or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple makes new low-end 1.4GHz iMac official with $1,099 starting price
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple makes new low-end 1.4GHz iMac official with $1,099 starting price - Page 2

post #41 of 166

Apple is getting boring now, they only release stuff at the end of the year.

post #42 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by satchmo View Post

Just curious regarding the $999 iMac offering from MacMall in the story. It has a 640M graphics chip...I don't see this an option on the Apple store.

Does MacMall custom install special chips?

Found this, http://store.apple.com/us/product/FD093LL/A/refurbished-215-inch-imac-27ghz-quad-core-Intel-Core-i5. Apple used the 640M in iMacs released starting in October 2012 so AI is using an older model that's on sale for comparison.

post #43 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Ok you tell me, do you think this is priced right? Because I'm not seeing many people outside of this site who think this is a good deal. I think Apple probably could have hit the $999 price point if they wanted to. But hey for only $200 more you can get a computer with double the performance so maybe this is Apple's way of up selling you. 1smile.gif

 

The correct answer to "priced right" is totally up to the market. You know the expression "vote with your dollars"? That's what that means. In the free market, Apple gets to sell their product at whatever price they think is "right" and the market ultimately answers through sales. Why does my personal opinion about it matter? Why does yours? The market decides what "priced right" means. Apple is betting enough people will buy this, and it's their bet, not yours.

 

I did not make any statement about whether I think they will be successful. I really do not know.

I did not make any statement about whether I think this product is a "good deal." I was merely answering your earlier question about who it was marketed for.

 

I don't think you "struggle" with this at all. You're an armchair expert who thinks "Tim the bean counter" is fleecing the consumer. What if this product does well? What will you do then?

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #44 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by satchmo View Post

Just curious regarding the $999 iMac offering from MacMall in the story. It has a 640M graphics chip...I don't see this an option on the Apple store.



Does MacMall custom install special chips?

 



its a old model, so its a october 2012 model that is superior than what apple is selling right now at $1100 and $1300 price points. Check the Apple refurbs section on apple websites you will see some on sales that have the 650m.

Seriously Intel HD5000 and Iris GPU are absolute garbage compare to nvidia GPU's, even low ends ones like the 640m. This make Apple 2012 and 2013 imacs far superior to late 2013 and 2014 models. If someone is considering buying an imac, I suggest to get refurb models.

G3D benchmarks:
Intel HD 5000 - 604
Intel Iris 5100 - 760
Nvidia 640m - 1021
Intel Iris 5200 pro - 1117
Nvidia 650m - 1297
Nvidia 750m - 1527
Nvidia GTX 775m - 4265 (late 2013 27" imacs)
Nvidia GTX 780m - 4327 (late 2013 27" imacs)
Nvidia GTX 680mx - 4341 (late 2012 27" imacs) <--- my imac, late 2012 and still the best you can get
Edited by herbapou - 6/18/14 at 6:49am
post #45 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

With those specs and that price point who is this geared towards? 1confused.gif

Schools, students, offices.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #46 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

With those specs and that price point who is this geared towards? 1confused.gif

At most people.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #47 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by kfeltenberger View Post

Anybody in business.  Most desktop computers are overpowered for the tasks they tend to run (Office, CS application, and inventory tracking/management) and this would be ideal.  I could probably get something like this approved as a desktop replacement than the more expensive older entry level model because when you add up the numbers I can get more workstations for the same amount of money.

Unless of course you are type A and then nothing is fast enough.

As to office even those apps can get bogged down. Speaking of money, I'm expecting heavy discounts this holiday season, for the most part this machine is over priced. That may be intentional to give them room to run promotions and the like.
post #48 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post
 

Just because someone doesn't agree with what Apple does, doesn't make them a troll. If you want to think that way, I could say well the fanboys have taken over this thread already too with comments like this. It goes both ways dude. 

 

 

Just because an animal swims doesn't make it a fish. This is true. But does that invalidate the statement "The ocean is overrun with fish"?

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #49 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by d4NjvRzf View Post

Any particular reason why Apple prefers 5400 rpm hard drives to the nore common 7200 rpm variety? You can't even get 5400 rpm drives on Newegg these days.

Most likely it is a preference for reliability.
post #50 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

Like
Just like all of their Mac product line...  I don't understand why Apple consumer desktop hardware is so overpriced and under-powered.  Their mobile device hardware is price competitive... I never understood this...

