What are the Odds...
...that come the next PowerMac update (lets assume MWNY, since that's everyone's perennial favorite), that both the middle and top-of-the line PM's will be dual processor machines?
That is, we end up with something similar to
Fast - 933 MHz G4
Faster - Dual GHz G4
Fastest - Dual 1.15 GHz G4
?
From a business perspective it would seem unlikely that Apple would offer two dual systems simultaneously until they can put a bigger gap between them (say 250MHz per chip). Otherwise the slower one would probably cannibalize the faster one's sales. I mean, if you had the option of buying the exsting Dual GHz machine at ~$2600 or a similarly architectured Dual 1.15 GHz at $3000 - which would you buy?
On the other hand, from an OS X perspective, it seems like the best thing they could ever do in terms of making the system more reposnsive. Especially if they kept the middle price point around $2600, give or take.
Thoughts?
That is, we end up with something similar to
Fast - 933 MHz G4
Faster - Dual GHz G4
Fastest - Dual 1.15 GHz G4
?
From a business perspective it would seem unlikely that Apple would offer two dual systems simultaneously until they can put a bigger gap between them (say 250MHz per chip). Otherwise the slower one would probably cannibalize the faster one's sales. I mean, if you had the option of buying the exsting Dual GHz machine at ~$2600 or a similarly architectured Dual 1.15 GHz at $3000 - which would you buy?
On the other hand, from an OS X perspective, it seems like the best thing they could ever do in terms of making the system more reposnsive. Especially if they kept the middle price point around $2600, give or take.
Thoughts?
Comments
<strong>...that come the next PowerMac update (lets assume MWNY, since that's everyone's perennial favorite), that both the middle and top-of-the line PM's will be dual processor machines?
That is, we end up with something similar to
Fast - 933 MHz G4
Faster - Dual GHz G4
Fastest - Dual 1.15 GHz G4
?
From a business perspective it would seem unlikely that Apple would offer two dual systems simultaneously until they can put a bigger gap between them (say 250MHz per chip). Otherwise the slower one would probably cannibalize the faster one's sales. I mean, if you had the option of buying the exsting Dual GHz machine at ~$2600 or a similarly architectured Dual 1.15 GHz at $3000 - which would you buy?
On the other hand, from an OS X perspective, it seems like the best thing they could ever do in terms of making the system more reposnsive. Especially if they kept the middle price point around $2600, give or take.
Thoughts?</strong><hr></blockquote>
well, it can be ok, the alternative will be
single 933 Mhz
single one Ghz
dual 1,13 ghz
or
single 933 mhz
single 1,13ghz
dual 1 ghz, if they have not enough 1,13 ghz chip in production.
Prizes will be unchanged.
I was just wondering how you guys thing Apple would set the lineup, given the (rather large) assumption they have at least one more significantly faster PPC 7455 to offer come summer, and have it in good quantity. This is really not mutually exclusive of having better RAM and the like. For the purposes of my example just assume that whatever the UMA is, it's the same across all three machines.
Four years ago, all of Apple's prices were high. They wanted to find a way where they could still get huge profits from pro users willing to pay $1500 to $3000 for a Mac but also get more everyday users on the platform. So they came out with the intentionally limited iMac. Since then Apple has kept the slots off the consumer machines, including the Cube, to keep the pros paying more. Of course by doing this they lose some people who want more than an iMac but don't want to pay $1599.
But because of the megahertz gap, the pros are buying many less machines. Sales are down from 350,000 - 400,000 to around 215,000 per quarter. So maybe Apple needs to go back and tty to get some of those mid-level everyday customers. If they offered a PowerMac for $1299, they'ed probably sell 100,000 of them easily to everyday consumers. When you are only selling 215,000 a quarter, that's a big boost.
The reasons Apple originally charged a huge premium for a PowerMac are almost gone. They should now price them at $1299, $1799, and $2299 and go for higher volume.
[ 04-25-2002: Message edited by: spindler ]</p>
<strong>
Fast - 933 MHz G4
Faster - Dual GHz G4
Fastest - Dual 1.15 GHz G4
</strong><hr></blockquote>
This could be a valid option if Apple prices the .15 (2x) processor GHz difference appropriately. Let's not have it cost $600 more just for that increase... how about further upgraded components like a larger HD, more ram, etc. (enough to justify the $600 increase)
[ 04-25-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]</p>
also a 1700-2000 dual would be nice...
but i have no clue anymore. i have no idea what, if anything, is going to happen at MWNY. there's no clear sign as to where the powermacs are going. i tend to believe that we're going to see the G4 in the powermac for a long time....
does the G5 exist??
And I still don't understand why they persist in maintaining the L3-crippled aspect of the low-end PowerMac. Surely this cannot entice people to spend so much more on the next model up enough to warrant the potential non-sale? (I would prefer to pay that little bit more for an older rev with L3 cache).
I don't know, can't live with 'em, can't live without 'em.
But I am waitning for NY with some cash in my pocket, hoping at least for a revved Mobo.
<Please, please>
[ 04-26-2002: Message edited by: DaveLee ]</p>