy screen. They are superior.




Quote:
Originally Posted by ljocampo View Post

Apple doesn't listen to you guys because your numbers are miniscule to those of us that love it.

Why do MBPs have a matte option but iMacs don't?

Why aren't you 'rallying' against the small minority of users who ruin the look of MBPs with inferior matte screens?

This is just typical form over function from Apple (think magic mouse for another example), and a massive ego which won't accept criticism (think S. Jobs passive aggressive keynote response to peoples' just concern over reception issues).
post #20 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vandelay Industries View Post

yet...

Why do MBPs have a matte option but iMacs don't?

Why aren't you 'rallying' against the small minority of users who ruin the look of MBPs with inferior matte screens?

This is just typical form over function from Apple (think magic mouse for another example), and a massive ego which won't accept criticism (think S. Jobs passive aggressive keynote response to peoples' just concern over reception issues).

As for those who want a Matte screen, becoming the majority... Not yet and my guess never. That said, I'm all for choice. If Apple can offer it, without hurting the majority, then they should. I think if people who spent this much energy petitioning for matte screen, instead trimmed and installed a simple anti-glare film on the iMac's glass, they'd have it all ready. It took me all of 3 minutes to install a protective film on my iPhone's glass and you can hardly tell it's there.

I'm not rallying for anything. I wasn't the one who started a petition. I don't think how a computer looks to those who want it matte are wrong at all. I was glad when Apple reversed itself and offered it. I don't want it though.

I see nothing wrong with the magic mouse. There are plenty of people who love how it functions. I'm not one of them. I prefer my logitech wireless USB nano. Sure SJ has an ego. We all do. He has been right more than wrong though. I believe the iPhone 4's reception issue is more FUD than reality. I have one. It works fine.

There wasn't any need to go defensive. All opinions are right for those who give them. I wasn't arguing yours. Just stating mine.
post #21 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec View Post

Next iMac will need 8GB Ram as standard, we have gone past 4GB Ram, especially for 1K+ price range computers.

Probably, but Apple has invented the new RAM: SSD. The prices are still very high and on top of that people often complain that there are third-party SSD's that perform much better. I am interested in iMacs and I will need one this year, but I am not going to pay 750 euros to have the option 2TB HD + 256 GB SSD. Yes, this is 1115 USD, almost the cost of a new entry-level iMac. And where this 750 euros comes from? The 2 TB option alone is 150 euros and the 256 GB SSD alone is 500 euros. Taking both should cost at most as much as the sum if not less; but no way more.

Practically, this means for me that I will postpone for as long as I can such a purchase and I will certainly end up not shelling out the money for such options and stay limited to a more basic configuration. And of course I will not upgrade to Lion since there is in my plans a new computer, but given Apple's practices concerning pricing over Europe, it will take much time. This is a fairly general attitude in Europe towards Apple computers. Too bad for them.
post #22 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec View Post

Next iMac will need 8GB Ram as standard, we have gone past 4GB Ram, especially for 1K+ price range computers.

No, not at all. If the OS doesn't need it, there's no reason to include it standard.

And thank you for being one of four posts in this thread that don't deserve to be deleted.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Updated iMac line expected to boost Apple's share of PC market