Well you do get slightly better construction, but yeah in the end ripoff machines.
post #51 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post
 

I think the 1.4GHz figure might be a bit misleading - look at the Turbo Boost 2.7GHz. That is way more than most Intel CPUs boost by.

 

Its a dual core CPU. I suspect that it'll be at 1.4 ghz most of the time as its pretty easy to saturate two cores these days.

post #52 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Shame that Tim the bean counter shows up every once in a while. This would have been perfect at $899 or $999.

I have a feeling it will be selling in that price range fairly quickly.
post #53 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

I'm struggling to see how Apple couldn't have achieved a $999 price point.

They could have if they'd dropped the RAM to 4GB and they probably should have. I'm glad they didn't compromise on the IPS display though. I don't get the processor prices unless Intel gave them a huge discount:

http://ark.intel.com/products/75030/Intel-Core-i5-4260U-Processor-3M-Cache-up-to-2_70-GHz
http://ark.intel.com/products/76640/Intel-Core-i5-4570R-Processor-4M-Cache-up-to-3_20-GHz

The dual-core CPU in the base model is priced more than the quad in the next model up. I suppose if they saved $100 on the CPU and $25 on the HDD, that helps them cut the retail price by $200. This is the same CPU in the entry Macbook Air and it uses mobile RAM.

The reason to do this is that the PC market is slowing down so a lower entry point will help boost unit volume. It is an odd update not having the rest of the lineup refreshed but it's better than nothing.
post #54 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post
 

Its a dual core CPU. I suspect that it'll be at 1.4 ghz most of the time as its pretty easy to saturate two cores these days.

That's a good point. I remember when I switched from dual to quad core it was quite a noticeable difference, which I wasn't expecting at the time. Things are more multi-threaded than they were a few years ago.

post #55 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post



They could have if they'd dropped the RAM to 4GB and they probably should have. I'm glad they didn't compromise on the IPS display though. I don't get the processor prices unless Intel gave them a huge discount:



http://ark.intel.com/products/75030/Intel-Core-i5-4260U-Processor-3M-Cache-up-to-2_70-GHz

http://ark.intel.com/products/76640/Intel-Core-i5-4570R-Processor-4M-Cache-up-to-3_20-GHz



The dual-core CPU in the base model is priced more than the quad in the next model up. I suppose if they saved $100 on the CPU and $25 on the HDD, that helps them cut the retail price by $200. This is the same CPU in the entry Macbook Air and it uses mobile RAM.



The reason to do this is that the PC market is slowing down so a lower entry point will help boost unit volume. It is an odd update not having the rest of the lineup refreshed but it's better than nothing.

 



or they could just take a margin hit and just drop it by $100. Its not like they have rasor thin margins on those.
post #56 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Show us your detailed analysis that at least shows the BOM compared with Apple's entry-level profit margin for other Macs makes this higher by $100 or a graph that shows that $999 would maximize iMac profits by increasing sales enough to offset the loss of $100 per unit.
That sounds like a bean counter response.
post #57 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Schools, students, offices.
At that price?
post #58 of 166

It should be nice and quiet, it's only a 15W CPU. Especially if you upgrade to an SSD.

post #59 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

With those specs and that price point who is this geared towards? 1confused.gif

Lots and lots of people. Especially in 3rd world countries.

 

Very few people need the additional power offered by the more expensive models. Many people simply want an easy to use computer for Grandma and Grandpa. Many businesses want a beautiful iMac in their reception desks instead of clunky PCs. There are many executives and VPs who want a nice looking easy to use machine which they basically use to surf the internet, send emails, and make a few Excel and Powerpoint files.

 

All these people will greatly appreciate the $200 savings. With cloud storage becoming bigger, the loss of 500GB isn't significant (and unless you are saving movies, 500GB is quite sufficient anyways). Additionally, the 1.3GHz will probably never be used by most of these people.

 

Which is why Apple left the RAM the same, because RAM is indeed useful even in such settings (Extra RAM means you never really need to close your apps, and can comfortably have many Safari tabs open).

post #60 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by addicted44 View Post

Lots and lots of people. Especially in 3rd world countries.

Very few people need the additional power offered by the more expensive models. Many people simply want an easy to use computer for Grandma and Grandpa. Many businesses want a beautiful iMac in their reception desks instead of clunky PCs. There are many executives and VPs who want a nice looking easy to use machine which they basically use to surf the internet, send emails, and make a few Excel and Powerpoint files.

All these people will greatly appreciate the $200 savings. With cloud storage becoming bigger, the loss of 500GB isn't significant (and unless you are saving movies, 500GB is quite sufficient anyways). Additionally, the 1.3GHz will probably never be used by most of these people.

Which is why Apple left the RAM the same, because RAM is indeed useful even in such settings (Extra RAM means you never really need to close your apps, and can comfortably have many Safari tabs open).
So basically overpriced because it will look nice on someone's desk. Internet, email, Excel and PowerPoint are all available on Windows PCs.
post #61 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

It is an odd update not having the rest of the lineup refreshed but it's better than nothing.

 

Well, this is not really an update but an addition to the existing line. Also, the timing and the specifications suggest that this machine targets mostly schools, businesses and administration. On the other hand, Apple seems to prepare the ground for a real update of the whole line this autumn. I am curious to see in which way exactly.

post #62 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

That sounds like a bean counter response.

It's the response of someone who understands business as opposed to one that just "feels" what a price should or some asshat comment that will reflexively claim, "it should be ($100) lower."

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #63 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


So basically overpriced because it will look nice on someone's desk. Internet, email, Excel and PowerPoint are all available on Windows PCs.

Not to mention that the Mac version of MS Office has historically been second-class compared to the Windows version.

post #64 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post
 

Like

Just like all of their Mac product line...  I don't understand why Apple consumer desktop hardware is so overpriced and under-powered.  Their mobile device hardware is price competitive... I never understood this...

 

Yeah, this is true. When my son was planning to buy his Macbook Air, I shopped around for matching specs, and the Air was priced right where it belonged, and that what he got. I don't regularly follow computer prices, but I had expected to find that I could match its specs for $200-$300 less... but nope.

post #65 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

It's the response of someone who understands business as opposed to one that just "feels" what a price should or some asshat comment that will reflexively claim, "it should be ($100) lower."
Makes Apple look like a company more concerned about margins than the best products. Also odd, because it doesn't match what they did with the MBA. The MBA got a spec bump and $100 price cut. That's a good deal.
post #66 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by addicted44 View Post
 

Very few people need the additional power offered by the more expensive models.

 

Power is one aspect. Another one is longevity. It is known that Apple uses to offer longest support for the more powerful machines regarding OS updates. For example, even 6 years old MacBook Pros will run Mavericks. MacBooks of the same age are simply not supported.

post #67 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by d4NjvRzf View Post
 

Any particular reason why Apple prefers 5400 rpm hard drives to the nore common 7200 rpm variety? You can't even get 5400 rpm drives on Newegg these days.

 

I *think* I read somewhere that Apple uses 5400 rpm drives in the iMac because the ultra-thin chassis doesn't provide sufficient cooling for 7200 rpm units. Anyone know for sure whether or not that's true?

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply
post #68 of 166
I agree with those questioning the price point. The $200 between the 2.7 and 2.9 GHz models would suggest that the $1099 model would have 2.5 GHz processor, not simply a 1.4. This model looks designed to make the $2.7 GHz model more enticing.

And why now? Why wasn't this low-end released when this round of iMacs came out? Is Apple trying to clear out inventory of certain components ahead of a larger model refresh?
post #69 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post

A better deal would be to get a Mac mini which is faster already for $599 and then get an IPS display such as what I have. The Mac mini is faster out of the box, you can expand the RAM yourself to 16GB, and there's spots for 2 hard drives if ever necessary. I'm not even going into graphics because someone who is buying something like a Mac mini or this overpriced iMac doesn't care about graphics. If they did, they'd be buying an real iMac with real graphics. 

Like I said before my dad just bought the $599 Mac mini ($579 w/my discount) and I purchased the 23" Dell IPS panel for $135. So for roughly $750 you get a better Mac. And don't assume because its a Dell display that is junk. Its an awesome display. I'm really impressed with this display for the price (and its IPS).

So, I'll ask again, how is this iMac priced so high such a good deal when a Mac mini that is 2yrs old is better and $500 less expensive?

I'm sure some fanboy can come up with some kind of bullshit answer, or some lame response. 

Because with your way you have to stare at an ugly Dell monitor for X-number of years.

How's that?
post #70 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by mubaili View Post

I am at lost the reason behind this product.

Home use, office use.... the 27" is a big monster that is totally over sized for basic computing. Whether it will sell at that price is anybody's guess. I  wouldn't be surprised if it drops $100.- quite quickly.

post #71 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by PB View Post
 

 

Well, this is not really an update but an addition to the existing line. Also, the timing and the specifications suggest that this machine targets mostly schools, businesses and administration. On the other hand, Apple seems to prepare the ground for a real update of the whole line this autumn. I am curious to see in which way exactly.

 

This iMac was already available to schools, businesses, etc. Its now just made available to the public. I'm guessing too that they'll have something far better in the fall across the lineup, and then maybe lower this to a respectable price. 

post #72 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post


Because with your way you have to stare at an ugly Dell monitor for X-number of years.

How's that?

 

Not a valid answer. That does nothing to explain how the iMac at $1099 with lower specs and $500 more expensive than a Mac mini is a better deal. Its not ugly, if you don't like the Dell logo then cover the fucking thing up. 

post #73 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

So basically overpriced because it will look nice on someone's desk. Internet, email, Excel and PowerPoint are all available on Windows PCs.

OSX isn't. That makes a big difference. OS efficiency comes into play here just as much as it does when you compare Sammy's octo core, destroyer-of-batteries processors against Apple's humble A series processors then realize that Apple products still function better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by d4NjvRzf View Post

Not to mention that the Mac version of MS Office has historically been second-class compared to the Windows version.

Historically being the operative word. I don't buy software because of what it used to do; I buy it because of what it does now.
post #74 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

That sounds like a bean counter response.

It's the response of someone who understands business as opposed to one that just "feels" what a price should or some asshat comment that will reflexively claim, "it should be ($100) lower."

I don't think her/her ludicrous posts are worthy of a serious or considered response.

post #75 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


Unless of course you are type A and then nothing is fast enough.

As to office even those apps can get bogged down. Speaking of money, I'm expecting heavy discounts this holiday season, for the most part this machine is over priced. That may be intentional to give them room to run promotions and the like.

 

In most enterprise/business environments the individual's opinion really isn't taken into consideration unless it's to explain why they need more than the standard workstation.  In my company which is running on 4-5 year old Dells (spit), this little iMac would be like Chuck Yeager climbing into the X-1 and going supersonic.

post #76 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by d4NjvRzf View Post
 

Any particular reason why Apple prefers 5400 rpm hard drives to the nore common 7200 rpm variety? You can't even get 5400 rpm drives on Newegg these days.

Maybe you can't, but it took me only 5 seconds to find them.

 

17 Desktop HDDs at 5400 RPM:

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007603%20600484468&IsNodeId=1

 

132 Laptop HDDs at 5400 RPM:

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007605%20600483985&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Pagesize=100&Page=1

post #77 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

You don't need to. I don't either.

I just find your shrill, knee-jerk posts -- that often provide no context or explanation, but just whines -- somewhat tiring. That's all. If you're going to complain about Apple pricing (a standard and tired old complaint that's as old as Apple), or imply that no one (or very few) will buy it at that price, can you back it up with even a little bit of argumentation or evidence? (I could say the same about your drive-by Dre/Beats posts).
I never said no one would buy it at this price. I'm sure plenty of people will, but plenty more would if Apple had found a way to shave $100 or $200 more off the price. With Windows 8 being such a turd and these convertible 2-in-1's not really taking off I'd love to see Apple aggressively target Windows users. And maybe take some steam out of Chromebooks too (which appear to be gaining traction in education markets). Is that shrill enough for you?
post #78 of 166
Yeah no thanks. I will hold out either for the other iMacs to get updated or for the mini to get updated (lol) before I spend more money with Apple.
post #79 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by iaeen View Post


Historically being the operative word. I don't buy software because of what it used to do; I buy it because of what it does now.

Well has Office for Mac finally reached parity with the Windows version in features and performance? I seem to recall some members of this forum saying that Excel performs better in a Windows virtual machine than on bare Mac hardware (http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/163482/microsoft-to-release-long-awaited-office-for-mac-update-in-2014-report#post_2485309).


Edited by d4NjvRzf - 6/18/14 at 8:00am
post #80 of 166
The biggest reason why so many colleagues don't go Apple is price. Apple is missing out in not offering a basic all in one machine, a lower rung on the ladder that would get more people into iOS. To me, iOS is the real deal for Apple.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple makes new low-end 1.4GHz iMac official with $1,099 starting price